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: Constitutional Ammendment Act 4199
Details
Submitted by[?]: Konservative Unionistische Partei
Status[?]: defeated
Votes: This bill asks for an amendement to the Constitution. It will require two-thirds of the legislature to vote in favor. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: July 4200
Description[?]:
| OOC: We understand that the monarchy has been a key place of role-play recently, we respect and understand that now but we wish now wish to move that role-play to the elected role of President. Our aim is not to depose the monarchy, but create an alternative. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The title of the head of government, who chairs the cabinet.
Old value:: Reichskanzler
Current: Staatskanzler/Staatskanselier (State Chancellor)
Proposed: Premierminister
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The formal title of the Head of State.
Old value:: Jens II, Kaiser des Narikatonischen Reichs
Current: Staatspräsident/President (President)
Proposed: Präsident
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change The national flag (URL).
Old value:: https://images.discordapp.net/.eJwNy8sNwyAMANBdGADHhPLJuYsggggSwQg7p6q7t-_-PupZXR3qEpl8AJyNM61Ts9BKtehKVHtJs7HOdEMSSfm6yxAGdGHHaDwiOuvNbjYwwWFwEaMNNrw29A7eaY2Huf0L9a7nqOr7AwaNJag.1Z50VunZNXNusM3zdMnXdYvL3lM
Current: https://i.postimg.cc/dQ9R9fFF/ND.png
Proposed: http://flag-designer.appspot.com/gwtflags/SvgFileService?d=3&c1=3&c2=1&c3=5&o=0&c4=2&s=0&c5=5
Article 4
Proposal[?] to change Structure of the executive branch.
Old value:: The Head of State is hereditary and symbolic; the Head of Government chairs the cabinet.
Current: The Head of State is also Head of Government.
Proposed: The Head of State and Head of Government are two separate officials.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 17:31:33, April 22, 2017 CET | From | Große Reformpartei - Sozialdemokraten | To | Debating the Constitutional Ammendment Act 4199 |
| Message | We cannot agree now and we will not agree in the future. There is no way this will happen without a fight. Peter Jogel TE Chairman |
| Date | 17:58:51, April 22, 2017 CET | From | Konservative Unionistische Partei | To | Debating the Constitutional Ammendment Act 4199 |
| Message | We thank the TEN for their contribution to this debate. Debate is important and always appreciated. |
| Date | 20:11:20, April 22, 2017 CET | From | Volkskommunistische Partei | To | Debating the Constitutional Ammendment Act 4199 |
| Message | The TEN have always been just a voicebox for royal influence. It's no wonder these royalists don't support this. And what's this, 'without a fight' statement? Are they suggesting they would take to military action to defend the royals? Christopher Bernstein Leader of the Volkskommunistische Partei |
| Date | 20:32:27, April 22, 2017 CET | From | Große Reformpartei - Sozialdemokraten | To | Debating the Constitutional Ammendment Act 4199 |
| Message | What do you think I am supposing by this Herr Bernstein? And yes it's pretty obvious that we are against this, because we are monarchists. You didn't discover anything new there. Everyone knows we support the monarchy, so why would we support the abolishment of it? Peter Jogel TE Chairman |
| Date | 20:32:58, April 22, 2017 CET | From | Liberaldemokraten | To | Debating the Constitutional Ammendment Act 4199 |
| Message | We support our Kaiser, we can't agree to this Beatrix Lerche Reichskanzler |
| Date | 23:04:29, April 22, 2017 CET | From | Volkskommunistische Partei | To | Debating the Constitutional Ammendment Act 4199 |
| Message | Herr Jogel, The statement to me could suggest that you would be willing to encourage military action in order to protect the monarchy from being democratically abolished. Which, to my ear, sounds tyrannical, warmongering and nafarious. We do not want to see the country plunged into civil war, and I'm sure you do not wish to appear to be a mere military organisation fighting on behalf of the Kaiser. Or, it could suggest that you will simply... fearsomely debate the topic? Yet why make such a vague and loaded statement? It is obvious, as you said, that you will oppose the measure. So it is surely unnecessary to add that there is "no way this will happen without a fight," unless there is something else your statement implies? Herr Jogel, instead of being deliberately vague, why not just actually respond to the point: what WE think you meant means nothing. What did YOU mean? Christopher Bernstein Leader of the Volkskommunistische Partei (People's Communist Party) |
| Date | 23:09:41, April 22, 2017 CET | From | Volkskommunistische Partei | To | Debating the Constitutional Ammendment Act 4199 |
| Message | Neue Liberale, why do you support an institution such as this? We thought you believed in equality for the people, not in an institution that stands for nothing but aristocracy and wealth. Not to mention that these monarchs actually have the power to convey major, hereditary rights on people through titles of nobility, obviously an unreasonable and ridiculous example of their aristocratic power over the people. How can we be equal when we give such power to nobles? Christopher Bernstein Leader of the Volkskommunistische Partei (People's Communist Party) |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes |
Total Seats: 117 | |||
| no | Total Seats: 282 | |||
| 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: "If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator." - George W. Bush |