Forum:Second Chamber

__NEWSECTIONLINK__ In Lovia, Congress is the national legislative body and the most powerful branch of government. The Second Chamber is one of the two chambers of Congress, located in the Capitol in Downtown Noble City, in which the Members of the Congress vote bills that originated in the First Chamber. Paradoxically, Lovia does not have a bicameral parliament: there is only one group of MOTCs that both debates and votes the proposals. For the current composition of Congress, see 2011 Provisional Congress.

Whereas all national citizens may propose bills in the First Chamber, only Members of the Congress may vote them in the Second Chamber. Article 6 of the Constitution states that "all Members of the Congress are expected to vote on the motion in the Second Chamber". They have three legal voting options: "pro (in favor of the motion), contra (in opposition to the motion) and abstention (the wish not to vote)." Further more, they "have two weeks’ time to cast their vote in the Second Chamber. Voting may be closed earlier if the required majority is reached. The proposer may also choose to lengthen the voting period."

A normal majority ("fifty percent of the valid votes") is required to pass a motion amending the Federal Law. To vote on Constitutional amendments, a special majority ("more than two thirds of the valid votes") is required to pass a amendment. The special majority requirement was lowered from three quarters to two thirds in the 2010 State Reform (Sixth Amendment). All proposals approved by Congress, by the required majority and in due time, must be implemented by the government of Lovia.

Lovian Dollar
Official vote for the creation of a Lovian dollar. It will be valued at 90 US cents,and subdivided into dimes and cents. HORTON11 21:36, May 5, 2011 (UTC)

Pro

 * 1) HORTON11 22:00, May 5, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2) —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 22:53, May 5, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) Marcus/Michael Villanova 23:23, May 5, 2011 (UTC)
 * 4) --O u WTBsjrief-mich 14:36, May 6, 2011 (UTC)
 * 5)  We will need a monetary policy issued by a National Bank to back up our currency.  11:25, May 7, 2011 (UTC)
 * 6)  I am all in favour of our own currency. As for the designs, I like them very much. The Master&#39;s Voice 15:01, May 11, 2011 (UTC)

Abstain

 * 1)  --O u WTBsjrief-mich 09:32, May 6, 2011 (UTC) I like the entire idea, I only find that the designs are not really a unit. Especially the five dollar, which has a way more archaic look than the others with those lines.
 * The designs are not yet official. They are just proposals HORTON11  14:20, May 6, 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, if we're going to decide on that later, nothing'll block my support :) --O u WTBsjrief-mich 14:36, May 6, 2011 (UTC)
 * If you check the Lovian Dollar page, you will see my latest proposals which are more consistent in style. HORTON11  18:17, May 6, 2011 (UTC)

✅ 55% majority, and voting expired. Horton, instate the currency if you haven't already. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 13:28, May 11, 2011 (UTC)

073. Recognition of the existing localities
Just a check, it's been a year, and there has been a census. No First Chamber needed, so I'm just taking it here. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 16:12, May 13, 2011 (UTC)

I hereby propose the following:
 * Congress recognizes all the following localities as cities, under the Lovian law:
 * Newhaven and Noble City
 * Congress recognizes all the following localities as towns, under the Lovian law:
 * Hurbanova and Sofasi
 * Congress recognizes all the following localities as villages, under the Lovian law:
 * Adoha, Kinley, Novosevensk, Portland and Train Village
 * Congress recognizes all the following localities as hamlets, under the Lovian law:
 * Beaverwick, Clave Rock and East Hills
 * Congress recognizes all the following localities as neighborhoods, under the Lovian law:
 * Abby Springs, Downtown Adoha, Amish Kinley, Artista, Bayfield, Bayside, Citizen Corner, Downtown Noble City, Drake Town, Ferguson Beach Village, Hightech Valley, Downtown Hurbanova, Hurket-on-Kings, Industrial Park, King's Gardens, Downtown Kinley, Little Europe, Little Frisco, Long Road, Malipa, The Mall, Mandarin Village, Millstreet, New Town, Downtown Newhaven, Newport, Nicholasville, Old Harbor, Old Port, Pines, Downtown Sofasi, Trading Quarter, Downtown Train Village and Transcity

Pro

 * 1) —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 16:12, May 13, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2) --O u WTBsjrief-mich 17:14, May 13, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) Marcus/Michael Villanova 19:43, May 13, 2011 (UTC)
 * 4)   06:54, May 14, 2011 (UTC)
 * 5)  Nathaniel Scribner 07:53, May 14, 2011 (UTC)
 * 6)  The Master&#39;s Voice 12:25, May 27, 2011 (UTC)

Abstain


✅}} No one is going to vote contra, and already a majority. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 12:08, May 14, 2011 (UTC)

Revision to 004. Sports and National Team Act

 * 1) Lovian boules is recognized as the national sport of Lovia.
 * 2) Congress hereby commits itself to protect the sport and its culture as national heritage.
 * 3) A national sports team is a team that performs a single sport at a high level and represents Lovia during international contests, championships and friendly games.
 * 4) Congress can grant a sports team this title and duty by a normal majority.
 * 5) The ownership of a national sports team remains with its original proprietor.
 * 6) Congress will provide in a part of the expenses of this team to guarantee regular practice and performance.
 * 7) Congress may revoke this grant by a normal majority when the team does not represent Lovia correctly, with dignity and without wrongful conduct.
 * 8) Congress bars players who abuse narcotics, or any other substance that illegally improves a player's game, or have abused narcotics in the past twelve months from participating in a national sports team.
 * 9) Drugs that are prescribed by a fully qualified doctor of medicine may be used.
 * 10) At all times, other doctors of medicine may question the prescription and file for re-examination. If two other fully qualified medical professionals find the prescription unnecessary or harmful and therefore illegal, the sportsperson may no longer use the prescribed drugs.
 * 11) Non-governmental governing bodies in Lovian sports may bar players from playing:
 * 12) On reasonable suspicion of drug abuse;
 * 13) On ethical grounds, that is when a player acts not appropriately and without dignity, or when he or she has violated the law.
 * 14) Minors, that is people who have not yet reached the age of eighteen, must be a member of a sports player's union to protect them from wrongful conduct.
 * 15) Minors and adults are both restricted from sports if the temperatures outside are harmful to health.
 * 16) Minors may not participate in physical training or games when the outside temperature is below -20 degrees Celsius (-4°F) or above 32 degrees Celsius (90°F).
 * 17) Adults may not participate in physical training or games when the outside temperature is below -25 degrees Celsius (-13°F) or above 38 degrees Celsius (100°F).

