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: Democratic Efficiency Act of 3004
Details
Submitted by[?]: 瑩大共產黨 (Communist Party) 🎑
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: February 3005
Description[?]:
| The Legislative Yuan hereby resolves that omnibus legislation is undemocratic and stands in the way of progress. It shall be required that individual legislation include only topics and issues related to each other in some way. It shall be required that individual legislation not exceed seven articles. Statement from Chairman Sun Shu'ao, DPP: "Over the past four years nearly every bill that has passed through the halls of our legislature have been omnibuses. On so many of the omnibus occasions our party has been forced to oppose supported government actions for sake of preventing passage of unfavorable acts. We are more than sure that other legislators have faced this same dilemma. For the sake of progress we must address this issue and set limits on the creation of legislation so that everyone can vote confidently in approval or denial of issues." |
Proposals
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 22:59:23, September 23, 2010 CET | From | 姬恩黨 (Jien Faction) 🌄 | To | Debating the Democratic Efficiency Act of 3004 |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, We have been attempting to pass a legislative reform bill for years attempting to reign in the bill creation process. We sincerely hope that this bill passes. We yield. |
| Date | 23:04:37, September 23, 2010 CET | From | 革命党 (Gémìngdǎng) | To | Debating the Democratic Efficiency Act of 3004 |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, Do opposition parties not realise that it is the governing party's right to do just that, govern? We should not stand in the way of progress. I yield. |
| Date | 23:07:34, September 23, 2010 CET | From | 姬恩黨 (Jien Faction) 🌄 | To | Debating the Democratic Efficiency Act of 3004 |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, Does the communist party not realize that it is the duty of the government to govern in an effective and efficient manner that provides visibility for the people? We should not stand in the way of democracy. We yield. |
| Date | 23:20:44, September 23, 2010 CET | From | 瑩大共產黨 (Communist Party) 🎑 | To | Debating the Democratic Efficiency Act of 3004 |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, This continual usage of omnibus legislation has gone on through many governments. This is not an issue we are putting up against the current government. The current government is not the only one proposing omnibus legislation, the Zen Socialist parties are as well. This bill is meant to regulate all parties in the creation of omnibus legislation so that it is easier for parties to support certain issues over others. And anyways, what legitimacy does the current government even have? The KMT is presiding over a dysfunctional half-empty cabinet. They have taken no action to fix that problem. We yield. |
| Date | 23:22:55, September 23, 2010 CET | From | 革命党 (Gémìngdǎng) | To | Debating the Democratic Efficiency Act of 3004 |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, The Revolutionary Party supports progressivism. We should not deny government the right to govern, that is what the legislature is elected for. I'm sure that if your party was in government you would have no position on this matter, but as you are opposition, you're attempting to unleash populism in order to gain support. The more legislation in a bill to vote on, the better. I yield. |
| Date | 23:23:40, September 23, 2010 CET | From | 革命党 (Gémìngdǎng) | To | Debating the Democratic Efficiency Act of 3004 |
| Message | OOC: Sorry, my response was to Zongshi Liu. >< |
| Date | 23:27:29, September 23, 2010 CET | From | 姬恩黨 (Jien Faction) 🌄 | To | Debating the Democratic Efficiency Act of 3004 |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, You will notice that the Zongshi Liu has been an ardent supporter of legislative reform. The legislature is in place to serve the people, not itself. We yield. |
| Date | 23:30:05, September 23, 2010 CET | From | 瑩大共產黨 (Communist Party) 🎑 | To | Debating the Democratic Efficiency Act of 3004 |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, My party was in the government just a few months ago before we resigned due to the KMT's failures. Even while we were in government we held our opposition to omnibus legislature. Who are you to make assumptions about the philosophy and morals of our party's policy on this matter? You are just some simple unrepresented communist movement. We yield. |
| Date | 23:31:26, September 23, 2010 CET | From | 革命党 (Gémìngdǎng) | To | Debating the Democratic Efficiency Act of 3004 |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, You echo exactly what we had pointed out. Alas, an agreement. However, your party wishes to limit the legislature which serves the people. We, however, do not. In fact, we will be endorsing the increase of the quota of legislation that can be proposed. I yield. |
| Date | 23:33:32, September 23, 2010 CET | From | 革命党 (Gémìngdǎng) | To | Debating the Democratic Efficiency Act of 3004 |
| Message | (To Mínzhǔjìnbùdǎng) Mr. Speaker, You wish to deny some people a voice? Every ideology has the right to be represented. If they are unpopular with the people they wont win much of the vote. However, your comments are invalid, and the topic is legislation, not petty ideological arguements, of which I find saddening that they are mere stereotypes. I yield. |
| Date | 23:33:33, September 23, 2010 CET | From | 革命党 (Gémìngdǎng) | To | Debating the Democratic Efficiency Act of 3004 |
| Message | (To Mínzhǔjìnbùdǎng) Mr. Speaker, You wish to deny some people a voice? Every ideology has the right to be represented. If they are unpopular with the people they wont win much of the vote. However, your comments are invalid, and the topic is legislation, not petty ideological arguements, of which I find saddening that they are mere stereotypes. I yield. |
| Date | 23:33:35, September 23, 2010 CET | From | 姬恩黨 (Jien Faction) 🌄 | To | Debating the Democratic Efficiency Act of 3004 |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, Do you not understand that this simply makes the legislature more organized? One may propose as much as they like, but they will have to split it up into multiple bills dealing with the same or similar issues. We yield. |
| Date | 23:36:29, September 23, 2010 CET | From | 瑩大共產黨 (Communist Party) 🎑 | To | Debating the Democratic Efficiency Act of 3004 |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, Where do we even say we deny the people a voice? All the exact same legislation can be brought to vote by all parties, they just have to divide their legislation separately according to the concerned issue and such. This allows for MORE parties to possibly support legislation and HELP the people. You are a very uninformed individual and extremely close-minded. You have no sense of what democracy is. |
| Date | 23:38:57, September 23, 2010 CET | From | 革命党 (Gémìngdǎng) | To | Debating the Democratic Efficiency Act of 3004 |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, I withdraw from such debate. I and my party shall not be drawn into a petty debate, simply because we have an apparent double-act that senses a possible competitor. I yield. |
| Date | 23:40:09, September 23, 2010 CET | From | 瑩大共產黨 (Communist Party) 🎑 | To | Debating the Democratic Efficiency Act of 3004 |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, Let is be known that the Communist Party has proven our point of close-mindedness. We yield. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes | Total Seats: 182 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 568 | ||||
| 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: "In Germany they first came for the Communists and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me--and by that time no one was left to speak up." - Pastor Martin Niemoller |