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: Military act of 3548
Details
Submitted by[?]: Hobratsuri Komunisturi Partiis
Status[?]: passed
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: August 3551
Description[?]:
| While we fully support the national service and the strength it gives us to provide support and – most importantly – defend ourselves, we find it completely immoral to force people who may oppose it on moral grounds. Thus, we want to revert the law to its old value. We also find it dubious that the military backs the civilian police up; thus we want to have a sharper distinction, while still providing the option for military assistance during emergencies. As for the national defense, we understand HDK:s opposition to government interference in the market, but some state owned defense industries is a must, we believe. It is a matter of national security, and a backup is never wrong. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The nation's policy on the separation of the police and the military.
Old value:: A civilian police force is in place, backed up by the military.
Current: A civilian police force is in place, backed up by the military.
Proposed: A civilian police force is in place and the military may be called in to help in serious emergencies.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change National service.
Old value:: All adults upon completion of schooling must serve a term in the military.
Current: All adults upon completion of schooling must serve either a term in the military or a lesser paid term of civilian national service, at their option.
Proposed: All adults upon completion of schooling must serve either a term in the military or a lesser paid term of civilian national service, at their option.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 16:19:46, September 24, 2013 CET | From | Hobratsuri Demokratebis Kavshiri | To | Debating the Military act of 3548 |
| Message | We don't see the necessity of state-owned defence industries, as the state already has near total monopoly on demand private ownership serves a good and stable function anyway, responding to the needs of the Ministry of Defence while maintaining maximum efficiency. So we cannot back a reversal of this policy. We are somewhat oppose to article 2 as we don't military involvement overly problematic considering our transparent and reliable legal system that doesn't lend the ability to abuse current policies. Even so, although we're not overly enthusiastic about it, we'd agree to support articles 2 & 3. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||
| yes | Total Seats: 375 | ||
| no | Total Seats: 0 | ||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Particracy allows you to establish an unelected head of state like a monarch or a president-for-life, but doing this is a bit of a process. First elect a candidate with the name "." to the Head of State position. Then change your law on the "Structure of the executive branch" to "The head of state is hereditary and symbolic; the head of government chairs the cabinet" and change the "formal title of the head of state" to how you want the new head of state's title and name to appear (eg. King Percy XVI). |
| Random quote: "For every action there is an equal and opposite government program." - Bob Wells |