Changes: Section 6 is deleted and Section 5 is modified to be more temperature friendly. Also added guidelines for adults in Section 5.

Pro

 * 1) —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 23:14, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2)  Good someone looks after the sports too.  08:21, May 17, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) --O u WTBsjrief-mich 08:41, May 17, 2011 (UTC) Sure, why not
 * 4) Marcus/Michael Villanova 11:48, May 17, 2011 (UTC)
 * 5)  HORTON11  01:56, May 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * 6) Nathaniel Scribner 02:00, May 27, 2011 (UTC)

Abstain


✅ Finally. Thanks for the vote, Horton. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 02:01, May 27, 2011 (UTC)

075. Amending Article 8.2
8.2. Federal Secretaries
 * 1) The Prime Minister will chose which Members of the Congress will become Secretaries of a certain Department at the beginning of his term. His proposal needs to be accepted by a normal majority in Congress.
 * 2) Congress should be able to question all executing members of government - of any level - about their activities. When they have lost their trust in the questioned person, they can vote a motion of distrust against him or her. When this motion is accepted by a normal majority, he or she has to resign and a replacement has to be appointed by Congress.
 * 3) When Congress has lost its trust in the incumbent government, it can vote a motion of distrust. When this motion is accepted by a normal majority, both government and Congress are dissolved and new federal elections are to be held.
 * 4) When the Prime Minister and his government resign, Congress can appoint a new government by normal majority. If no new government is appointed within two weeks, Congress is dissolved and new federal elections are to be held.

Goals as specified in the First Chamber. This is a Constitutional amendment, meaning it needs a special majority to get approved.

Pro

 * 1)   14:27, May 19, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2)  --O u WTBsjrief-mich 07:18, May 20, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3)  —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 11:13, May 20, 2011 (UTC)
 * 4)   HORTON11  12:42, May 20, 2011 (UTC)
 * 5)  Marcus/Michael Villanova 00:49, May 21, 2011 (UTC)

Contra

 * This takes all power from the Governors and they're states' rights. Federal government shoulden't tangle with the states and the removal of their local elected officals. Nathaniel Scribner 08:59, May 20, 2011 (UTC)
 * Two remarks: (1) It is not the federal government which gets to do this but the Congress (2) Congress can already 'tangle' with the governors according to the current Constitution, I didn't change that part. 12:48, May 20, 2011 (UTC)
 * States' rights need to be reduced even further than they are now. Lovia is just too small for states' rights to exist. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 20:37, May 20, 2011 (UTC)
 * That is not the discussion of this amendment. Its sole purpose is to fix government transition issues. (Though I do agree that the States are only good for making maps look nice) 07:58, May 21, 2011 (UTC)

Abstain

 * This is going null and void if the 2011 State Reform. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 00:56, May 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * Agreed as I said in the comment underneath, let's wait until state reform. Marcus/Michael Villanova 01:07, May 27, 2011 (UTC)

Discussion
I Ask as PM all congressmen to stop proposing bills and all that, this will be the last one before the changes i'm working on.I 'm working on a State Reform which would seriuosly alter the consitution. Marcus/Michael Villanova 14:38, May 21, 2011 (UTC)
 * I say voting suspended. The bill is withdrawn. 05:38, May 27, 2011 (UTC)

077. 2011 State Reform
Article 1 A - Lovian National State
 * 1) Lovia is a sovereign, independent, unitary and indivisible National State.
 * 2) Lovia is a democratic and social state, governed by the rule of law, in which human dignity, the citizens' rights and freedoms, the free development of human personality, justice and political pluralism represent supreme values, in the spirit of the democratic traditions of the Lovian people and shall be guaranteed.
 * 3) Lovia shall be organized based on the principle of the separation and balance of powers - legislative, executive, and judicial - within the framework of constitutional democracy. Therefore no person is entitled to combine a top function in two or three branches of government; thus, the ruling monarch, the Prime Minister and the Supreme Court Judge shall be no less than three different persons.
 * 4) In Lovia, the observance of the Constitution, its supremacy and the laws shall be mandatory.
 * 5) The national sovereignty shall reside within the Lovia people, that shall exercise it by means of their representative bodies, resulting from free, periodical and fair elections, as well as by referendum.
 * 6) No group or person may exercise sovereignty in one's own name.

Article 1 B - Lovia is a monarchy, ruled by the ruling monarch.
 * 1) The ruling monarch is the person who legally inherited the throne from the previous ruling monarch. He or she is thus a descendant of the first Lovian monarch, King Arthur I of Lovia (Arthur Noble).
 * 2) The ruling monarch can be either male (the King) or female (the Queen).
 * 3) The method of the line of succession to the Lovian throne is absolute cognatic primogeniture. Therefore, the person who legally inherits the Lovian throne, after the previous ruling monarch has either deceased or abdicated, is the person who is the eldest child of the previous monarch. If the monarch had no children, the throne goes to the next oldest sibling, followed by younger siblings and cousins.
 * 4) All descendants of Arthur I of Lovia are part of the line of succession, regardless of any activity, except for those that have requested that they be removed.
 * 5) The partner of the ruling monarch is the person who legally married the ruling monarch. They are a member of the royal family, but they do not enjoy privileges over the citizens of Lovia.
 * 6) The person first in line to the throne is known as the heir apparent, and becomes monarch after the previous monarch has abdicated or deceased.
 * 7) The heir apparent to the throne will sign the Constitution upon their coronation.
 * 8) The heir apparent assumes the throne after he has presented himself to Congress on invitation of a normal majority in Congress. After this, the heir is officially declared Monarch of Lovia.
 * 9) The ruling monarch has the right to demand financial support from the Department of Finance, in which case the Secretary of Finance can decide to grant the ruling monarch an amount of money, in agreement with Congress.
 * 10) The maximum amount of financial support that can be given is 4000 Lovian dollars per month.
 * 11) With the exception of the ruling monarch in function, no member of the royal family is granted extra-legal privileges. Each member of the royal family, with the exception of the ruling monarch in function, is a regular citizen as determined by the Constitution.
 * 12) The ruling monarch's functions in the government are solely ceremonial. If the ruling monarch wishes to become a member of Congress, then they must run for office in the same way a normal citizen would.

