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 Adjustment Act (Jan 4418) - Liberty
Details
Submitted by[?]: Liberty Party
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: September 4418
Description[?]:
| Liberty propose to reduce the Congress to 350 members. We also propose that limitations be placed on activity related to bill proposal. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The maximum proposal quota a party can accumulate.
Old value:: 50
Current: 50
Proposed: 10
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The number of proposals a party can introduce per year (will be handed out as a monthly quota).
Old value:: 20
Current: 20
Proposed: 5
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change The total number of seats in the legislative assembly. Should be between 75 and 750.
Old value:: 750
Current: 750
Proposed: 350
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 09:43:09, July 03, 2018 CET | From | Beluzia Socialist People's Party | To | Debating the Constitutional Adjustment Act (Jan 4418) - Liberty |
| Message | The BSPP agree that the proposals need to be reduced in order to bring stability and stop those fools the BDP bringing their wide ranging nonsense "reform" bills to the house with tens of contradictory articles. However we cannot accept the reduction in seats. we would like to see a more modest parliament, but to ensure representation would like to see the figure nearer the 500s |
| Date | 09:48:37, July 03, 2018 CET | From | Liberty Party | To | Debating the Constitutional Adjustment Act (Jan 4418) - Liberty |
| Message | Liberty think that 500 politicians in Congress, in addition to local politicians, is still too many. |
| Date | 09:53:14, July 03, 2018 CET | From | Unsubmissive Beluzian Workers Party | To | Debating the Constitutional Adjustment Act (Jan 4418) - Liberty |
| Message | If I recall correctly, Liberty mentioned 32 years ago that: 'Liberty are happy to accept 550. What does everyone else think?', based on our following vote: The KWRF Central Committee has held a vote over parliamentary seats for the next term: Proposal 550: 100 (40.0) Proposal 600: 98 (39.2) Proposal 500: 52 (20.8) Proposal 550 has won the plurality of votes and will be the first position of the KWRF. The Parliamentary Faction will vote on the three proposals and if a different proposal is chosen, it will go into a runoff with Proposal 550. If the same proposal is chosen, there will be no runoff The KWRF Parliamentary Faction has voted as follows: Proposal 500: 58 (62.4) Proposal 600: 30 (32.3) Proposal 550: 5 (5.3) Proposal 500 has been chosen by the Parliamentary Faction. A runoff vote will follow. A joint session by the Central Committee and the Parliamentary Faction has voted as follows: Proposal 550: 208 (60.6) Proposal 500: 135 (39.4) The KWRF has decided to adopt Proposal 550 as its official position for reducing bureaucracy and enabling a more efficient and transparent Parliament We ask why Liberty accepted our number, but then all of a sudden changed stances and proposed 350 seats. |
| Date | 10:07:53, July 03, 2018 CET | From | Liberty Party | To | Debating the Constitutional Adjustment Act (Jan 4418) - Liberty |
| Message | Liberty have always wanted to see a much smaller Congress. Indeed we've proposed legislation to do just that which the KWRF have previously supported. Congress Size Reduction Act (4398) - Liberty http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=570030 |
| Date | 11:28:29, July 03, 2018 CET | From | Beluzia Socialist People's Party | To | Debating the Constitutional Adjustment Act (Jan 4418) - Liberty |
| Message | Given the disagreement over this measure and the fact that we are in the process of forming a government. I think it right that the Liberty Party remove this bill at this stage, rather than push it through in distracted times. Furthermore we would recommend sending the bill in two parts. We would agree to the government slow down to create stability, but seat figures clearly needs more debate. |
| Date | 11:41:50, July 03, 2018 CET | From | Liberty Party | To | Debating the Constitutional Adjustment Act (Jan 4418) - Liberty |
| Message | BSPP are right this is unlikely to be moved in this form. Unfortunately we can't remove this bill but we'd be willing to reintroduce the slow-down as a separate motion. |
| Date | 11:49:51, July 03, 2018 CET | From | Beluzia Socialist People's Party | To | Debating the Constitutional Adjustment Act (Jan 4418) - Liberty |
| Message | I would prefer that a government were formed first so that all members of that government could discuss their own views on the slow down and reach a common consensus on such a large issue. I suspect we may be able to pass with two thirds though. |
| Date | 12:31:12, July 03, 2018 CET | From | Liberty Party | To | Debating the Constitutional Adjustment Act (Jan 4418) - Liberty |
| Message | We thank the BSPP for their support. The left side of the aisle have shown enthusiasm for this bill previously (sans 350) which is why we didn't hesitate to reintroduce. It was only held up by the BDP. This isn't ideological anyway so it should get support again. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes | Total Seats: 0 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 676 | |||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 74 |
| Random fact: Head to the "Language assistance" thread to receive and offer help with translations: http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=6368 |
| Random quote: Time and again, the police prove themselves to be the Class Enemy, an armed mob used to oppress the masses and maintain the wealthy in their privileges. ~Friedrich Pfeiffer, General Secretary of the Dorvish Communist Party |