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: Republic Act, 2189
Details
Submitted by[?]: KSP - Kazulia Socialdemokratisk Parti
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: May 2191
Description[?]:
| After that a puppet monarchy was established we have a dictatorship, since cabinet can not be changed. We propose to reintroduce democracy, with the reintroduction of the Kazuliana Statsförbund Republik. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The constitutional right and responsibility to propose a cabinet to the legislature.
Old value:: Only the Head of State can propose a cabinet coalition.
Current: Each party can propose a cabinet coalition.
Proposed: Only the largest party can propose a cabinet.
Article 2
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 hereditary and symbolic; the Head of Government chairs the cabinet.
Proposed: The Head of State and Head of Government are two separate officials.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change The formal title of the Head of State.
Old value:: Kunglig majestät
Current: Hans Majestet Birger av Hinnsby, Kasulernes Konge (His Majesty Birger of the House of Hinnsby, King of the Kazulians)
Proposed: Republik President
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 12:54:57, February 22, 2006 CET |
From |  Konservativ Monarkistpartiet | To | Debating the Republic Act, 2189 | | Message | Why not just change the part of the Constituion that allows anyone to propose a cabinet? After all it was you (or the NL) who created it so that only the HoS could propose a cabinet, you seem to be going the wrong way around one feels. |
| Date | 12:58:53, February 22, 2006 CET |
From | KSP - Kazulia Socialdemokratisk Parti | To | Debating the Republic Act, 2189 | | Message | I remind to you that was you that had not vote on the last constitutional amedment about the changment of cabinet proposal.
We had abstain on it since we are against before that it was put on vote. |
| Date | 13:30:04, February 22, 2006 CET |
From | Konservativ Monarkistpartiet | To | Debating the Republic Act, 2189 | | Message | President controls the cabinet. Before the last election there was no cabinet, so surely the President in theory takes over the cabinets powers? |
| Date | 19:17:02, February 22, 2006 CET |
From | Northern Light | To | Debating the Republic Act, 2189 | | Message | Just notice this..Sv propose a monarchy and get the support of every party, including the anarchist...
Then they ABSTAIN to the proposal to give the major party the power to make the cabinet, actually installing a dictatorial fascist state(we cannot change the cabinet in ANY WAY now)..this cannot go on.
It's obvious SV aims are just to take as much power as possible, and it's our duty to stop it |
| Date | 21:54:24, February 22, 2006 CET |
From | Konservativ Monarkistpartiet | To | Debating the Republic Act, 2189 | | Message | What power has the SV taken for itself? What power did the NL preserve for itself in originally opposing any constitutional change concerning cabinet creation? |
| Date | 22:18:45, February 22, 2006 CET |
From | Konservativ Monarkistpartiet | To | Debating the Republic Act, 2189 | | Message | Sorry, explain the lie again? I convinced other parties to vote for monarchies, in order to remove the HoS powers? Where did the latter part occur? |
| Date | 23:32:57, February 22, 2006 CET |
From | Konservativ Monarkistpartiet | To | Debating the Republic Act, 2189 | | Message | 1) Why do you demand why we voted against the Government proposal?
2) We want a dictatorship? Where have we said that? We are a tad confused the SL are a party that wanted to keep all the power in the hands of one man, and for three years prevented the passage of a new cabinet? How can you moan at us, when your position is worse, you were never going to vote in favour of the Government proposal, you are such a moron.. |
| Date | 23:39:20, February 22, 2006 CET |
From | KSP - Kazulia Socialdemokratisk Parti | To | Debating the Republic Act, 2189 | | Message | 1) Because in this way we had a dictatorship
2) See 1). As you can learn, a parliamentary democracy divide the powers between HoS and HoG. At least, if a HoS not make his work, after a legislature he/she was removed and the situation can change. Here how this is impossible. This is way we prefer a republic. And we had abstain on the gov proposal since we are against it, but we don't want to take any position on it. |
| Date | 23:42:29, February 22, 2006 CET |
From | Konservativ Monarkistpartiet | To | Debating the Republic Act, 2189 | | Message | 1) Then why did you vote against it? You enjoy moaning out the SV for not voting for it, regardless of the fact you yourself didn't.
2) If the HoS controls the cabinet, but the HoS doesn't command a majority within the legislature, then the HoS cannot pass a cabinet, therefore there is no effective government. This situation also prevents parties that can pass a cabinet from having the opportunity to do so. If you abstained on it as well, then please stop moaning at us for doing the same. |
| Date | 23:52:31, February 22, 2006 CET |
From | KSP - Kazulia Socialdemokratisk Parti | To | Debating the Republic Act, 2189 | | Message | 1) We were against monarchy, and the current situation is an effect of it.
2) This is right at maximum only for a legislature. After that, the HoS will change.
We had put our reasons, which are yours? |
| Date | 23:58:14, February 22, 2006 CET |
From | Konservativ Monarkistpartiet | To | Debating the Republic Act, 2189 | | Message | 1) We are for a monarchy, stop saying the same things over and over again.
2) It is not right that a country does not have a cabinet for three years, that is unfair on the people of Kazulia, and was a direct result of your reusal to allow a more democratic system.
My reasons
1) I supported the monarchy, because I support the monarchy, spooky eh?
2) I abstained because the NL switched sides (without explaining, woot) fairs fair. |
| Date | 00:20:49, February 23, 2006 CET |
From | KSP - Kazulia Socialdemokratisk Parti | To | Debating the Republic Act, 2189 | | Message | Thank you for the explanation of your reasons: we respect your monarchist idea. But the cabinet not achieve consensus due to RP, not by us. The proposed cabinet had the majority, if RP accept it: still, we defend the system, not the passed situation.
And you vote against NL only because is NL? Well done! |
| Date | 11:56:00, February 23, 2006 CET |
From | Northern Light | To | Debating the Republic Act, 2189 | | Message | Boy...that sure is easy convincing SV to do what you want...
You know i changed idea just to make sure it didnt pass right?
Luckly elections will be soon |
| Date | 12:10:12, February 23, 2006 CET |
From | Konservativ Monarkistpartiet | To | Debating the Republic Act, 2189 | | Message | SL: You made two attempts to pass a cabinet, that was it, not exactly trying that hard was it? Where did I say I voted against NL only because it is NL? Why do you make up rubbish?
NL: 1) Convincing, what are you on about?
2) How awful of you
|
| Date | 19:50:09, February 24, 2006 CET |
From | Konservativ Monarkistpartiet | To | Debating the Republic Act, 2189 | | Message | Nationality and ethnicity are different. You cannot change your ethnicity, yet we have laws that change nationality, thus they can only be different, never the same, unless nationality is based purely upon ethnicity. |
| Date | 20:11:59, February 24, 2006 CET |
From | Konservativ Monarkistpartiet | To | Debating the Republic Act, 2189 | | Message | Listen thicko, the Founding Fathers of your party probably had families, which means some probably had children, whether or not they lead your party, there will still be immigrants supporting you, they won't all have died at the same time will they? |
| Date | 11:57:16, February 25, 2006 CET |
From | Northern Light | To | Debating the Republic Act, 2189 | | Message | I can assure you nobody in the NL has families, (at least not in the common sense), so all the NL members are 100% Kazulian this generation |
subscribe to this discussion -
unsubscribeVoting
| Vote |
Seats |
| yes | Total Seats: 24 |
| no | Total Seats: 75 |
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Don't put "the" as the first word in your party name, because when parties are referred to in news reports, their names are preceded with "the", e.g. the [Socialist Party] has lost. |
| Random quote: "The Holy Roman Empire was neither Holy, nor Roman, nor an Empire" - Voltaire |