Article 8 – Elections and the formation of a federal government
 * 1) Federal Elections:
 * 2) Every year federal elections must be held for the election of the 100 seat Congress.
 * 3) The term of office of every Member of the Congress is exactly one year. Therefore every year the elections should be held at the same date.
 * 4) Election procedure during Federal Elections:
 * 5) During a period of three weeks, any Lovian citizen can, without restrictions, become a candidate in the Federal Elections. This period begins exactly one month and twenty-one days before Inauguration Day.
 * 6) During a period of three weeks, any Lovian citizen can cast his or her votes in favor of candidates in the Federal Elections.
 * 7) Every citizen may cast three favorable votes in the Federal Elections: a Major Vote, a Minor Vote and a Favor Vote. A Major Vote is worth three points, a Minor Vote two and a Favor Vote one.
 * 8) Citizens may choose not to cast their votes, or to only cast some of them.
 * 9) Citizens may not cast multiple votes for the same candidate. All cast votes must be given to different candidates.
 * 10) If more than 100 candidates are running, only the top 100 in number of votes will receive seats in Congress.
 * 11) The normal dates of elections, excluding the possibility of a dissolution of Congress, are set at December 10th to 31st for nominations, and from January 1st to 21st for voting. Inauguration Day is set at February 1st.
 * 12) All candidates will complete the elections with a percentage of the total votes, with the exception of those that have withdrawn.
 * 13) The percentage of votes cast to a certain candidate from the total votes cast is the amount of seats in Congress that the candidate will control.
 * 14) The congressperson may delegate their seats to all the parties that they wish, but still control the votes of each congressperson.
 * 15) New federal elections must be held when more than half of the Members of the Congress are inactive; either self-declared or if they have not edited for over a month (30 days).
 * 16) The Prime Minister and Federal Secretaries:
 * 17) The Prime Minister is the declared leader of a coalition of political parties that consist of more than 50% of the seats in Congress.
 * 18) If a coalition agreement is not reached by Inauguration Day, all non-vital executive government activities are shut down until an agreement is reached.
 * 19) The Prime Minister will chose which Members of the Congress will become Secretaries of a certain Department. Their proposal needs to be accepted by a normal majority in Congress.
 * 20) Congress should be able to question all executing members of government - of any level - about their activities. If the congress has lost their trust in the questioned person, a motion of distrust may be proposed in congress against him or her. When this motion is accepted by a normal majority, he or she has to resign from the government and a replacement has to be proposed by the Prime Minister and approved by Congress.
 * 21) When Congress has lost its trust in the incumbent government, it can vote a motion of no confidence. When this motion is accepted by a normal majority, both government and Congress are dissolved and new federal elections are to be held.
 * 22) If the Prime Minister or a Federal Secretary resigns, the government coalition must select a successor, which then has to be approved by Congress.
 * 23) State Elections:
 * 24) Every Lovian citizen has the right to become a candidate for Governor of a state wherein he or she has an official residence.
 * 25) It is not permitted to be a candidate during a state election in more than one state.
 * 26) The term of office of the elected Governor and Deputy Governor is exactly one year. Therefore every year the elections should be held at the same date.
 * 27) Election procedure during State Elections:
 * 28) During a period of two weeks, any Lovian citizen and resident of the state can become a candidate in the State Elections. This period begins exactly one month before the day of the inauguration of the Governor and Deputy Governor.
 * 29) During a period of two weeks, any Lovian citizen can cast his or her vote in favor of a candidate in the State Elections of the state of which he or she is an official resident.
 * 30) Every citizen may cast one vote per state election. Inhabitants of multiple states have the right to cast one vote for each state in which they have an official residence.
 * 31) Citizens may choose not to cast their vote.
 * 32) The normal dates of elections, excluding the possibility of a resignation of both Governor and Deputy Governor, are set at September 16th to 30th for nominations, and from October 1st to 14th for voting. Inauguration Day is set at November 1st.
 * 33) The candidate who received the highest number of votes and at least three will become Governor of the state in which he or she participated in the state elections.
 * 34) In the case of an ex aequo, a second voting round must be held within two weeks' time.
 * 35) The Governor is in charge of the competencies given to the state government.
 * 36) The candidate who received the second highest number of votes and at least three will become Deputy Governor of the state in which he or she participated in the state elections.
 * 37) The Deputy Governor is in temporary charge of the state competencies during the absence of the Governor.
 * 38) Upon the resignation of the Governor, or any other instance causing the Governor to quit, the Deputy Governor becomes Governor and will keep this office until the next elections.

(+yuri's fair trial act all in one)

tl;dr: government and opposition coalitions now introduced, pm is leader of the government coalition, king is no longer member by right, line of succession reform, 100 member congress and percentage of votes=percentage of seats.

