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: Proposal Regeneration Time Increase
Details
Submitted by[?]: Libertarian League
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: February 2201
Description[?]:
| This will lower the amount of proposals allowed per year, making bills more thought out. |
Proposals
Article 1
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: 6
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The maximum proposal quota a party can accumulate.
Old value:: 12
Current: 20
Proposed: 6
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 22:14:09, March 15, 2006 CET | From | Conservative People's Party | To | Debating the Proposal Regeneration Time Increase |
| Message | I'm for it |
| Date | 22:25:16, March 15, 2006 CET | From | Conservative People's Party | To | Debating the Proposal Regeneration Time Increase |
| Message | No, wait, I'm against it - We're not just striving for the best possible nation, but also a good game experience and this will damage the dymanics of the game. I'm against |
| Date | 02:46:04, March 16, 2006 CET | From | Libertarian League | To | Debating the Proposal Regeneration Time Increase |
| Message | if you think about how many proposals you actually make after an election year, you will agree... you will have 6 that rolled over from the dry "pre-election year" and then 6 more that same year... that will give you a minimum of 12 per election cycle which leaves now just over 2 days for passing bills... |
| Date | 03:39:43, March 16, 2006 CET | From | Independent Freedom Party | To | Debating the Proposal Regeneration Time Increase |
| Message | how about 9? |
| Date | 04:44:00, March 16, 2006 CET | From | CNT/AFL | To | Debating the Proposal Regeneration Time Increase |
| Message | There really is no need to limit the democratic process. Self regulation works fine in Lodamun. |
| Date | 08:12:49, March 16, 2006 CET | From | Conservative People's Party | To | Debating the Proposal Regeneration Time Increase |
| Message | That's right LL, but I still don't see a reason to lower the limit. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes | Total Seats: 120 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 81 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: RP laws follow the same passing rules as in-game variable laws. Laws that are not of a constitutional nature require a simple majority "Yes" vote from active parties currently holding seats. Laws that are of a constitutional nature require a 2/3 majority "Yes" vote from active parties currently holding seats. RP laws may be abolished a simple majority vote this applies to ANY RP law. |
| Random quote: "If there's anything a public servant hates to do it's something for the public." - Kin Hubbard |