Main | About | Tutorial | FAQ | Links | Wiki | Forum | World News | World Map | World Ranking | Nations | Electoral Calendar | Party Organizations | Treaties |
Login | Register |
Game Time: May 5475
Next month in: 01:31:15
Server time: 10:28:44, April 26, 2024 CET
Currently online (0): Record: 63 on 23:13:00, July 26, 2019 CET

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 active government.

Details

Submitted by[?]: LiberalDemocraticFreedomTaxAndSpendParty

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: March 2211

Description[?]:

We propose to raise the amount of proposals alloted.

Proposals

Debate

These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:

Date22:27:20, March 29, 2006 CET
FromLiberalDemocraticFreedomTaxAndSpendParty
ToDebating the More active government.
MessageThese numbers are negotiable...

Date22:29:34, March 29, 2006 CET
FromPeople's Populist Party - Zogist Mafia
ToDebating the More active government.
MessageWhy?

Date06:08:05, March 30, 2006 CET
FromModerate Beluzians
ToDebating the More active government.
MessageHe's loosing seats....

Date10:04:47, March 30, 2006 CET
FromLiberalDemocraticFreedomTaxAndSpendParty
ToDebating the More active government.
MessageYou're losing seats, we are gaining them (Me and the NMrP that is).

Anyway, just look at the stats, we have the lowest quotas in the entire world.

Date13:08:26, March 30, 2006 CET
FromPeople's Populist Party - Zogist Mafia
ToDebating the More active government.
MessageI don't see those as convincing arguments. In the past you Exploited our liberal policy in regards to bills, and have showed little sign of repentance. What is the benefit of restoring the ability to exploit our system?

Date04:17:05, March 31, 2006 CET
FromModerate Beluzians
ToDebating the More active government.
MessageYou've lost seats from your over 30.

And I know exactly why I lost seats.

Date12:42:54, March 31, 2006 CET
FromPeople's Populist Party - Zogist Mafia
ToDebating the More active government.
MessageWhy did you lose seats? Abstaining?

Date19:14:41, March 31, 2006 CET
FromBeluzian Defense and Federalist Party
ToDebating the More active government.
MessageI oppose. The current system we have now works very well.

Why does more bills? The Left controls the government, and has a fair majority. If he can propose more bills, they can pass more drastic changes to our policy. The same would be true if the Right was ever to regain control of the government.

However, we currently have a very fair and moderate system, and any changes to it will not have my support.

Date05:50:40, April 01, 2006 CET
FromModerate Beluzians
ToDebating the More active government.
MessagePPP: Yes. I thought if it worked for the Marxist Party, then it would work for me. Of course not, silly me. I just want to get more than 12 seats. I'm quickly losing interest because I seem to stay stagnant or decline with every election.

Date17:31:05, April 01, 2006 CET
FromPeople's Populist Party - Zogist Mafia
ToDebating the More active government.
MessageYour opinions are almost the opposite of the People, as far as I can tell... hers are pretty close to them, esp. on the important issues. I think thats the difference.

Date18:59:07, April 01, 2006 CET
FromModerate Beluzians
ToDebating the More active government.
MessageSilly people, they must bend to my will!!!!

Date18:59:38, April 01, 2006 CET
FromLiberalDemocraticFreedomTaxAndSpendParty
ToDebating the More active government.
MessageTrue

Date19:00:51, April 01, 2006 CET
FromLiberalDemocraticFreedomTaxAndSpendParty
ToDebating the More active government.
MessageMB: I expect that they never will

Date09:44:22, April 05, 2006 CET
FromPartisans And Artisans League
ToDebating the More active government.
MessageThe 'people' have favoured the left for a long time. Well big government at least. I've been led to believe that they do change over time although the evidence looks pretty slim. I would say to the MB that your problem might be your 'coherency' - being a reasonably realistic party as you are you would tend to not vote always one way or the other on the market or government responsibilities, which the 'people' don't tend to like - just a suggestion.

Date13:02:06, April 05, 2006 CET
FromNeo-Marxist revolutionary Party
ToDebating the More active government.
MessageMB: So what I was like that for nearly a hundred years (game time that is) whereas before I won the elections and presedential elections about five/six times running wouldn't win and then would again. What's your point? Plus as the others have said it comes down to the issues themselves. I agree I do abstain a lot especially lately, although this has been due to a combination of work and now annoyingly enough illness, I don't abstain because I want to; going back to the point, it also comes down to which issues you abstain upon and their relevance to the 'People'. I've been lucky in that whenever I've abstained it tends to be on issues which the 'people' don't see as very relevant. However, if I start abstaining on issues that have much relevance I will lose seats.

Date03:49:38, April 07, 2006 CET
FromModerate Beluzians
ToDebating the More active government.
MessageWow, a smart ass comment garners this much grief. Lord....

subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe

Voting

Vote Seats
yes
  

Total Seats: 22

no
      

Total Seats: 78

abstain

    Total Seats: 0


    Random fact: Particracy is completely free! If you want to support the game financially, feel free to make a small donation to the lievenswouter@gmail.com Paypal account.

    Random quote: "Casting a vote shouldn't make you sick." - Ronnie Dugger

    This page was generated with PHP
    Copyright 2004-2010 Wouter Lievens
    Queries performed: 81