Pro

 * —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 12:22, May 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * The Master&#39;s Voice 12:24, May 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * Marcus/Michael Villanova 12:35, May 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * HORTON11 12:40, May 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * though I can find myself in OWTB's remark. 12:53, May 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nathaniel Scribner 15:24, May 29, 2011 (UTC)

Contra

 * --O u WTBsjrief-mich 12:25, May 27, 2011 (UTC) (automatic seat)
 * What's with the automatic seat, if I may ask? The Master&#39;s Voice 12:34, May 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * The King's seat is abolished in this change. For a stable government this is necessary and a national king can't run for congress for reasons I can't explain in English. --O u WTBsjrief-mich 12:39, May 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * With the king's powers so reduced there is no reason that they can't run for Congress. Why not use a translator? It will probably get the meaning across. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 12:42, May 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't think it's neccesary, per se, to keep that seat... We can do without an unactive King who never does anything anymore. Besides that, it's awfully outdated. From now on the King will play a merely ceremonial role in this country. The Master&#39;s Voice 12:43, May 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * The reason simply explained: King should be above the nation, if the King runs for Congress, the nation is above the King, as the nation decides whether the King gets a seat or not. So, the King can't run for Congress, as he'll then lose his only function: to be for the nation, as in this case the nation is for the King. --O u WTBsjrief-mich 12:47, May 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * The King is no longer there for the nation. He left, and so did most of his buddies. Lovia has to move on and so has he... he may even be replaced in the near future, because a symbol of our nation should at the very least show himself, however that's a whole different discussion. There is no point in preserving the automatic seat for someone who obviously stopped caring... The Master&#39;s Voice 12:50, May 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * The King lost his seat, which is a great thing. I don't think he should run in elections though, that is not what Kings do. The King is a symbol of the nation, which stands above all political chatter. 12:52, May 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * He should be able to run in elections if he wants, though. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 12:53, May 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * Being King is as much a curse as it is a blessing: you can not say or do as much as others, you are ought to be neutral and fulfill your duty. I don't think Kings should seat in a parliament anyway. 12:55, May 27, 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm very sorry, but I can't support this change. I used to be anti-automatic seat, but Dimitri told me why it was necessary (control in Congress by a (call it pseudo-)neutral member is necessary to keep the state from dictature, compare this to the Eerste and Tweede Kamer principle in the Netherlands). So, I'll only support this under the condition that a new safety factor is introduced. Obviously, this is not the case right now, so I simply can't be in favour of this change. --O u WTBsjrief-mich 12:56, May 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * The King never managed to be fully neutral and was entangled in quite a few issues himself. The Master&#39;s Voice 12:58, May 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * That's why I said "pseudo-neutral". --O u WTBsjrief-mich 12:59, May 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * That's why I said "pseudo-neutral". --O u WTBsjrief-mich 12:59, May 27, 2011 (UTC)


 * Well, then what do you want added? —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 12:58, May 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * @UWTB: That is the price you pay for true democracy. People can choose as they want, no (semi-)neutral figure to 'guide' a little. 13:00, May 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * Atm, our community is too small for a system based on two chambers. What we need is a very closed law system which does not leave any space for interpretation (so, very difficult). Another thing is that all new laws should be checked by an impartial judge. If the last thing could be arranged I could be changing my vote. @Yuri: that's why true democracy sucks and constantly brings dictators and wars. --O u WTBsjrief-mich 13:01, May 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * Constitutional Court anyone?  13:02, May 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * @OOS- we do have a 1st and second chamber, but not in the Dutch sense. HORTON11  13:04, May 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * A bicameral system is not proven to be better or worse than a mono-cameral one. 13:06, May 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * I think we can decide for ourselves if a law is constitutional. The constitution really only protects rights and sets procedures and standards. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 13:13, May 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * I would follow OWTB entirely if this was like Belgium or the Netherlands, but Lovia remains an online community and the more (direct) democracy the better. If a Congress representing 80% of the active users makes a decision I believe that to be okay. 13:18, May 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * I would follow OWTB entirely if this was like Belgium or the Netherlands, but Lovia remains an online community and the more (direct) democracy the better. If a Congress representing 80% of the active users makes a decision I believe that to be okay. 13:18, May 27, 2011 (UTC)



Abstain


✅ Awesome, now we need to enforce. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 16:15, May 29, 2011 (UTC)

Did you also include Yuri's fair trial act to the constitution? Marcus/Michael Villanova 19:31, May 29, 2011 (UTC)

Yes. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 19:47, May 29, 2011 (UTC)

080. National Congressperson Order
This is to keep track of us, and our created congressmen and there votes, and who votes for them i'll ad the law to FedLaw, (Not sure which book though).

Pro

 * Marcus/Michael Villanova 19:31, May 29, 2011 (UTC)
 * HORTON11 19:38, May 29, 2011 (UTC)
 * --O u WTBsjrief-mich 19:48, May 29, 2011 (UTC) we don't need laws for this, if it's just a list, it's fine this way
 * Then what are we going to put in the Federal Law? —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 20:06, May 29, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nothing, just create the list. As a Waldener would have said: a solution to a non-existent problem is a problem itself or something like that :P Take a look at the Congressional Journal, didn't work. --O u WTBsjrief-mich 20:08, May 29, 2011 (UTC)
 * Alright then. xD —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 20:11, May 29, 2011 (UTC)
 * Can we abolish the congressional journal? Marcus/Michael Villanova 20:20, May 29, 2011 (UTC)
 * —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 20:11, May 29, 2011 (UTC)
 * (although I still consider "congressperson" to be a ridiculous word) The Master&#39;s Voice 21:15, May 29, 2011 (UTC)
 * We could make "congressor" of it :P --O u WTBsjrief-mich 21:19, May 29, 2011 (UTC)
 * (Just for the good order) 06:19, May 31, 2011 (UTC)

Abstain

 * We need to draft a law for this. I'll make one. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 19:47, May 29, 2011 (UTC)

✅ With a 55% majority. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 22:35, May 29, 2011 (UTC)

081. NCO add-on

 * 1) ﻿Every party (coalition or caucus) has the right to put foward a Party Leader.
 * 2) Party Leaders are elected by the members of a certain party.
 * 3) Party Leaders are to be the first, in tradition, to address congressional bills and address party leaders, but this is not mandatory.
 * 4) These members shall be addressed in the following:
 * 5) If their coalition has the majority of the seats they should be addressed with their Party or Coalition name first and there position in Congress (either Majority or Minority).
 * 6) The entire Congress shall then elect a Speaker of the Congress, or head of the congress, has the power to:
 * 7) Call congressional hearings on impeachment or other important Lovian activites.
 * 8) all a special congressional session to order.
 * 9) Ceremonially open and close congress at the beginning and ending of a congressional term.

