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: regulation of industrial pollution act
Details
Submitted by[?]: the free capitalist 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: March 4428
Description[?]:
| We must lower our pollution controls to be less restrictive for the sake of economic improvement while still maintaining a level of control for industrial pollution. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government regulation of pollution in industry.
Old value:: The government enforces highly restrictive industrial pollution standards.
Current: The government enforces highly restrictive industrial pollution standards.
Proposed: The government enforces moderate pollution restrictions.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 05:34:47, July 22, 2018 CET | From | Sunrise Party 해돋이당 | To | Debating the regulation of industrial pollution act |
| Message | Dear Speaker, We agree with the idea of economic development, though we also must pursue Ecological friendly policies for the benefit of the Sindo practitioners-including Her Imperial Majesty Taeyang Hak-Sook. Our vote will be abstain until we gather more information. Signed, Yoon Choong-Sik Minister of Environment and Tourism |
| Date | 08:13:17, July 23, 2018 CET | From | Conservative Party (보수당) | To | Debating the regulation of industrial pollution act |
| Message | Dear Speaker, We will also be abstaining until there is clearer information. Both options seem good to us but the full impact of both needs to be discovered for us to choose whether to vote for or against this Sean Hong Prime Minister |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||
| yes | Total Seats: 0 | ||
| no |
Total Seats: 104 | ||
| abstain | Total Seats: 156 |
| Random fact: Players who consent to a particular role-play by acknowledging it in their own role-play cannot then disown it or withdraw their consent from it. For example, if player A role-plays the assassination of player B's character, and player B then acknowledges the assassination in a news post, but then backtracks and insists the assassination did not happen, then he will be required under the rules to accept the validity of the assassination role-play. |
| Random quote: "Power always has to be kept in check; power exercised in secret, especially under the cloak of national security, is doubly dangerous." - William Proxmire |