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: TCP: National Reform, February 2222.
Details
Submitted by[?]: Conservative 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: October 2222
Description[?]:
| This reform is aimed towards improving the democratic procedures of The Telamon Commonwealth. |
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:: 4
Current: 20
Proposed: 10
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The maximum proposal quota a party can accumulate.
Old value:: 7
Current: 40
Proposed: 10
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change The constitutional right and responsibility to propose a cabinet to the legislature.
Old value:: Only the Head of State can propose a cabinet coalition.
Current: Each party can propose a cabinet coalition.
Proposed: Each party can propose a cabinet coalition.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 12:17:26, May 03, 2006 CET | From |  United Liberal Alliance | To | Debating the TCP: National Reform, February 2222. |
| Message | Can I point out now that if you propose bills like this you are likely to really upset people as it really messes with their coherency raitings and indeed their general positions. There is no common link to these proposals so I would suggest that you create seperate bills for them. For example, Article 1 and Article 5 which relate to the constitution should go in one bill, article 2 on energy regulation in another and so on. |
| Date | 14:51:31, May 03, 2006 CET | From | Telamon National Party | To | Debating the TCP: National Reform, February 2222. |
| Message | Yes, I agree with the UCA for once :p |
| Date | 15:24:10, May 03, 2006 CET | From | Conservative Party | To | Debating the TCP: National Reform, February 2222. |
| Message | k, thanks for the advise :) |
| Date | 15:34:38, May 03, 2006 CET | From | Conservative Party | To | Debating the TCP: National Reform, February 2222. |
| Message | So this would be how I should do it? only propose reforms under one category per bill? |
| Date | 16:32:09, May 03, 2006 CET | From | United Labour Party of Telamon | To | Debating the TCP: National Reform, February 2222. |
| Message | Yes. |
| Date | 17:00:46, May 03, 2006 CET | From | Telamon National Party | To | Debating the TCP: National Reform, February 2222. |
| Message | yes. |
| Date | 19:52:21, May 03, 2006 CET | From | Conservative Party | To | Debating the TCP: National Reform, February 2222. |
| Message | So as this is my first bill, may I ask why it is clearly being voted down? :D It seems understandable that the coalition parties votes it down, but why would the TNP? |
| Date | 20:01:56, May 03, 2006 CET | From | Conservative Party | To | Debating the TCP: National Reform, February 2222. |
| Message | So as this is my first bill, may I ask why it is clearly being voted down? :D It seems understandable that the coalition parties votes it down, but why would the TNP? |
| Date | 20:13:06, May 03, 2006 CET | From | Conservative Party | To | Debating the TCP: National Reform, February 2222. |
| Message | So as this is my first bill, may I ask why it is clearly being voted down? :D It seems understandable that the coalition parties votes it down, but why would the TNP? |
| Date | 20:29:27, May 03, 2006 CET | From | Conservative Party | To | Debating the TCP: National Reform, February 2222. |
| Message | sorry about that (the repeated messages). |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 0 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 320 | ||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: When forming a cabinet, try to include as few parties as possible, while still obtaining a majority of the seats. |
| Random quote: "Politics is all about compromises and negotiations, nothing more, nothing less." - Augusto Amadeo, former Istalian politician |