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: Debate Reform Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Fair Capitalism Party
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This bill is a resolution. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: March 2061
Description[?]:
| Hutori has already passed a bill similar to this, and we beleived to be fair and sensible. Article 1: No bill, excluding cabinet proposals or early election bills may pass through Parliament without comment being made on it by three individual parties, excluding the founder. Ariticle 2: Article 1 of this bill may be circumvented twice by every party during every term. These "vetos" do not carry forward into the next term, therefore the maximum any party can have at any time is two "vetos." Should any party choose to activate one of their "vetos," they must clearly state it in the description of the bill, and must wait at least three moths before puting the bill through to the voting stage, Article 3: It is assumed no party will refrain from comment to keep a bill in the debating stage. Article 4: Should any party circumvent any of the previous articles in a way that has not been mandated by this or any future bill, then the bill in question should be voted aginst, as should the next bill proposed by the party in question. Further no votes may be placed at the party's disgression, and may be campaigned for by any other party. Article 5: This bill can be repealed, amended or elaborated upon at any time by propsing a bill clearly stating which party of the bill is to be amended, what it should be amended to, and a reason for this. Naturally, this bill will operate by the rules proposed upon it. |
Proposals
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 16:31:08, May 28, 2005 CET | From |  Aloria Green Socialist Party | To | Debating the Debate Reform Act |
| Message | I wouldn't want to vote against a bill, merely bcause proceadure hadn't been followed. I think this is a bit too strict. |
| Date | 16:41:34, May 28, 2005 CET | From | Fair Capitalism Party | To | Debating the Debate Reform Act |
| Message | How else would it be enforced? If people haven't commented on it, despite being violation of a the good will part of this, it would also show it was unsupported, and it probably wouldn't get any votes anyway. |
| Date | 19:16:42, May 28, 2005 CET | From | Aloria Green Socialist Party | To | Debating the Debate Reform Act |
| Message | Then things work fine as they are... |
| Date | 19:48:59, May 28, 2005 CET | From | Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Debate Reform Act |
| Message | We agree, everyone must have the right co comment on bill, so at least he does show being active - vs. those staying inactive for sometime. This will also help bill not being passed without all (msot of the) parties seeing the bill (e.g. take the case when someone is without internet for some time) |
| Date | 21:54:36, May 28, 2005 CET | From | Fair Capitalism Party | To | Debating the Debate Reform Act |
| Message | This would stop you missing bills, and stop people thinking they didnt really matter. |
| Date | 01:03:02, May 29, 2005 CET | From | Aloria Green Socialist Party | To | Debating the Debate Reform Act |
| Message | Bills are up for quite a while though.. I don't know.. I'm not dead against it.. I just don't quite see the need.. |
| Date | 01:03:33, May 29, 2005 CET | From | Aloria Green Socialist Party | To | Debating the Debate Reform Act |
| Message | And you still need another party to comment on this.. ;-) |
| Date | 15:59:53, May 29, 2005 CET | From | United Stalinist Front | To | Debating the Debate Reform Act |
| Message | This is stupid! Bills are up for 8 months thats long enough! It should be at the partys discretion whether to leave it up or put it to the vote. |
| Date | 17:38:31, May 30, 2005 CET | From | Fair Capitalism Party | To | Debating the Debate Reform Act |
| Message | Tell ya what GSP, you support the bill, but propose a repeal should it not be satisfactory. |
| Date | 01:46:26, May 31, 2005 CET | From | Aloria Green Socialist Party | To | Debating the Debate Reform Act |
| Message | That seems a fair compromise- give it a try & see what happens. Deal. Although if we keep having earlier elections. nothing will ever get passed... |
| Date | 17:29:21, May 31, 2005 CET | From | Fair Capitalism Party | To | Debating the Debate Reform Act |
| Message | Ok, it's through. |
| Date | 19:42:21, May 31, 2005 CET | From | United Stalinist Front | To | Debating the Debate Reform Act |
| Message | Well you can adhere to this legislation, I will just keep doing as I always do. Besides, doesnt this mean I can propose a bill that you would ordinarily support and put it straight to vote...you would be obliged to vote no which would lose you voters. |
| Date | 17:48:31, June 01, 2005 CET | From | Fair Capitalism Party | To | Debating the Debate Reform Act |
| Message | Well, it seems you never propose bills which we ordinaraly vote for anyway. |
| Date | 19:23:16, June 01, 2005 CET | From | Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Debate Reform Act |
| Message | USF - If you don't follow the rules of the game and one of the rules is that all laws that passed must be kept, then you degrade yourself to party undermining democracy. |
| Date | 23:05:44, June 01, 2005 CET | From | Fair Capitalism Party | To | Debating the Debate Reform Act |
| Message | I don't think they really care if democracy is destroyed. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes | Total Seats: 209 | |||
| no | Total Seats: 84 | |||
| abstain | Total Seats: 41 |
| Random fact: Discuss flag designs at the Flag Designs thread: http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=37 |
| Random quote: "The United States is in no sense founded upon the Christian doctrine." - George Washington |