Pro

 * Marcus/Michael Villanova 12:22, June 17, 2011 (UTC)
 * —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 18:23, June 17, 2011 (UTC)
 * --O u WTBsjrief-mich 08:55, June 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * 11:41, June 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * HORTON11 14:48, June 18, 2011 (UTC)

Abstain

 * - As part of the NCO Act? I'm not sure that makes sense. It doesn't really have anything to do with the NCO. Otherwise, good. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 12:38, June 17, 2011 (UTC)
 * It sorta does. It has to do with order in congress and there positions. So it does have to do with this. Marcus/Michael Villanova 12:41, June 17, 2011 (UTC)
 * Ok. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 18:23, June 17, 2011 (UTC)

Comments
✅ Marcus/Michael Villanova 15:13, June 18, 2011 (UTC)

000. Composition of Villanova II Government

 * Prime Minister - Marcus Villanova
 * Department of Culture, Heritage and Education - Oos Wes Ilava
 * Department of Energy and Environment - Justin Abrahams
 * Department of Finance - Percival E. Galahad (controlled by TimeMaster)
 * Department of Foreign Affairs - Yuri Medvedev
 * Department of Industry, Agriculture and Trade - Nathaniel Scribner
 * Department of Justice - John Amman (controlled by OWTB)
 * Department of Tourism and Leisure - Thomas Bale (controlled by Marcus)
 * Department of Transportation - Semyon Breyev
 * Department of Welfare - Jude Almore (controlled by Horton)

I did change William Krosby to Percival Galahad, as I'm running for Speaker of the Congress. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 18:05, July 14, 2011 (UTC)

Pro

 * TimeMaster: 13 Votes —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 18:05, July 14, 2011 (UTC) (LDP - LAP - MCP)
 * OWTB: 15 Votes --O u WTBsjrief-mich 19:10, July 14, 2011 (UTC) (CCPL - LMP - PNO - RMP - RTP)
 * Horton11 11 Votes — HORTON11  20:13, July 14, 2011 (UTC) (SDP, Labor, CDU)
 * Crystalbeastdeck09 14 Votes -- Marcus/Michael Villanova 20:57, July 14, 2011 (UTC) (CPL.nm, GP, NPO, WFP, PCP)
 * Regaliorum 19 Votes -  Regaliorum  08:35, July 15, 2011 (UTC) (CPL.nm)

Contra

 * I'm still against this composition. Me and six congressmen (UNS \ CNP). The Master&#39;s Voice 06:14, July 15, 2011 (UTC)

Abstain
✅ Thanks to every one with already only four people voting pro! But in any case there's a 50% majority! Marcus/Michael Villanova 21:02, July 14, 2011 (UTC)

001. Appointment of the Speaker of the Congress
I hereby propose myself, William Krosby, as the Speaker of the Congress for the 2011 Second Congress (50% majority required). —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 22:49, July 14, 2011 (UTC)

Pro

 * TimeMaster: 13 Votes —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 22:49, July 14, 2011 (UTC) (LDP - LAP - MCP)
 * Crystalbeastdeck09: 14 Votes -- Marcus/Michael Villanova 23:03, July 14, 2011 (UTC) (CPL.nm, GP, NPO, WFP, PCP)
 * Regaliorum 19 Votes -  Regaliorum  08:37, July 15, 2011 (UTC) (CPL.nm)
 * Nathaniel Scribner 11:19, July 15, 2011 (UTC) 7 Votes.

Contra

 * OWTB: 1 Vote --O u WTBsjrief-mich 08:35, July 15, 2011 (UTC) (RTP)
 * La Blaca & his six congressmen The Master&#39;s Voice 09:34, July 15, 2011 (UTC)

Abstain

 * OWTB: 14 Votes --O u WTBsjrief-mich 08:36, July 15, 2011 (UTC) (CCPL - LMP - PNO - RMP) - I do not believe we're in need of a Speaker of the Congress.
 * Then change the law. It is required. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 12:45, July 15, 2011 (UTC)
 * I know, but it's not something which concerns me, so I'll just remain neutral. --O u WTBsjrief-mich 16:32, July 15, 2011 (UTC)



✅ By a 53% majority. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 12:45, July 15, 2011 (UTC)

008. Recognition of Charleston
If this is passed, the hamlet of Charleston, will become official, and be incorporated as a hamlet under Noble City. Once it reaches 200 population it will become a village.

Pro

 * 13 Votes —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 20:06, August 14, 2011 (UTC) (LDP - LAP - MCP)
 * 14 Votes -- Marcus/Michael Villanova 00:02, August 15, 2011 (UTC) (CPL.nm, GP, NPO, WFP, PCP)
 * 11 votes - HORTON11  06:19, August 15, 2011 (UTC) (SDP, Labour, CDU)
 * 19 Votes. 07:26, August 15, 2011 (UTC)

Abstain


✅ by a 57% majority. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 11:48, August 15, 2011 (UTC)

Comments
Why under Noble City? It's way closer to Train Village... ---O u WTBsjrief-mich 21:10, August 25, 2011 (UTC)

Because Train Village is not a town, it's a village, and does not qualify to have hamlets under its name. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 01:47, August 26, 2011 (UTC)

And Clave Rock? Obviously, our executive branch of the government doesn't do anything. If you create useless laws, at least execute them. --O u WTBsjrief-mich 09:12, August 26, 2011 (UTC)

