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: Private Monument Freedom Act.
Details
Submitted by[?]: Liberal-Progressive Union
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[?]:
| This bill uses government funds but relies on the private sector to maintain vital historical and important parks and monuments. By using the private sector government is free from actively engaging in the effort and allows for certain specialties in the private sector that are unavailable in the government sector. For example, to promote tourism the private industry may use such activities as hiring actors to portray early Hobrazian settlers, to maintain monuments the private sector can bring in comapanies that specialise in monument maintainance. The private sector offers more possibilities for the total upkeeping of parks and can bring in more tourist by the various private companies that are available. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change National, cultural and historic sites and monuments.
Old value:: The state actively protects scenery, localities, cultural, and historical sites; it maintains an agency to preserve them untouched if public interest so requires.
Current: The state actively protects scenery, localities, cultural, and historical sites; it maintains an agency to preserve them untouched if public interest so requires.
Proposed: The state encourages and funds private efforts towards the protection of cultural and historical heritage.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 16:43:55, November 11, 2005 CET | From |   Liberal-Progressive Union | To | Debating the Private Monument Freedom Act. |
| Message | More possibilites for the private industry in attracting tourism and maintaining historical heritage. |
| Date | 18:36:18, November 11, 2005 CET | From | We Say So! Party | To | Debating the Private Monument Freedom Act. |
| Message | The entirity of the above bill description is a falacy. There is nothing stopping the public sector from doing any of the things you have mentioned to attact tourists or scholars. Moreover, we are extremely concerned at the thought of provding government funds to operate the private sector. Of the private sector is not self supporting than it does not deserve to exist, and to expect them to protect cultural and historical sites is foolish in the extreme. Leave the public sector to look after the cultural heritage of our country and not run the risk of seeing "the birth place of X, sponsored by Hobrazia burger". |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 172 | ||||||
| no |
Total Seats: 228 | ||||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: The players in a nation have a collective responsibility to ensure their "Bills under debate" section is kept in good order. Bills which are irrelevant or have become irrelevant should be deleted. Deletion can be requested for bills proposed by inactive parties on the Bill Clearout Requests thread: http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=4363 |
| Random quote: "I am working for the time when unqualified blacks, browns, and women join the unqualified men in running our government." - Cissy Farenthold |