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: Tobacco - A Federal Issue
Details
Submitted by[?]: Radical Alliance
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: February 3737
Description[?]:
| Madam Speaker, I believe everyone knows the Radical Left's stance on the policy regarding tobacco. We would like to legalize sales and use of tobacco. But we do also see it rational as well as beneficial for our population if we let this be regulated by local governments. Susan Anderson Minister of Justice Radical Alliance |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government policy towards smoking.
Old value:: Smoking is prohibited.
Current: Smoking is legal outdoors and in private homes and clubs, but illegal indoors in places of employment, with the exception of places that primarily serve liquor.
Proposed: Smoking regulations are to be determined by local governments.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Sale of tobacco products.
Old value:: The sale of tobacco products is prohibited.
Current: There are certain restrictions on the sale of tobacco and only adults may purchase tobacco.
Proposed: The sale of tobacco products is regulated by local governments
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 21:07:02, October 01, 2014 CET | From | Radical Alliance | To | Debating the Tobacco - A Federal Issue |
| Message | Madam Speaker, How can the Federalist Party vote against a bill that gives States more power? I guess the so called "Federalist" Party isn't that federal minded after all, perhaps a name change would be in order. Unitarist Party perhaps? Susan Anderson Minister of Justice Radical Alliance |
| Date | 00:26:31, October 02, 2014 CET | From | Federal Heritage Party of Hutori | To | Debating the Tobacco - A Federal Issue |
| Message | Madam Speaker, While typically giving the States more power is generally a good idea. However, in this case we are talking about substances that have been scientifically proven to do physical, mental and social harm to people. As such we can condone this bill as the health of a person is more important than allowing local governments power in this instance. Ryan McLaughlin Interim President Federalist Party |
| Date | 00:46:48, October 02, 2014 CET | From | Federal Heritage Party of Hutori | To | Debating the Tobacco - A Federal Issue |
| Message | OOC: *Can not |
| Date | 00:59:23, October 02, 2014 CET | From | Radical Alliance | To | Debating the Tobacco - A Federal Issue |
| Message | Madam Speaker, Everyone should know that prohibition is absolute worst way of handling such issues. It only makes people criminal even though they only do physical harm to themselves. It would much easier to help them if tobacco - as well as drugs were legal. It wouldn't increase the use of these substances, this we have proof of from other countries. So I ask; why keep the wrong policy - shouldn't we do everyone a favor and legalize these substances? Susan Anderson Minister of Justice Radical Alliance OOC: I use my knowledge from the real life to support my arguments. I hope it is okay. |
| Date | 01:21:08, October 02, 2014 CET | From | Federal Heritage Party of Hutori | To | Debating the Tobacco - A Federal Issue |
| Message | Madam Speaker, I believe the RA is confusing legalization with decriminalization. The answer is not legalization but, rather decriminalization this would institute rehabilitation programs and health programs instead of jail and or prison time. It is decriminalization that shows a decline in use not legalization. As for these substances not affecting anyone else that is blatantly false second hand smoke has been shown to be more dangerous than first hand smoke. Not mention the negative social and mental impact these substances can have on the people around them. Ryan McLaughlin Interim President Federalist Party OOC: I don't mind. |
| Date | 02:03:09, October 02, 2014 CET | From | Radical Alliance | To | Debating the Tobacco - A Federal Issue |
| Message | Madam Speaker, Decriminalization does not allow the production of these substances - and therefor allowing a massive criminal industry to keep on flourishing in the midst of this great nation. And removing the source of income from criminals and removing the necessity to visit criminals to get what you want would certainly reduce the over all crime rate. Decriminalization is better than doing nothing - we do however find it better to legalize all substances except such substances as e.g. Krokodil. But it should never be the matter of state to force people to be rehabilitated - it should be there own choice. The government should instead actively throw light on this matte through national campaigns of all sorts. And yes, second hand smoking is dangerous, but it simply won't go away just because you say so, but it is easier to control when you regulate the use of these substances; you can e.g make it illegal to use at the job and outdoors on certain places, but it should not be regulated inside of people's homes. That would be up themselves to decide. Susan Anderson Minister of Justice Radical Alliance |