Train Village is a town, and anyways Noble City is too far away. Could Charleston not be made an independent hamlet? HORTON11 10:16, August 26, 2011 (UTC)

omg. . . Clave Rock is a hamlet, and Train Village is NOT a town (it's a village), Horton, as of the 2011 Census. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 13:45, August 26, 2011 (UTC)

009. Abortion Regulations Act

 * 1) Abortus Provocatus, defined as a willingly induced termination of pregnancy before fetal viability, is considered legal only when:
 * 2) Carried out by a qualified physician, registered in a hospital recognized by the Department of Welfare.
 * 3) Positive advice has been given by the executing physician and at least one other, non-involved physician.
 * 4) Executed no sooner than seven days after the first consultation.
 * 5) Executed within the first twelve weeks of the pregnancy
 * 6) Abortus Provocatus after the first twelve weeks of the pregnancy is considered legal only when:
 * 7) Carried out by a qualified physician, registered in a hospital recognized by the Department of Welfare.
 * 8) Positive advice has been given by the executing physician and at least two other, non-involved physicians.
 * 9) Executed no sooner than three days after the first consultation.
 * 10) The health of the mother is considered to be severely at risk when the pregnancy is not terminated.
 * 11) Before carrying out an abortion, the executing physician must always take the following measures:
 * 12) To notify the patient of all health risks involved with the abortion of pregnancy.
 * 13) To bring several other facilities for unwanted children to the patient's mind.
 * 14) To ensure themselves of the patient's full will to carry out the abortion.
 * 15) If an abortion is carried out illegally, the following consequences may follow:
 * 16) The executing physician will have their medical license revoked.
 * 17) The executing physician will be fined $10000 plus the cost of the operation.
 * 18) The mother will be fined $10000.

This will be in the Social Law Book.

Pro

 * 11 Votes. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 15:42, September 18, 2011 (UTC) (LDP & LAP)
 * 2 votes. (Porcines and Grant) --Semyon 19:43, September 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * 19 votes. 06:41, September 19, 2011 (UTC)
 * 2 votes (SDP) HORTON11  20:18, September 19, 2011 (UTC)

Contra

 * 1 Vote. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 15:42, September 18, 2011 (UTC) (MCP)
 * 3 votes. (CCPL and Breyev) --Semyon 19:43, September 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * 6 votes (La Blaca & UNS) --The Master&#39;s Voice 20:54, September 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * 15 votes --O u WTBsjrief-mich 19:37, September 19, 2011 (UTC)
 * 9 votes HORTON11  20:18, September 19, 2011 (UTC)
 * 7 votes Nathaniel Scribner 05:20, September 20, 2011 (UTC)

Abstain

 * 1 Vote. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 15:42, September 18, 2011 (UTC) (MCP)
 * 2 votes. (7) --Semyon 19:43, September 18, 2011 (UTC)

Marcus seems to be going inactive, even if he wasn't, he could not tilt it to a 50% majority. It seems we are still interested in passing an abortion regulation law, so we should discuss it further. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 01:45, September 21, 2011 (UTC)

Comments
This is actually not ultra-progressive, and seems like a good compromise to me. Congrats! --Semyon 19:43, September 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but only two votes? :( How about you switch the two and the five so there can be more pros? :D —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 01:21, September 19, 2011 (UTC)
 * Meh, well... it seems obvious that this bill will pass however I vote, and I want to maintain Breyev's and the CCPL's conservative credentials. :) --Semyon 16:25, September 19, 2011 (UTC)
 * Way to progressive to my taste, this new bill on abortions... As I've said before; unless there is a clear health-risk for the mother-to-be or the unborn child or in case of rape or incest, abortion should never be allowed regardless of which trimester the pregnancy is in. While the technical term may be "forcefully terminating a pregnancy", I prefer calling the beast by it's name: murder. The Master&#39;s Voice 16:51, September 19, 2011 (UTC)
 * This would not really be murder, as the child is still dependent on the mother. But I still believe that there should be a valid reason for terminating its life: "just because" is not enough. Instead of allowing this a mother who does not want the child can give it to an adoption agency. There are many couples unable to have kids who would love to be able to adopt. HORTON11  20:14, September 19, 2011 (UTC)

So you want no rules instead of light rules? Sometimes I don't understand this. Vote for this, and once you can get a majority of people who will vote for a more strict proposal, make it more strict... —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 22:43, September 19, 2011 (UTC)
 * Indeed, without this law abortion is allowed regardless of who performs it or what stage of the pregnancy the mother is on. 06:10, September 20, 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree this law is the second-best option, but I, personally, cannot fully support such a progressive law. What worries me more, however, is that women will abort their pregnancies anyway, law or no law. They always have and they always will. Last thing we want to happen is back-ally abortions that lead to women becoming sterile or dying of infections. The Master&#39;s Voice 08:17, September 20, 2011 (UTC)

That would be caused by a stricter, not weaker, abortion law. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 11:04, September 20, 2011 (UTC)

016. UNLOR (urgent!)
Here's a simple peace of legislation that must bring peace back to Lovia:

06:35, October 7, 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Congress declares that it wishes Lovia to come under the protection of a United Nations peacekeeping force, named the UN Lovian Order Restoration (UNLOR) Force.
 * 2) UNLOR is to be given a mandate in order to;
 * 3) Protect Lovian citizens from the ongoing minority and police violence.
 * 4) Stop the violence, plundering and terror that is caused by the rioters and police.
 * 5) UNLOR would be established and operated under all current UN legislation.
 * 6) UNLOR would be disband when Lovian Congress is back in control.
 * 7) When UNLOR gets disband, Congress is to install a Commission to investigate the riots and the ties it has with government officials.

