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: Small Farm Preservation Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Lutte Féministe de Libération
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: August 2174
Description[?]:
| To save the family farm, the very symbol of Rildanor. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government agricultural and farming subsidies policy.
Old value:: Agricultural crops which are considered beneficial to the enviroment or to the continued ecological safety of the state are subsidized.
Current: Agricultural crops which are considered beneficial to the enviroment or to the continued ecological safety of the state are subsidized.
Proposed: The government subsidises the operations of low-income farming families.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 04:41:55, January 21, 2006 CET | From | Social Liberal Party | To | Debating the Small Farm Preservation Act |
| Message | For. |
| Date | 10:03:47, January 21, 2006 CET | From | Devout Ecologists Party | To | Debating the Small Farm Preservation Act |
| Message | Against. The family farm is -not- Rildanor's symbol as I recall. Plus people who get a low income are already subsidised by the guarantee of minimum income. And, people who really suffer from low income should produce enfironment beneficial crops then. |
| Date | 01:12:40, January 22, 2006 CET | From | Lutte Féministe de Libération | To | Debating the Small Farm Preservation Act |
| Message | Who said they wouldn't. This is to further support a dying way of life. The family farm is an essential ingredient in linking the past with the present. Farming is an expensive and all too often untenable way of life without government support. |
| Date | 09:10:53, January 22, 2006 CET | From | Devout Ecologists Party | To | Debating the Small Farm Preservation Act |
| Message | Wouldn't what? You know, this bill is just another way to support a dying way of life. As it is currently, we support it too, we just ask the people to produce agricultural crops which are considered beneficial to the enviroment or to the continued ecological safety of the state. That way, as it is currently, we strike two goals at once. We support the farms, and provide ecological support. If we were to denounce this, we would lose a lot. We would undermine the ecological support and undermine the support we provide to farms. Even subsidising of farms for families who aren't low-income would be undermined if we'd take this away, and thus we, indeed, undermine the family farm with this bill! We are NOT saving it. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 226 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 274 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: The voters enjoy active parties who take upon themselves the initiative to create laws. |
| Random quote: "Poverty is like punishment for a crime you didn't commit." - Eli Khamarov |