Main | About | Tutorial | FAQ | Links | Wiki | Forum | World News | World Map | World Ranking | Nations | Electoral Calendar | Party Organizations | Treaties |
Login | Register |
Game Time: November 5474
Next month in: 01:52:58
Server time: 10:07:01, April 25, 2024 CET
Currently online (2): LC73DunMHP | Moderation | Record: 63 on 23:13:00, July 26, 2019 CET

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: Improving National Defense Act Of 2138

Details

Submitted by[?]: Democratic-Republican Party

Status[?]: defeated

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: December 2139

Description[?]:

To improve our country's security the following is proposed

Proposals

Debate

These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:

Date15:05:35, November 10, 2005 CET
FromJakanian Conservative Party
ToDebating the Improving National Defense Act Of 2138
Messagesupported

Date16:12:20, November 10, 2005 CET
FromOgden Sinclair Party
ToDebating the Improving National Defense Act Of 2138
MessageOpposed

Date03:20:22, November 11, 2005 CET
From Islamic Nationalist Front
ToDebating the Improving National Defense Act Of 2138
MessageOOC: I have mixed feelings. JCP, care to back up your view?

Date21:16:29, November 11, 2005 CET
FromDemocratic-Republican Party
ToDebating the Improving National Defense Act Of 2138
MessageIt is our party's belief that we must allow for the miltary to help protect law and order when the civilian police is cannot maintain order in sitiuations like national emergencies

Date02:53:56, November 12, 2005 CET
FromJakanian Conservative Party
ToDebating the Improving National Defense Act Of 2138
MessageIF Police go on strike, as permitted by Jakanian Law, who will patrol the streets?

subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe

Voting

Vote Seats
yes
  

Total Seats: 46

no
   

Total Seats: 172

abstain
   

Total Seats: 32


Random fact: Players who consent to a particular role-play by acknowledging it in their own role-play cannot then disown it or withdraw their consent from it. For example, if player A role-plays the assassination of player B's character, and player B then acknowledges the assassination in a news post, but then backtracks and insists the assassination did not happen, then he will be required under the rules to accept the validity of the assassination role-play.

Random quote: "The communist revolution is the most radical rupture with traditional property relations; no wonder that its development involves the most radical rupture with traditional ideas." - Karl Marx

This page was generated with PHP
Copyright 2004-2010 Wouter Lievens
Queries performed: 61