We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: Progressive Reform Bill - Tort Reform (ii)
Details
Submitted by[?]: Progressive Party
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: April 2131
Description[?]:
| The plaintiffs in many of these cases suffer far more than the cost of legal fees and medical expenses. Wages lost for time off work and compensation for pain and suffering should be factored into the monetary awards that are paid for damages. Sometimes, no amount of money can be enough to account for the loss of a limb or loved one. Plaintiffs seeking an unjustified amount of money and can be punished for making trivial and silly lawsuits. Not only will their cases be thrown out, but they will be forced to pay for the legal fees of the defendant and will be charged with filing a frivolous lawsuit with the possibility of imprisonment or heavy fines. Why We Propose There Should Be No Cap: A cap on damages awarded to the plaintiff in a successful case would be totally arbitrary. There is no way to measure the value of a life lost to medical malpractice. We also have full confidence in the jury that they would not award an excessively unjustified amount should the plaintiff win their case. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Tort reform on non-civil lawsuits.
Old value:: Lawsuits may only provide money for medical and legal expenses.
Current: There is a cap on monetary damages awarded to patients in lawsuits.
Proposed: There is no cap on monetary damages awarded to patients in lawsuits.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 08:42:18, October 22, 2005 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Progressive Reform Bill - Tort Reform (ii) |
| Message | The AAP supports. |
| Date | 14:51:10, October 25, 2005 CET | From | Liberal Party for Equality | To | Debating the Progressive Reform Bill - Tort Reform (ii) |
| Message | We want to see the compromise, damages awarded but with a cap. We cannot support this (see last debate) |
| Date | 18:07:11, October 25, 2005 CET | From | Progressive Party | To | Debating the Progressive Reform Bill - Tort Reform (ii) |
| Message | Our reasons for not having a cap are already in the bill description. It's very arbitrary to even set a cap and would possibly cause every case to to be fought at that cap level. We have full confidence in the jury that they would not award excessive amounts of damages that are unwarranted by the loss. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 194 | ||||
| no | Total Seats: 181 | ||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 37 |
| Random fact: The use of proxy servers makes it impossible to detect multiing and is therefore forbidden. Players who access Particracy through a proxy will have their accounts inactivated. |
| Random quote: "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity." - Sigmund Freud |