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: Ratification bill
Details
Submitted by[?]: National Republican Alliance (NRA)
Status[?]: passed
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: May 4100
Description[?]:
| This is a bill to push through the reforms of the newly created Artanian Cooperation Act Treaty. http://classic.particracy.net/viewtreaty.php?treatyid=3447 Pls read this before voting these are all the articles inside the Treaty |
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.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Policy on monopolies (this general law is superceded by other laws relating to specific parts of the economy).
Old value:: Monopolies are forbidden, and are actively broken up.
Current: Monopolies are forbidden, and are actively broken up.
Proposed: Monopolies are only actively enforced in specific sectors of the economy.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning the pension system.
Old value:: The state operates a compulsory public system combined with an optional private pension.
Current: The state operates a compulsory public system combined with an optional private pension.
Proposed: The state offers a voluntary public pension, combined with other voluntary private pensions.
Article 4
Proposal[?] to change The government's position towards the stock exchange(s).
Old value:: Stock exchanges are allowed but are regulated.
Current: Stock exchanges are allowed but are regulated.
Proposed: Stock exchanges are allowed and are unregulated.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 20:40:32, October 03, 2016 CET | From | National Republican Alliance (NRA) | To | Debating the Ratification bill |
| Message | Only the software patent was already in our legislation. I hope you all vote for this so we can ratify this treaty and make Rutania a example for the rest of Artania! Chairman Paul Prescott, Democratic Front |
| Date | 21:02:20, October 03, 2016 CET | From | National Republican Alliance (NRA) | To | Debating the Ratification bill |
| Message | I have send messages to Dorvik,Aloria and Darnussia. I hope they will consider implenting and ratifying these changes to improve Artania as a continent. Chairman Paul Prescott, Democratic Front |
| Date | 21:16:04, October 03, 2016 CET | From | Former Nationmaster of Rutania | To | Debating the Ratification bill |
| Message | Normally my party are against treaties that dictate national law but this one seems acceptable. So for that reason and for unity within the new government I will support this. Michael Brandt Shadow Foreign Secretary (Previously Foreign Secretary under the MRA government) |
| Date | 21:19:58, October 03, 2016 CET | From | National Republican Alliance (NRA) | To | Debating the Ratification bill |
| Message | I thank the CPP for theyre support. Lets make not only Rutania but the whole of Artania a great place to live. Chairman Paul Prescott, Democratic Front |
| Date | 00:36:10, October 04, 2016 CET | From | Rutania Conservative Party (RCP) | To | Debating the Ratification bill |
| Message | My party will suport this. |
| Date | 13:11:09, October 04, 2016 CET | From | Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Ratification bill |
| Message | I am usually against this but for the sake of maintaining unity I will support this bill |
| Date | 14:03:02, October 04, 2016 CET | From | Rutanian Green Party | To | Debating the Ratification bill |
| Message | While I have some concerns with the de-regulation of the stock market, and eminent domain, I'll tentatively support this. Would article 1 still allow the government to pay private entities for the purchase of said property, so as to allow important construction to go ahead (and therefore abolish forced eminent domain), or forbid this entirely? Jackson Ruhr. |
| Date | 23:33:29, October 04, 2016 CET | From | National Republican Alliance (NRA) | To | Debating the Ratification bill |
| Message | This bill will orbit this entirely because we think no government should be able to take property from its people even if paid |
| Date | 00:47:06, October 05, 2016 CET | From | Rutanian Green Party | To | Debating the Ratification bill |
| Message | I am referring to when the government buys the land from people, and these people sell it willingly to the government, rather than monetary compensation for forcefully taking their land. This bill will abolish this completely? Eminent domain, even in a limited form, can be important for allowing construction projects to go ahead. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 358 | ||||
| no | Total Seats: 128 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 114 |
| Random fact: Character names must appear plausible and should consist of at least a first name and a surname. Exceptions to this will only be granted at Moderation's discretion and where a very strong case has been presented |
| Random quote: "If we were to wake up some morning and find that everyone was the same race, creed and color, we would find some other causes for prejudice by noon." - George Aiken |