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: Liberalisation & Rationalisation of Details
Details
Submitted by[?]: Post-Revolutionary Pragmatic 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: June 2175
Description[?]:
| Sometimes, the small details get overlooked in favour of the big issues - this bill aims to rectify that problem. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Policy on the legality of abortions
Old value:: Abortion is allowed during the first trimester.
Current: Abortion is allowed during the entire course of the pregnancy.
Proposed: Abortion is allowed during the first and second trimesters.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Education for children under adult age.
Old value:: Education is entirely voluntary.
Current: Education is compulsory and has to happen at school.
Proposed: Education is compulsory, but home schooling is permitted.
Article 3
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 4
Proposal[?] to change International media content regulation.
Old value:: International media content undergoes the same regulation as domestic media content.
Current: International media content undergoes the same regulation as domestic media content.
Proposed: International media content is free from regulation
Article 5
Proposal[?] to change The nation's policy on the separation of the police and the military.
Old value:: The military acts as a de-facto police force, with powers of arrest.
Current: A civilian police force is in place and the military is not allowed to play any part in it.
Proposed: A civilian police force is in place and the military may be called in to help in serious emergencies.
Article 6
Proposal[?] to change The use of torture for obtaining information.
Old value:: Suspects can only be tortured under grave emergencies where the information is vital.
Current: Torture is never allowed.
Proposed: Torture is never allowed.
Article 7
Proposal[?] to change Trade union strike ballots.
Old value:: Trade unions must by law hold a ballot of all members before going on strike, a majority of all members, regardless of if they vote or not must approve the strike action.
Current: Trade unions must by law hold a ballot of all members before going on strike, a majority of all members, regardless of if they vote or not must approve the strike action.
Proposed: Trade unions must by law hold a ballot of all members before going on strike, majority approval of those that vote is needed from its members.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 01:27:46, January 23, 2006 CET | From | Sedarvan Economists' Party | To | Debating the Liberalisation & Rationalisation of Details |
| Message | What are the benefits for passing this legislation? |
| Date | 01:32:43, January 23, 2006 CET | From | Post-Revolutionary Pragmatic Party | To | Debating the Liberalisation & Rationalisation of Details |
| Message | Hmm, could you give a specific article or articles you'd like that question answered for? |
| Date | 02:41:18, January 23, 2006 CET | From | Sedarvan Economists' Party | To | Debating the Liberalisation & Rationalisation of Details |
| Message | Specifically, articles 7 and 3. |
| Date | 02:55:30, January 23, 2006 CET | From | Post-Revolutionary Pragmatic Party | To | Debating the Liberalisation & Rationalisation of Details |
| Message | Article 3: Large works of infrastructure are needed and in everybody's best interest - if they do not get done, the public as a whole suffers. For the good of the nation, and with suitable compensation, we consider this a necessity. Article 7: We view it as logical that those who do not go and vote approve of whatever course of action is decided on. While we don't view it as absolutely necessary that unions vote before going on strike, we appreciate the added stability this brings and view it as a good transitional measure. |
| Date | 05:26:18, January 23, 2006 CET | From | National Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Liberalisation & Rationalisation of Details |
| Message | Against 3 |
| Date | 09:06:38, January 23, 2006 CET | From | National Fascisti | To | Debating the Liberalisation & Rationalisation of Details |
| Message | Against 2,3,6. |
| Date | 09:23:31, January 23, 2006 CET | From | National Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Liberalisation & Rationalisation of Details |
| Message | oh, against 2 also. |
| Date | 09:39:53, January 23, 2006 CET | From | Traxian Imperial Party | To | Debating the Liberalisation & Rationalisation of Details |
| Message | against 4, 5, 6 may be wiling to let 5 in though |
| Date | 11:18:16, January 23, 2006 CET | From | Totalitarian Party | To | Debating the Liberalisation & Rationalisation of Details |
| Message | The Totalitarian Party supports Articles one, two and three. |
| Date | 19:22:40, January 23, 2006 CET | From | National Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Liberalisation & Rationalisation of Details |
| Message | Thanks for spliting... I mean really? A bunch of people ask you to split and you dont do anything? |
| Date | 23:08:17, January 23, 2006 CET | From | Post-Revolutionary Pragmatic Party | To | Debating the Liberalisation & Rationalisation of Details |
| Message | I see no calls for splitting. |
| Date | 01:50:43, January 24, 2006 CET | From | National Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Liberalisation & Rationalisation of Details |
| Message | Saying they support some and not others means they want a split. |
| Date | 09:38:15, January 24, 2006 CET | From | Totalitarian Party | To | Debating the Liberalisation & Rationalisation of Details |
| Message | NLP is correct. Also, having a bill pass is much better than having it fail. If some parties support some articles, you can split them off and have a greater chance of them passing. |
| Date | 17:43:30, January 24, 2006 CET | From | Post-Revolutionary Pragmatic Party | To | Debating the Liberalisation & Rationalisation of Details |
| Message | Well, apologies, but as there was both support for and resistance against pretty much the same articles, I felt splitting the bill up wouldn't do much good. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes | Total Seats: 205 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 236 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Players must never be asked for their Particracy password. This includes Moderation; a genuine Moderator will never ask for your password. |
| Random quote: "The 20th century has been characterised by three developments of great political importance: the growth of democracy, the growth of corporate power; and the growth of corporate propaganda against democracy." - Alex Carey |