| Date | 02:19:31, October 02, 2014 CET | From | Federal Heritage Party of Hutori | To | Debating the Tobacco - A Federal Issue |
| Message | Madam Speaker, The reality of the situation is that nations that have decriminalized drug use instead of legalizing it have seen a sharper decline in use effectively making the cost of production and distribution cost prohibitive. Furthermore why would we would we allow something that is proven to result in long-term health problems and even death? Ryan McLaughlin Interim President Federalist Party |
| Date | 02:29:00, October 02, 2014 CET | From | Radical Alliance | To | Debating the Tobacco - A Federal Issue |
| Message | Madam Speaker, Mr McLaughlin completely ignores my argument on the criminal effect prohibition has on our society. Would mr McLaughlin please explain why he supports criminal activities? But no, decriminalization does not have any real effect on the amount of users - it remains nearly the same. But we should allow it since it is their own decision and because they will do it anyway - no prohibition policy is gonna change that. This should the gentleman have realized by now. Susan Anderson Minister of Justice Radical Alliance |
| Date | 02:42:13, October 02, 2014 CET | From | Federal Heritage Party of Hutori | To | Debating the Tobacco - A Federal Issue |
| Message | Madam Speaker, We agree that prohibition has a negative impact in some areas and merely stated that we would rather decriminalize harmful substance use instead of legalizing it so those affected are more likely to seek assistance. As for your accusation of us supporting criminal enterprises we would like to ask Ms. Anderson if she would please refrain from engaging in McCarthyism. Ryan McLaughlin Interim President Federalist Party OOC: Actually IRL nations that have decriminalize drug use such as Portugal have in general seen sharper decline in use than those who have outright legalized it. I just couldn't find a way to bring it up IC. |
| Date | 02:51:33, October 02, 2014 CET | From | Radical Alliance | To | Debating the Tobacco - A Federal Issue |
| Message | Madam Speaker, Mr McLaughlin is still avoiding my question. Please answer my question; why do you choose to continue a policy that financially supports criminal activities in such an unprecedented degree? We can still help people even though it is legalized and not decriminalized - stating anything else would be preposterous. Susan Anderson Minister of Justice Radical Alliance OOC: There are very mixed results so it probably depends on different things than just the nations policy. |
| Date | 02:54:04, October 02, 2014 CET | From | Radical Alliance | To | Debating the Tobacco - A Federal Issue |
| Message | OOC: It isn't even possible to decriminalize anything - only legalize.. A bit sad... |
| Date | 03:37:58, October 02, 2014 CET | From | Federal Heritage Party of Hutori | To | Debating the Tobacco - A Federal Issue |
| Message | Madam Speaker, We do not support a policy that financially supports criminal enterprises in fact our position would weaken said enterprises. As you have less of a demand for a "product" then the profitability of that "product" goes down so in turn less money is made and decriminalization has been shown to reduce the rate of use. Ryan McLaughlin Interim President Federalist Party OOC: Yeah there are mix results and your probably right that is depends on a nations other policies. However, the general trend is that decriminalization is more effective although that maybe me incorrectly attributing it to causation instead of correlation. Yeah I kind of wish that was an option. |
| Date | 17:48:02, October 02, 2014 CET | From | Radical Alliance | To | Debating the Tobacco - A Federal Issue |
| Message | Madam Speaker, Perhaps it will weaken the criminal industry, but it will certainly not help as much as our political stance on the issue. Our politics will take away all income based on sales and production of drugs where yours only will reduce the income by some percentages. Susan Anderson Minister of Justice Radical Alliance |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||
| yes | Total Seats: 176 | ||
| no | Total Seats: 181 | ||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 34 |
| Random fact: "Game mechanics comes first." For example, if a currently-enforced bill sets out one law, then a player cannot claim the government has set out a contradictory law. |
| Random quote: "This country has far more problems than it deserves and far more solutions than it applies." - Ralph Nader |