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: Eminent domain
Details
Submitted by[?]: Post-Revolutionary Pragmatic Party
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: July 2229
Description[?]:
| The better to serve the public good, the state should have the right of eminent domain. The current legislation is an artefact of the Libertarian period and should be reformed. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Eminent Domain.
Old value:: The government may not seize private property.
Current: The government may not seize private property.
Proposed: The government may seize private property for vital government works.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Eminent domain compensation (if eminent domain is legal).
Old value:: The victim of eminent domain determines just compensation.
Current: The victim of eminent domain sets compensation, government can appeal to the courts if they deem the cost too high.
Proposed: A neutral body appointed by the courts determines the compensation, either party may appeal.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 01:48:18, May 18, 2006 CET | From | Post-Revolutionary Pragmatic Party | To | Debating the Eminent domain |
| Message | We will move to the vote immediately so as to avoid another proposal stalled by week-long debate. |
| Date | 01:50:59, May 18, 2006 CET | From | Free Movement of Gaduridos | To | Debating the Eminent domain |
| Message | We will NOT support Eminent Domain on grounds that it takes away freedoms |
| Date | 01:56:53, May 18, 2006 CET | From | Post-Revolutionary Pragmatic Party | To | Debating the Eminent domain |
| Message | All government takes away freedoms - if the Free Movement feels like it, it may disband itself. It is the duty of the state to provide for the common good - the wishes of the individual must be respected if possible but can be overruled by the wishes of the public. Is the FMG opposed to incarceration or law enforcement as well? |
| Date | 04:00:53, May 19, 2006 CET | From | Free Movement of Gaduridos | To | Debating the Eminent domain |
| Message | no. Just opposed to taking land from private citizens. I believe theres other ways to provide for the common good like using land the gov already has or giving the citizen the option to sell, not SEIZE land. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes | Total Seats: 331 | |||||
| no | Total Seats: 110 | |||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: All role-play must respect the established cultural background in Culturally Protected nations. |
| Random quote: "The avoidance of taxes is the only intellectual pursuit that still carries any reward." - John Maynard Keynes |