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: Democracy Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: People's Party
Status[?]: passed
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: July 2069
Description[?]:
In search of greater representation in Likaton we propose this bill |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The method used to determine the number of seats each region receives in the national legislature.
Old value:: Equal representation, regardless of region population.
Current: Equal representation, regardless of region population.
Proposed: A proportional algorithm that gives a very small advantage to larger regions.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
Date | 16:39:30, June 18, 2005 CET | From | Proletariat Revolution Party | To | Debating the Democracy Act |
Message | This didn't pass before. Drop it. |
Date | 17:10:30, June 18, 2005 CET | From | mutt Party | To | Debating the Democracy Act |
Message | No. |
Date | 19:22:04, June 18, 2005 CET | From | Republican Party | To | Debating the Democracy Act |
Message | If there are more citizens within a region, it is only natural and right that they be given a larger amount of representation within the National Council. I am in favor of this bill in its' current form and will vote in favor should it be brought to a vote. |
Date | 19:54:43, June 18, 2005 CET | From | Liberal Party for Equality | To | Debating the Democracy Act |
Message | I am also in favour. |
Date | 21:50:54, June 18, 2005 CET | From | National Centrist Party | To | Debating the Democracy Act |
Message | This will lead to cities dominating the countryside. What about rural areas? |
Date | 23:22:20, June 18, 2005 CET | From | mutt Party | To | Debating the Democracy Act |
Message | At the moment it is a true representation of what our citizens want. |
Date | 23:33:02, June 18, 2005 CET | From | Right Wing Liberals Party | To | Debating the Democracy Act |
Message | Ill support |
Date | 00:18:36, June 19, 2005 CET | From | Liberal Party for Equality | To | Debating the Democracy Act |
Message | It is altogether fairer - more people, greater proportion of the opinion, greater proportion of the vote. we run more or less a proportional representation system as it is, so we may as well stick with that. |
Date | 18:59:04, June 19, 2005 CET | From | People's Party | To | Debating the Democracy Act |
Message | The bill received overwhelming support and was held by just a few stubborn parties ... thats why I brought it back to vote. The current system allows disproportionate power to certain smaller communities. Lets have one person, one vote |
Date | 23:40:12, June 19, 2005 CET | From | National Centrist Party | To | Debating the Democracy Act |
Message | Under a one person, one vote system only larger communities will matter. The current system is fair to ALL regions. It prevents regional power plays, and encourages the government to act on a truly national level. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
Vote | Seats | ||||||
yes |
Total Seats: 179 | ||||||
no |
Total Seats: 21 | ||||||
abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
Random fact: Submitting a bill without any proposals in it will not attract or detract voters. It will not raise your visibility or change your political position. |
Random quote: "Men are so simple and so much inclined to obey immediate needs that a deceiver will never lack victims for his deceptions." - Niccolo Machiavelli |