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: Inter-Provincial Highway System Establishment Act of 3734
Details
Submitted by[?]: Democratic Socialist 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: September 3734
Description[?]:
| A bill to establish a publicly constructed and funded closed access, high speed highway system connecting all provinces of Hutori, and for other purposes. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Tax percentage of the profit made by corporations.
Old value:: 20
Current: 9
Proposed: 27
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Eminent Domain.
Old value:: The government may not seize private property.
Current: The government may seize private property for vital government works.
Proposed: The government may seize private property for vital government works.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change Eminent domain compensation (if eminent domain is legal).
Old value:: A neutral body appointed by the courts determines the compensation, either party may appeal.
Current: The victim of eminent domain sets compensation, government can appeal to the courts if they deem the cost too high.
Proposed: The government determines compensation for victims of eminent domain.
Article 4
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy in respect to highways.
Old value:: All highway projects are undertaken by contracted firms.
Current: There is a national highway system constructed and maintained by the national government, and local systems by local governments.
Proposed: There is a national highway system constructed and maintained by the national government, and local systems by local governments.
Article 5
Proposal[?] to change Sales tax on luxury goods.
Old value:: 20
Current: 27
Proposed: 40
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 22:31:51, September 26, 2014 CET | From | Radical Alliance | To | Debating the Inter-Provincial Highway System Establishment Act of 3734 |
| Message | Madam Speaker, The Radical Left does not feel need for this under our current economical situation. A 83bn budget deficit is our main concern and we must focus on this so that we can restore foreign investors confidence in our economy. And the Radical Left would never support the suggested laws on eminent domain neither such drastic tax increases as you suggest. It would completely destroy the foundation of our industry and later on our economy. Lucas Hentze Party Leader, Radical Alliance |
| Date | 22:40:09, September 26, 2014 CET | From | Democratic Socialist Party | To | Debating the Inter-Provincial Highway System Establishment Act of 3734 |
| Message | Madam Speaker: The reason for the increase of tax on both Luxury Items and Corporate incomes is to PREVENT the new highway system from affecting the national deficit. In concern with the economy, a high speed highway system would allow goods and services to be moved swiftly and safely across the country, thus saving both public and private institution transportation costs. Furthermore, Madam Speaker, I am confused as to why the gentleman refers to his party as the "radical left", yet acts in a fairly right wing manor in concerns to both taxation, eminent domain, and the minimum wage. With due respect to the gentleman, I cannot figure whether the Radical Alliance serves the people of this nation, or Corporations and foreign investors. |
| Date | 22:46:00, September 26, 2014 CET | From | Radical Alliance | To | Debating the Inter-Provincial Highway System Establishment Act of 3734 |
| Message | OOC: Sorry it was a mistake calling it the Radical Left, it was one of my previous party with inspiration from Radikale Venstre (Radical Left) in Denmark, a centre-left party. Just pretend i wrote Radical Alliance :P The name is confusing, I know, but it because a bourgeoise party is called Venstre (Left) and the radicals of Venstre split with the party and created Radikale Venstre. The conservatives back then were called Højre (Right) and there wasn't a social democratic party back then. That's why it was called Radikale Venstre. |
| Date | 22:54:01, September 26, 2014 CET | From | Radical Alliance | To | Debating the Inter-Provincial Highway System Establishment Act of 3734 |
| Message | Madam Speaker, We do understand why you choose to propose these tax increases, but we do simply not support them since they are way to drastic and would result in less or maybe negative growth in our economy. We do not believe that a highway system would be beneficial for our economy since you propose these drastic tax increases. Our main objective is to secure our citizen's freedom rights. This is why we are against eminent domain. But we do not understand your accusations regarding our political position; we do after all support moderate tax increases and a more extensive social security net e.g. for women getting abortions. And the abolishment of the minimum wage is the best for both workers as well as employers since the workers get more to say about the their own wage and employers get a better competitiveness. Lucas Hentze Party Leader, Radical Alliance |
| Date | 23:02:19, September 26, 2014 CET | From | Democratic Socialist Party | To | Debating the Inter-Provincial Highway System Establishment Act of 3734 |
| Message | Madam Speaker: The only tax increase proposed that could even remotely be considered "drastic" is that on luxury goods, which has doubled. Otherwise, the corporate tax only increase by 7. These measures insure that the highway can be well maintained without adding to the budget deficit. It must not be forgotten that a large amount of the tax revenue will actually be redistribute into the economy via payment of worker wages and purchasing of materials. As for eminent domain, the provisions of this bill only permit its use in major civic projects, and those whose land is taken will be reimbursed well by the Government. The Democratic Socialist Party is a major advocate for civil liberties, however, the right to own large swaths of land is hardly a civil right, and is therefore not a concern of ours. If the taking of private lands will benefit the rest of society, then it should be allowed to proceed. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes | Total Seats: 0 | ||||
| no | Total Seats: 114 | ||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 234 |
| Random fact: Once approved, players should copy Cultural Protocols into a bill in the debate section of their nation page, under the title of "OOC: Cultural Protocols". This bill should include links to the passed Cultural Protocol bill and the Moderation approval. |
| Random quote: "I am interested in politics so that one day I will not have to be interested in politics." - Ayn Rand |