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: Mayoral Reform Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Federalist Party
Status[?]: defeated
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: February 2262
Description[?]:
| As it currently stands, citiea and towns are run by municipal councils. While this may seem to support the best interests of the people, it in fact creates a large amount of beauractatic "red tape" that Hobrazia, frankly speaking, already has too much of. If mayors were directly elected by citizens, much of the councilor's bickerings ans stallings will be cut out of the equation. Also, since the mayor is selected by the public, we can be fairly certain that he has the public's best interests in mind. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The appointment of mayors.
Old value:: The municipal councils exercise mayoral powers.
Current: Citizens elect their mayor directly in a local election.
Proposed: Citizens elect their mayor directly in a local election.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 09:18:11, July 28, 2006 CET | From |  We Say So! Party | To | Debating the Mayoral Reform Act |
| Message | We disagree. Introducing mayors would have the opposite effect on "red tape" than that which you are opposing. The introduction of mayors would still require the use and operation of a municipal council to maintain and operate services but no final decisions could be made until it is presented to the mayor. The mayor might also have a very different political agenda than the Council thusly slowing down the process of government. There is also the increased cost and beaurocracy that is required to not only elect a municipal council every few years but extend that to elect a new mayor. whether those elections would take place at the same time or not would require enshrining in law. There would then be the requirement of "counters" to count the votes, election forms, campaign and organising teams etc, a large increase in costs wouldn't you say? |
| Date | 09:48:11, July 28, 2006 CET | From | National Imperial Hobrazian Front | To | Debating the Mayoral Reform Act |
| Message | Agreed with WSS!. |
| Date | 11:58:59, July 28, 2006 CET | From | Federalist Party | To | Debating the Mayoral Reform Act |
| Message | The mayor can't possible have an agenda so radically different from the council that it would drastically affect the government of the town. Besides, the regional and national governments are in both cases superior to the local governments; it's not like there would be an extremeist mayor elected. Besides, the use of a legislative body without an executive is a system doom to fail. You have a body that makes the laws and enforces them, but some members of the council may choose not to enforce a law that they disagree with, but was passed because they were in the minority. Are we to only partially enforce a law? We think not. The establishment of the office of mayor would ease the process of law enforcement on the local level. |
| Date | 19:31:05, July 28, 2006 CET | From | We Say So! Party | To | Debating the Mayoral Reform Act |
| Message | We question why you believe that laws would not be upheld. Currently we don't have "local" laws that differ from "national" laws, the law is the law, stop. The local councils are there to carry out those laws decided upon by national government, they do not set their own laws and as such there is no requirement to expand the amount of "red tape" through the introduction of Mayors. Also, there is nothing stopping any radical mayors from being elected, hence is the nature of democracy, however currently local council makeup is from the differing parties in a similar fashion to our national legislature, as such there is no requirement for a Mayor as each member of the council votes upon how things are operated, should they have that choice seperate from the national legislature, and the majority rules, again following the democratic tradition that this Country follows. The introduction of an autocratic mayor that can operate over the council merely increases internal discord. |
| Date | 21:37:35, July 28, 2006 CET | From | Federalist Party | To | Debating the Mayoral Reform Act |
| Message | It seems as if I am in the minority on this subject. However, I will still put this to a vote. |
| Date | 12:13:20, July 29, 2006 CET | From | We Say So! Party | To | Debating the Mayoral Reform Act |
| Message | It is worth putting to the vote, if only to help improve your visibility and so help gain you seats in elections. |
| Date | 19:19:34, July 29, 2006 CET | From | Federalist Party | To | Debating the Mayoral Reform Act |
| Message | precisely my point. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 118 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 282 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Particracy is set in the fictional world of Terra, which mirrors the real world of today and yet is not quite like it. |
| Random quote: "Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred." - Martin Luther King Jr. |