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: Eminent Domain Abolition Act, 3887
Details
Submitted by[?]: Borgerlig-Demokratiske Union
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: November 3887
Description[?]:
| Mr Speaker, it is not fair to the citizens of Kazulia that the state may take away their property simply by deeming any given project of "vital" importance. Imagine a hard-working family having saved money for years just to be able to afford their modest home, just to have it torn down by government bulldozers as a result. Kazulians deserve economic security, and solid property rights are an essential element of that. Prof. Hans Granlund FV party leader |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Eminent Domain.
Old value:: The government may seize private property for vital government works.
Current: The government may seize private property for vital government works.
Proposed: The government may not seize private property.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 16:39:12, August 05, 2015 CET | From | Venstre | To | Debating the Eminent Domain Abolition Act, 3887 |
| Message | The current law provides compensation for those affected by this, so no-one will have their savings taken away from them. Furthermore, there is a right to appeal, ensuring legal portections and banishing arbitrary confiscations. Whereas we sympathize with the intentions of this bill, it is simply not viable to allow vital infrastructure to be sabotaged by recaltricant landowners. Stig Ole Stigsen Leader of Venstre's parliamentary party |
| Date | 17:35:00, August 05, 2015 CET | From | Borgerlig-Demokratiske Union | To | Debating the Eminent Domain Abolition Act, 3887 |
| Message | Mr Speaker, financial compensation can never outweigh the loss of an owner who was unwilling to trade away his property in the first place. Subjective value, emotional attachment and countless other personal factors play a big role in such cases, and we see no need for the government to act so insensitively. Prof. Hans Granlund FV party leader |
| Date | 18:43:44, August 05, 2015 CET | From | Venstre | To | Debating the Eminent Domain Abolition Act, 3887 |
| Message | Mr. Speaker, No-one is arguing that forced purchases are unfortunate, but one has to consider the alternatives. With this proposal, it would be possible for wealthy individuals to essentially appropriate the country regardless of the interests of anybody else. Being insensitive is preferable to allowing such a thing. Stig Ole Stigsen Leader of Venstre's parliamentary party |
| Date | 00:16:54, August 06, 2015 CET | From | Folkeviljen (FV) | To | Debating the Eminent Domain Abolition Act, 3887 |
| Message | Mr Speaker, We believe that eminent domain is a necessary evil for now. Also we have total faith in the fairness of Kazulian courts and judicial system for they are not going to let unfair and barbaric invasion of land or property. Therefore, we stick with Venstre's perspective for now. Gustav Westerberg SD Leader |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes | Total Seats: 0 | |||
| no |
Total Seats: 74 | |||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: You can view who's online (i.e. been active the last 10 minutes) at the bottom of the menu (either at the top or the side). |
| Random quote: "In this age, the man who dares to think for himself and to act independently does a service to his race" - John Stuart Mill |