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: Cities Protection Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Democratic-Republican 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: February 2198
Description[?]:
| Wild animals in cities are a problem. We need to devolve Wild Animal regulation to local government, so that in more rural areas, wild animals may be freely kept as pets, while in crowded city apartments, they may not be (as a Polar Bear is far more likely to cause damage in a crowded apartment complex than in a rural farm area. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy regarding the keeping of wild animals as pets.
Old value:: All wild animals may be kept as pets, without any restrictions or precautions whatsoever.
Current: The government maintains a list of dangerous wild animals which may not be kept as pets; other wild animals may be kept as pets.
Proposed: This matter is left up to the local governments.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 22:05:00, March 09, 2006 CET | From |  Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Cities Protection Act |
| Message | Again the DRP are abandoning their responsibility! YOU are the government, govern! This type of local claptrap is just cowardice and an abdication of the responsibility the electorate invested in you! |
| Date | 00:36:11, March 10, 2006 CET | From | Democratic-Republican Party | To | Debating the Cities Protection Act |
| Message | The electorate invested me with the power to delegate this to their local government. Therefore, it is not cowardice. We would continue but we would then start yelling and/or having a major debate that lasts all night. |
| Date | 02:07:27, March 10, 2006 CET | From | Hutori Freedom Party | To | Debating the Cities Protection Act |
| Message | We aren't the ones trying to eliminate the government, Libertarian Party. Hypocracy, anyone? How can a semi-anarchist party nag another party about its governing responsibilities? |
| Date | 20:34:28, March 10, 2006 CET | From | Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Cities Protection Act |
| Message | There is no hypocrisy in The Libertarian Party, it is in our manifesto and our postion is clear, we stand for minimalist government! The entire electorate know that because we tell them so. What is more our positions have been solid for over 150 years while certain parties only consistency is their inconsistency! Vote whoring is one phrase that leaps to mind. You however are hiding behind the skirts of local decisions as you are too frightened of the electorate to make any decision, you are a government who is too frightened to govern. THAT is hypocrisy! |
| Date | 04:30:32, March 11, 2006 CET | From | Democratic-Republican Party | To | Debating the Cities Protection Act |
| Message | 150 years? Your party has been around for MAYBE as long as the DRP! Also, the DRP feels free to change as different members come in and the younger generation favor another option. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 139 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 191 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Players who deliberately attempt to present a misleading picture of the nation's current RP laws will be subject to sanction. |
| Random quote: "When was the last time you talked about race with someone of a different race? If the answer is never, you're part of the problem." - Bill Bradley |