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: Power to the Communities Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Liberal and Progressive 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: October 4002
Description[?]:
| If the federal government does not wish to provide many services to its people, then local communities should be given the right to do so with their own money. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Policy of the government concerning the funding of abortions
Old value:: The government does not provide funding for abortions.
Current: The government only funds abortions for medical emergencies.
Proposed: The government leaves the funding for abortions up to the local governments.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Pre-school education.
Old value:: The government leaves development of nurseries to the private sector.
Current: The government maintains a system of free publically owned nurseries alongside heavily regulated private establishments.
Proposed: The government leaves the pre-school education policy to local governments.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change Government funding for private schools.
Old value:: Private educational institutions receive no government funding whatsoever.
Current: Private schools are given funding on a case-by-case basis.
Proposed: The funding of private schools is the responsibility of local governments.
Article 4
Proposal[?] to change Art subsidies
Old value:: The government never subsidises or commissions art.
Current: The government subsidises artistic institutions and some artists on a case by case basis.
Proposed: The subsidisation of art is left to local governments.
Article 5
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning museum funding.
Old value:: The government does not fund or manage museums. This is left to the private sector.
Current: The national government maintains a system of museums nationwide.
Proposed: The government leaves funding and operation of museums to local governments.
Article 6
Proposal[?] to change Forest management.
Old value:: All forestry is performed by private companies.
Current: Local governments are required to operate forestry agencies, which own and manage all forest land.
Proposed: Local governments may set up forestry agencies. Where they do not, forestry is on a commercial basis.
Article 7
Proposal[?] to change Waste disposal responsibility.
Old value:: Waste disposal is left entirely to the private sector but is regulated.
Current: The government is responsible for waste disposal.
Proposed: It is the responsibility of local governments to decide on waste disposal regulation.
Article 8
Proposal[?] to change Government agricultural and farming subsidies policy.
Old value:: The government denies subsidy assistance to farmers.
Current: All agricultural operations are state-owned and operated.
Proposed: The government allows local governments to craft agricultural subsidy policy.
Article 9
Proposal[?] to change Government policy on airports.
Old value:: The government leaves airports entirely to the private sector.
Current: The government owns and operates all airports.
Proposed: Local governments determine policy on airports.
Article 10
Proposal[?] to change Eminent Domain.
Old value:: The government may not seize private property.
Current: The government may seize private property for any reason.
Proposed: The policy regarding eminent domain is left to local governments.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 16:22:11, March 19, 2016 CET | From |  Liberal Party of Davostan | To | Debating the Power to the Communities Act |
| Message | Oppose, a lot of these articles define that local authorities can define actual policy which means local governments can ban private enterprises in these areas if they so choose. We're also opposed to the Article 11 (Eminent domain compensation), we prefer the neutral body deciding this and not giving the government a "repeal whenever we want card". The bill it self is poorly written as well, what exactly can the local governments do in these areas, because the bill is so vaguely written, they can decide to fund abortions to anyone who comes to their doors or what defines as a forest management program. We'd like the author to rewrite the bill to define what the local governments are allowed to do in these areas. |
| Date | 22:33:51, March 19, 2016 CET | From | Liberal and Progressive Party | To | Debating the Power to the Communities Act |
| Message | We are willing to remove article 11, but nothing else. If a local area chooses, they should have the right to fund abortions or protect their forest areas, and ban certain enterprises. After all, it's their homes and their communities, and they should choose what they want to support, and do it. |
| Date | 23:38:28, March 19, 2016 CET | From | Common Sense Conservative Party | To | Debating the Power to the Communities Act |
| Message | This bill is ludicrous. We will vehemently oppose it In its current form |
| Date | 08:51:20, March 20, 2016 CET | From | Liberal and Progressive Party | To | Debating the Power to the Communities Act |
| Message | What is so ludicrous about this? All this does is give communities the right to CHOOSE services that THEY want for THEMSELVES that the federal government refuses to provide them. |
| Date | 12:53:46, March 20, 2016 CET | From | Liberal Party of Davostan | To | Debating the Power to the Communities Act |
| Message | It'll make things incredibly more confusing and tedious. What happens if Davogard decides to ban abortions? There will likely be sudden influx of interior migration from Davogard to other parts of the nation. Why should I need to cross an invisible border to be able to do something differently? This bill confuses things, yes communities should be allowed some power, but not at the cost of confusion. |
| Date | 23:04:25, March 20, 2016 CET | From | Liberal and Progressive Party | To | Debating the Power to the Communities Act |
| Message | This bill does not give local areas the option to ban abortions. It simply gives them the power as to whether or not to fund abortions. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes | Total Seats: 163 | |||
| no |
Total Seats: 337 | |||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Players have a responsibility to differentiate between OOC (out-of-character) and IC (in-character) behaviour, and to make clear when they are communicating in OOC or IC terms. Since Particracy is a role-playing game, IC excesses are generally fine, but OOC attacks are not. However, players must not presume this convention permits them to harass a player with IC remarks that have a clear OOC context. |
| Random quote: "It only takes 20 years for a liberal to become a conservative without changing a single idea." - Robert Anton Wilson |