Pro

 * 19 votes, 06:37, October 7, 2011 (UTC)
 * 13 votes, —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 13:46, October 7, 2011 (UTC)
 * 11 votes --O u WTBsjrief-mich 14:27, October 7, 2011 (UTC) (CCPL)
 * 10 votes- (SDP and Labor) HORTON11  14:37, October 7, 2011 (UTC)

Contra

 * (6 votes) - No foreign interverence, only as last resort. The Master&#39;s Voice 08:55, October 7, 2011 (UTC)
 * 3 votes --O u WTBsjrief-mich 14:27, October 7, 2011 (UTC) (LMP/RMP: minority issue, RTP: foreign intervention)
 * 1 Vote (LCP) HORTON11  14:33, October 7, 2011 (UTC)

Abstain
✅ by a 53% majority. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 15:06, October 7, 2011 (UTC)
 * 1 vote --O u WTBsjrief-mich 14:27, October 7, 2011 (UTC) (PNO: irrelevant to Oceana)

013. Modification to Settlement Act

 * Article 1 - Settlement Act
 * All Lovian settlements are classified into five denominational groups: hamlets, villages, neighborhoods, towns, and cities.
 * A hamlet is a very small settlement within a state.
 * A hamlet must:
 * Have a population below five hundred. If larger, the hamlet will become a village.
 * Consist mainly of non-industrial and non-commercial lots.
 * Not be affiliated with any town or city within Lovia.
 * If a hamlet becomes affiliated with a town or city, it will lose its hamlet status and become a neighborhood.
 * Exceptions can be made by a congressional vote.
 * A village is a mid-sized settlement within a state.
 * A village must:
 * Have a population of at least five hundred and no more than fifteen hundred inhabitants. If larger, the village becomes a town. If smaller, the village becomes a hamlet.
 * Not be affiliated with any town or city within Lovia.
 * If a village becomes affiliated with a town or city, it will lose its village status and become a neighborhood.
 * A town is a large settlement within a state.
 * A town must:
 * Have a population above fifteen hundred. If below, the town becomes a village.
 * Contain one to four neighborhoods of any type.
 * Congress can turn a town consisting of four neighborhoods into a city, granting it a fifth neighborhood, by Congressional majority.
 * A city is a very large settlement within a state.
 * A city must:
 * Have a population of at least three thousand.
 * Consist of a group of neighborhoods; at least five.
 * It is legally required that at least four of the five neighborhoods are fully finished and that it is possible for its inhabitants to lead a safe and regular life.
 * A neighborhood is a subdivision of a settlement.
 * A hamlet or village may become part of a town or city, however, the hamlet or village it will lose its hamlet or village status and become a neighborhood.
 * All Lovian neighborhoods are managed by the state of the town or city of which they are affiliated with.
 * All Lovian hamlets, villages, towns, and cities are managed by the state of which they are part of.
 * All Lovian hamlets, villages, neighborhoods, towns, and cities are part of the Kingdom of Lovia and fall under the authority of the authorities of Lovia. Only the Governor and the Congress have the right to commission the construction of neighborhoods and hamlets.
 * The Constitution rules that Congress may overrule the decisions of the Governor.

—TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 13:04, October 9, 2011 (UTC)

Pro

 * 13 votes, —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 13:04, October 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * 10 votes Marcus/Michael Villanova 13:41, October 9, 2011 (UTC) (WFP, SPP, PCP, GPL)

Contra

 * 3 votes Marcus/Michael Villanova 13:41, October 9, 2011 (UTC) (NPO)
 * 15 votes --O u WTBsjrief-mich 13:07, October 9, 2011 (UTC) (CCPL, LMP, PNO, RMP, RTP)
 * If East Hills is that important then just make it a neighborhood of Hurbanova. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 13:17, October 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * Can't, 'cause then Hurb will have to become a city and East Hills will loose its partial independence. It is not the only thing I dislike of this act. The entire village thing etc. --O u WTBsjrief-mich 13:19, October 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * I dislike the entire hamlets being connected to cities thing. I mean, really. Settlements are not part of other cities. They are part of regions, which are states. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 13:23, October 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, what difference would it make then to disconnect them? There is only a political level on the states and not on the towns. I personally see a hamlet as a group of houses located far away from a town, thus keeping some independence, while staying dependent on the town for more general stuff (shops/work/etc). A neighborhood, to me, is a hamlet which is grow to the town, thus loosing all bits of independence. --O u WTBsjrief-mich 13:36, October 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * 6 votes. I made an attempt to find a compromise between the two viewpoints, but apparently we don't do compromise in Lovia. --Nikolai Koshkov, a.k.a Semyon 15:19, October 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * It was a feeble attempt. Maybe I could restructure the law so that an affiliated hamlet is... a hamlet... and an unaffiliated hamlet is a village, but I don't really like that. Just make it a neighborhood. The main problem here, though, is that Charleston and Clave Rock are affiliated with Noble City, despite being 80 and 50 miles away, respectively. Kind of weird, since Train Village doesn't fit the criteria anymore (and it also fits the name... Train Village was a town before the first version of the law passed). —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 00:02, October 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * The old system was the best. No villages, hamlets affiliated. --O u WTBsjrief-mich 04:58, October 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * (6 votes) The Master&#39;s Voice 15:23, October 9, 2011 (UTC)

Abstain

 * 19 Votes; I don't see why this bill is needed. The entire discussion seems to be about personal preferences on organization rather than actual benefits/harms for society/users. 05:15, October 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * To fix the problem of Charleston and Clave Rock being affiliated with Noble City. I think that affiliation is fairly useless. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 10:59, October 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * That is not a need, it is just something you find problematic. And for what reason that is I honestly can't see. What is it that you (or anyone else) 'lose(s)' by keeping them attached to NC? 11:50, October 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * We discussed it earlier and concluded it was a bit weird. However, it does not actually matter. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 22:01, October 10, 2011 (UTC)

By a 23% minority. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 22:04, October 10, 2011 (UTC)

