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: Cultural Affairs Bill
Details
Submitted by[?]: Gao-Showa Imperial 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: April 2344
Description[?]:
| Changes we propose |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change National, cultural and historic sites and monuments.
Old value:: The state actively protects scenery, localities, cultural, and historical sites; it maintains an agency to preserve them untouched if public interest so requires.
Current: The state actively protects scenery, localities, cultural, and historical sites; it maintains an agency to preserve them untouched if public interest so requires.
Proposed: This matter is left up to the local governments.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy towards the funding of libraries.
Old value:: The national government controls a vast and comprehensive system of public libraries.
Current: The national government controls a vast and comprehensive system of public libraries.
Proposed: Funding and operation of libraries is left entirely to local governments.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change Government regulation of the viewing of movies.
Old value:: The viewing of movies is not regulated by the government.
Current: The government sets a range of standards (to be determined) and these apply to cinemas and private homes.
Proposed: The government sets a range of standards (to be determined) but these only apply to movie theaters.
Article 4
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy concerning museum funding.
Old value:: The national government maintains a system of museums nationwide.
Current: The national government maintains a system of museums nationwide.
Proposed: The government leaves funding and operation of museums to local governments.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 21:38:40, January 12, 2007 CET | From |  Royal Socialist Party of Hulstria | To | Debating the Cultural Affairs Bill |
| Message | You havent even given any argument as to why we should support this |
| Date | 23:58:52, January 12, 2007 CET | From | Kaiserliche Hulsterreichische Partei | To | Debating the Cultural Affairs Bill |
| Message | You're going to find out very quickly that we rarely give arguements as to why can bill should be passed in Gishoto, save renaming acts. Everyother party already has their mind made up as to how they'll vote as most of us have been here a while so theres no real point to debating. |
| Date | 00:27:11, January 13, 2007 CET | From | Gao-Showa Imperial Party | To | Debating the Cultural Affairs Bill |
| Message | exactly, we will occaisionally be turned on social issues but for most things we know how we and all the other parties will vote. |
| Date | 04:49:12, January 13, 2007 CET | From | Royal Socialist Party of Hulstria | To | Debating the Cultural Affairs Bill |
| Message | well I'm like the other parties, if you give me a reasonable argument as to why I should support something, I can be turned |
| Date | 18:51:21, January 13, 2007 CET | From | Refuge Pressure Party | To | Debating the Cultural Affairs Bill |
| Message | Article 1,2 and 4 can only lead to a reduction in funds for our cultural establishments and sites. For two parties who claim to be acting to protect different race's cultural heritidge to vote in favour of this is bizzare. |
| Date | 18:51:55, January 13, 2007 CET | From | Refuge Pressure Party | To | Debating the Cultural Affairs Bill |
| Message | Our mistake, clearly that should read "For a party" and not "For two parties" |
| Date | 19:22:24, January 13, 2007 CET | From | Gao-Showa Imperial Party | To | Debating the Cultural Affairs Bill |
| Message | perhaps the govenment is playing too big a role in looking after our culture? The central government has often abused it's power over Gao-Showa cultural sights and I think people would trust politicians with more connection to the area in which they live to make decisions about these matters. |
| Date | 17:58:52, January 14, 2007 CET | From | Refuge Pressure Party | To | Debating the Cultural Affairs Bill |
| Message | What you mean is that you want such funding drastically cut, but don't have the guts to propose it yourself because you know the voters wouldn't accept it. |
| Date | 00:02:14, January 15, 2007 CET | From | Gao-Showa Imperial Party | To | Debating the Cultural Affairs Bill |
| Message | well we do want funding dramatically cut everywhere, I believe our stance on that was well known to everyone including the voters. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 224 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 390 | ||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 136 |
| Random fact: "Treaty-locking", or ratifiying treaties that completely or nearly completely forbid any proposals to change laws, is not allowed. Amongst other possible sanctions, Moderation reserves the discretion to delete treaties and/or subject parties to a seat reset if this is necessary in order to reverse a treaty-lock situation. |
| Random quote: "I think that gay marriage is something that should be between a man and a woman." - Arnold Schwarzenegger |