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: Overturn of SR 91: IUT
Details
Submitted by[?]: Utilitarian Party of Solentia
Status[?]: defeated
Votes: This bill is a resolution. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: September 2953
Description[?]:
| The Utilitarian Party of Solentia found among old legislation relics this astounding bill. Although we do not welcome the creation of peerage nor new orders of merit, Section III article 2 is outrageous: "Article 2) This Resolution will take effect when passed and will remain as binding law until the Resolution is overturned by a piece of legislation specifically designed to reverse its effect. The overturning legislation will require 2/3 for this bill to be successfully overrided." [http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=219549] Although this bill has been in order since 2641, a bill which defied this bill was voted and approved. MC 04-2747 1: Peerage and Titles was enacted in 2748 and it is still valid. We nevertheless propose to repeal bill SR 91 according to its original spirit, despite the legality of the voting provision. We welcome further debate on the topic. We ask: To repeal immediately SR 91: IUT and thus set a precedent that provisions such as Section III article 2 of the aforementioned bill are from now on banned. |
Proposals
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 06:55:56, June 06, 2010 CET | From |  Utilitarian Party of Solentia | To | Debating the Overturn of SR 91: IUT |
| Message | MC 04-2747 1: Peerage and Titles [http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=249452] The Tory might as well have high regards for this bill. |
| Date | 14:19:39, June 06, 2010 CET | From | Coalition for National Unity [CNU] | To | Debating the Overturn of SR 91: IUT |
| Message | "The Tories suggest that this issue be split in two. Firstly, that we repeal the ban on Peerage and Titles and that we then legislate against issuing 2/3 necessary-removal of Acts. It is important that this issue is seen with a clear mind. It is highly questionable for a senate to legislate in a way that rejects a future Senate majority. This, we feel, infringes upon the sovereignty of the Senate. We reccomend that this be brought to the Supreme Court. Can the Senate legislate in a way that rejects a future majority?" Sen. Keith Juras, Tory Justice Spokesman. |
| Date | 19:36:36, June 06, 2010 CET | From | Utilitarian Party of Solentia | To | Debating the Overturn of SR 91: IUT |
| Message | The current problem is that the Senate cannot act in contravention to its previous bills. You might as well consider enacting a principle of discontinuation. This way we can argue that since the previous Senate decided that 2/3 were needed to repeal the act, that previous Senate is completely different from the current one and they are separate bodies. Under this principle, only a 50% +1 would be required to repeal any other bill whose provisions infringe legality. You might consider dropping your ideas on our bill on the matter. |
| Date | 19:42:17, June 06, 2010 CET | From | Coalition for National Unity [CNU] | To | Debating the Overturn of SR 91: IUT |
| Message | "The Senate is sovereign. If these Acts restrict future Senates, as this one does, they should be challenged in Court. It should be questioned, can the Senate rule on restrciting a future sitting of the House?" Sen. Keith Juras, Tory Justice Spokesman. |
| Date | 01:18:00, June 13, 2010 CET | From | Utilitarian Party of Solentia | To | Debating the Overturn of SR 91: IUT |
| Message | Sent to vote in order to have a nice, clean and prudish debate section according to British standards. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes | Total Seats: 47 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 50 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Cabinet ministers who disagree seriously with the head of government would usually be expected to resign. Parties within the cabinet may attempt to manoeuvre to replace the head of government though, for example by proposing a new cabinet bill or voting for an early election. |
| Random quote: "Those who expect to reap the blessing of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it. " - Thomas Paine |