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: Right to Property Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Anti Egalitarian Alliance
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: September 2305
Description[?]:
| Eminent domain is theft! |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Eminent Domain.
Old value:: The government may seize private property for vital government works.
Current: The government may seize private property for vital government works.
Proposed: The government may not seize private property.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 23:04:50, October 26, 2006 CET | From | Kirlawan Popular Front | To | Debating the Right to Property Act |
| Message | No it isn't. If a landowner holds out against vital developments, everyone else (and ultimately even they) suffer. As long as they are fairly compensated, it is fair to allow the state to Compulsorarily Purchase property when they can justify it. |
| Date | 14:13:15, October 27, 2006 CET | From | Anti Egalitarian Alliance | To | Debating the Right to Property Act |
| Message | If the land owner believes it is beneficial, they can sell of their own free will. |
| Date | 13:41:25, October 28, 2006 CET | From | Liberal Progressive Party | To | Debating the Right to Property Act |
| Message | I voted for this because I am concerned about the possible scope of eminent domain. In Dorvik, it was used as a political ploy by the Communist to seize the Green's party headquarters. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes | Total Seats: 471 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 276 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: If your "Bills under debate" section is cluttered up with old bills created by inactive parties, report them for deletion on the Bill Clearouts Requests thread: http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=4363 |
| Random quote: "An "acceptable" level of unemployment means that the government economist to whom it is acceptable still has a job." - Author Unknown |