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: More seats for an expanded government

Details

Submitted by^[?]: Kellarly 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: August 2065

Description^[?]:

As our government has enlarged, bringing in more parties, I suggest that the number of seats in the House be expanded so it can more accurately show the will of the voting public. It shall be kept as an odd number to avoid draws when voting.

Proposals

Article 1

Proposal^[?] to change The total number of seats in the legislative assembly. Should be between 75 and 750.

Old value:: 199

Current: 205

Proposed: 299

Debate

These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:

Date	15:19:35, June 08, 2005 CET
From	Sanctaphrax Party (Mod)
To	Debating the More seats for an expanded government
Message	We think even more might be acceptable, possibly 449?

Date	15:37:24, June 08, 2005 CET
From	Kellarly Party
To	Debating the More seats for an expanded government
Message	Ok, that can be done.

Date	15:38:24, June 08, 2005 CET
From	Kellarly Party
To	Debating the More seats for an expanded government
Message	Changed.

Date	15:46:38, June 08, 2005 CET
From	First Socialist Party
To	Debating the More seats for an expanded government
Message	Ick... I like our current number.

Date	15:58:10, June 08, 2005 CET
From	Kellarly Party
To	Debating the More seats for an expanded government
Message	I was thinking though, as we have more parties, it should really be expanded to show the differences more clearly and accurately.

Date	16:21:52, June 08, 2005 CET
From	First Socialist Party
To	Debating the More seats for an expanded government
Message	I don't think so.

Date	17:13:22, June 08, 2005 CET
From	Kellarly Party
To	Debating the More seats for an expanded government
Message	Why not though?

Date	17:15:48, June 08, 2005 CET
From	Kellarly Party
To	Debating the More seats for an expanded government
Message	You won't lose influence, it will show more accurately how the parties are divided...whats not to like?

Date	18:36:58, June 08, 2005 CET
From	First Socialist Party
To	Debating the More seats for an expanded government
Message	We want a small number of seats, yet large enough not to lose any accuracy.

Date	18:38:53, June 08, 2005 CET
From	Communist Party
To	Debating the More seats for an expanded government
Message	We would support this.

Date	18:41:22, June 08, 2005 CET
From	Libertarian Socialist Federation
To	Debating the More seats for an expanded government
Message	We support this

Date	18:51:27, June 08, 2005 CET
From	Kellarly Party
To	Debating the More seats for an expanded government
Message	Would 299 seats be more acceptable then? or maybe 249? Therefore it is not a huge increase, just one that allows for the new parties that have emerged.

Date	19:44:17, June 08, 2005 CET
From	Christian Liberal Party
To	Debating the More seats for an expanded government
Message	We support this. If it means I'm not put into the same category as the LCP, it's a plus.

Date	20:59:42, June 08, 2005 CET
From	First Socialist Party
To	Debating the More seats for an expanded government
Message	199 is fine.

Date	02:57:05, June 09, 2005 CET
From	Ruthlessly Random Party
To	Debating the More seats for an expanded government
Message	I'd go for 299 personally.

Date	06:45:46, June 09, 2005 CET
From	Sanctaphrax Party (Mod)
To	Debating the More seats for an expanded government
Message	I think 449, or 499, is fine.

Date	07:05:10, June 09, 2005 CET
From	Communist Party
To	Debating the More seats for an expanded government
Message	We'd support any increase.

Date	07:57:56, June 09, 2005 CET
From	First Socialist Party
To	Debating the More seats for an expanded government
Message	I will not change it at this time. Wait for the next election and hope that I lose seats.

Date	09:05:04, June 09, 2005 CET
From	Kellarly Party
To	Debating the More seats for an expanded government
Message	As the majority of parties are in favour i am putting it to vote. I have reverted it to 299, but this is not meant to be a snub to the Sanctaphrax Party, merely having an increase that is acceptable to all, apart from the SP obviously.

Date	09:56:27, June 09, 2005 CET
From	First Socialist Party
To	Debating the More seats for an expanded government
Message	That was very silly. I have over 1/3 of the seats. You need over 2/3 to change it. It will not pass.

Date	12:35:22, June 09, 2005 CET
From	Kellarly Party
To	Debating the More seats for an expanded government
Message	OOC: Ok I buggered that one up, didn't read that. Thought it was an over 50%. Oh well. I'll bide my time. Besides the people like big government and lots of democracy so its all good to me :D

Date	15:17:28, June 10, 2005 CET
From	Federal Technocrats
To	Debating the More seats for an expanded government
Message	Hmmm, even given the Socialist Constitutional veto, we support the proposed legislation.

Date	06:43:40, June 14, 2005 CET
From	First Socialist Party
To	Debating the More seats for an expanded government
Message	While the Liberal Canucks are still present (but not voting) this will still not be passed.

subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe

Voting

Vote

Seats

yes

Total Seats: 117

First Socialist Party (69)

Total Seats: 69

abstain

Libertarian Socialist Federation (0)

Total Seats: 0

Random fact: You can view who's online (i.e. been active the last 10 minutes) at the bottom of the menu (either at the top or the side).

Random quote: "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson

This page was generated with PHP
Copyright 2004-2010 Wouter Lievens
Queries performed: 96