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: Proportional Representation Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Liberal Party
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This bill asks for an amendement to the Constitution. It will require two-thirds of the legislature to vote in favor. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: October 3025
Description[?]:
The Liberal Party feels that this current voting system is outdated and means that the outcomes of the elections are ultimately decided by the larger regions. The Liberal Party believes that all Lodamun's citizens should have an equal chance of affecting the outcome of the up-coming election. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The constitutional right and responsibility to propose a cabinet to the legislature.
Old value:: Only the Head of State can propose a cabinet coalition.
Current: Each party can propose a cabinet coalition.
Proposed: Each party can propose a cabinet coalition.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The method used to determine the number of seats each region receives in the national legislature.
Old value:: A proportional algorithm that gives a very small advantage to larger regions.
Current: Equal representation, regardless of region population.
Proposed: Equal representation, regardless of region population.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
Date | 16:40:42, October 31, 2010 CET | From | United Democratic Caucus | To | Debating the Proportional Representation Act |
Message | Mr. Speaker, Our party would seriously consider the possibility of adopting the proposed in Article 1 after the next election. As for Article 2, we do not support it. Mr Speaker, we have reformed the administrative aspects of Lodamun significantly by merging the powers of the H.O.S. and H.O.G. into one single elected H.O.S. that acts as H.O.G., we are definitely against taking away powers from this elected official and giving it to Congress. I yield. |
Date | 20:25:26, October 31, 2010 CET | From | Liberal Party | To | Debating the Proportional Representation Act |
Message | Mr Speaker, The Liberal Party largely favours a parliamentary system and we willl continue to push for a parliamentary system. However, for the purpose of this bill and getting proportional representation through, would the Conservatives back this bill if we were to remove Article 1? |
Date | 20:33:46, October 31, 2010 CET | From | United Democratic Caucus | To | Debating the Proportional Representation Act |
Message | (OOC: Sorry. Got mixed up. o.O) Mr. Speaker, We are wary of the proposed in Article 2. We are unsure as to whether the people of the Republic of Kregon, for example, which has a much higher population than any other of the Republics, would be happy with having the same amount of seats as other, less populated Republics. Would this be fair? I yield. |
Date | 22:58:38, October 31, 2010 CET | From | Liberal Party | To | Debating the Proportional Representation Act |
Message | Mr Speaker, Proportional representation would ensure that each vote will count towards the outcome of the next election. This would also mean that constituencies with larger or more diverse populations will not end up being represented by MPs who won with under 50% of the vote. |
Date | 23:07:27, October 31, 2010 CET | From | Liberal Party | To | Debating the Proportional Representation Act |
Message | Mr Speaker, Proportional representation would ensure that each vote will count towards the outcome of the next election. This would also mean that constituencies with larger or more diverse populations will not end up being represented by MPs who won with under 50% of the vote. |
Date | 23:24:27, October 31, 2010 CET | From | United Democratic Caucus | To | Debating the Proportional Representation Act |
Message | Mr. Speaker, But it would result in unfair representation of the people. For example, there would be urban areas of cities represented by one member of Congress - and there will be some Congressmen representing, i'm sure, nothing more than farmland and countryside in your proposal. I yield. |
Date | 08:42:59, November 01, 2010 CET | From | Movement for the Progress of Lodamun | To | Debating the Proportional Representation Act |
Message | Mr. Speaker LNB support Parliamentary system, but won't support Article 2 because of reasons of CP. We will support Article 1. |
Date | 14:35:44, November 02, 2010 CET | From | Liberal Party | To | Debating the Proportional Representation Act |
Message | Mr Speaker, Will the Conservative Party and LNB back this bill if I was to add a proposal of increasing the number of seats in more densely populated areas? |
Date | 21:41:36, November 03, 2010 CET | From | United Democratic Caucus | To | Debating the Proportional Representation Act |
Message | Mr. Speaker, The Liberals have just offered something that goes completely against what they are proposing. They have just argued against their own proposal! Alas, they realise that equal representation is not fair - we will never support a change from proportional representation - a most liberal voting system. I yield. |
Date | 07:51:29, November 04, 2010 CET | From | Movement for the Progress of Lodamun | To | Debating the Proportional Representation Act |
Message | Mr. Speaker PANU will support this bill only because of Article 1, Article 2 isn't so important. |
Date | 07:51:53, November 04, 2010 CET | From | Movement for the Progress of Lodamun | To | Debating the Proportional Representation Act |
Message | Put to vote We have majority |
Date | 09:02:50, November 04, 2010 CET | From | Progress Party | To | Debating the Proportional Representation Act |
Message | Mr. Speaker, The Freedom Party would support this proposal. |
Date | 18:09:18, November 04, 2010 CET | From | United Democratic Caucus | To | Debating the Proportional Representation Act |
Message | Mr. Speaker, May I remind the parties that have voted in favour of this bill the obvious - the current system is proportional - hence proportional algorithm. Seats are based on population, not size, so the people are represented better. For this to confuse 3 parties is a complete disgrace. I yield. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
Vote | Seats | |||
yes | Total Seats: 71 | |||
no | Total Seats: 29 | |||
abstain |
Total Seats: 0 |
Random fact: Moderation will not approve a Cultural Protocol request within the first 48 hours of it being requested. This is in order to give other players a chance to query the proposed changes, if they wish to do so. Moderation may be approached for advice on a proposed change, but any advice proffered should always be understood under the provisio that no final decision will be made until at least 48 hours after the request has been formally submitted for approval. |
Random quote: "An extremely credible source has called my office and told me that Barack Obama’s birth certificate is a fraud." - Donald Trump |