021. Repeal Federal Planning Bureau Act

 * Article 4 - Federal Planning Bureau Act
 * 1) The Federal Planning Bureau is an official authoritative section situated on the federal level of Lovian government.
 * 2) Its structure is as following:
 * 3) The bureau works as a council;
 * 4) The bureau consists of three members, namely:
 * 5) the Prime Minister;
 * 6) the Secretary of Industry, Agriculture and Trade; and
 * 7) the Chairperson of the Federal Planning Bureau, who is chosen every six months by Congress and must be a Member of the Congress. [After Federal and Mid Term elections]
 * 8) Its powers are limited to:
 * 9) The proposal of economical and financial laws;
 * 10) Proposals which have been accepted by a special majority can go to the Second Chamber directly, without interference of the Federal Planning Bureau;
 * 11) The provision of advice on proposed bills concerning economical and financial matters;
 * 12) Advise can be obtained when:
 * 13) One of the members finds it necessary;
 * 14) Congress asks for it.
 * 15) The suspension of proposals on economical and financial level in order to re-calculate the consequences for Lovia and its inhabitants.
 * 16) The maximum suspension period is two weeks' time;
 * 17) The suspension can be obtained when one member of the Bureau demands it.

This didn't do anything and we didn't even get the first one set up. It's also not very helpful to Lovia. Thereby, it should be repealed.

Pro

 * 13 Votes —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 20:24, October 13, 2011 (UTC)
 * 15 votes --O u WTBsjrief-mich 04:40, October 14, 2011 (UTC) (CCPL, LMP, PNO, RMP, RTP)
 * 19 votes, 06:01, October 14, 2011 (UTC)
 * 11 votes HORTON11  11:01, October 14, 2011 (UTC)
 * 6 votes -- The Master&#39;s Voice 11:41, October 14, 2011 (UTC)

Abstain


✅ By a 64% majority.

019. Social Security Act

 * 1) The Social Security System is a collection of mechanisms that serve to fight poverty and social injustice to the benefit of society as a whole.
 * 2) The Social Security System is made up of the following institutions:
 * 3) The Social Security Fund, which is responsible for all transfer payments that are made under the Social Security System.
 * 4) The Social Security Fund is funded by contributions that are withheld from the wages in accordance to Lovia's tax policy.
 * 5) If the Social Security Fund faces a shortage its budget will be straightened by a financial injection from the federal budget.
 * 6) The Department of Finance and the Department of Welfare operate the Social Security Fund jointly.
 * 7) The Department of Finance is responsible for the income side of the Social Security Fund.
 * 8) The Department of Welfare is responsible for the spending side of the Social Security Fund.
 * 9) Receiving payments from the Social Security Fund without being entitled to them is considered social fraud.
 * 10) When social fraud is determined, the Social Security Fund can withhold further payments.
 * 11) Payments received without being entitled to them can be retrieved by court order.
 * 12) Social fraud as deliberate deception can punished with a compensating fee by court order.
 * 13) When payments are received from the Social Security Fund without being entitled to them, this includes:
 * 14) Applying to the Social Security Fund with false information so that one can receive money without a need.
 * 15) Receiving and keeping payments from the Social Security Fund when one does not need the money, whether by accident or purpose.
 * 16) Using another person to receive payments from the Social Security Fund illegally.
 * 17) Using money from the Social Security Fund mostly or entirely for personal gain instead of personal necessity.
 * 18) Other reasons may be defined by a judge.
 * 19) The National Healthcare Service, which is responsible for providing free medically necessary assistance to everyone the Lovian state is responsible for.
 * 20) The National Healthcare Service operates under the Department of Welfare which is responsible for the working.
 * 21) The National Healthcare Service runs all government hospitals, recognizes medical personnel and refunds medicine.
 * 22) The National Healthcare Service may advise Congress over price regulation concerning the pharmaceutical sector.
 * 23) The Social Assistance Service, which is responsible for legally and morally assisting the beneficiaries of the Social Security Fund.
 * 24) The Social Assistance Service operates under the Department of Welfare which is responsible for the working.
 * 25) The Social Assistance Service is to appoint all medical and social personal that observe the beneficiaries.
 * 26) The Social Assistance Service can appoint social housing if it is provided through Congressional clause.
 * 27) The Agency for Labor Inspection, which is to ascertain the compliance of employers and employees to the determinations of the labor law.
 * 28) The Agency for Labor Inspection operates under the Department of Welfare which is responsible for the working.
 * 29) The Agency has the task to control whether employers and employees respect the social regulations imposed upon them.
 * 30) The Agency is obliged to take a case to court when it finds a violation; the agency can not declare a verdict on its own.
 * 31) The transfer payments the Social Security System is charged with are monthly payments related to sick leave, deficiencies, unemployment, pensions and special benefits.
 * 32) All wages payed to an employee default by disease for more than 30 successive days are payed for 60% by the Social Security Fund.
 * 33) When paying, the Social Security Fund can ask for a second opinion of a competent examiner appointed by the Social Assistance Service.
 * 34) When an employee receives the sick leave benefit for six consecutive months, he or she must switch to the deficiency benefit.
 * 35) All people who can not take part in activities on the labor market due to a physical or mental deficiency are entitled to a deficiency benefit of 1200$.
 * 36) The obstructing deficiency needs to be determined sufficient by a competent examiner appointed by the Social Assistance Service.
 * 37) People with a limited deficiency might be assigned to communal services if a competent examiner deems this to be desirable.
 * 38) All unemployed people that are capable of working are entitled to a minimum income of 1200$ provided by the Social Security Fund.
 * 39) A person receiving the unemployment benefit is obliged to undertake reasonable effort in trying to find a new job.
 * 40) A person receiving the unemployment benefit might be assigned to communal services by an appointed social worker.
 * 41) All pensioned people are legally entitled to a pension that is provided to them by the Social Security Fund.
 * 42) The legal minimum for a pension is 800$, regardless of how many years the receiver has been under an employment contract.
 * 43) A compensating differential of 10% is payed for every 10 years the receiver has been under an employment contract.
 * 44) The Social Assistance Service can foresee benefits for large families, single parents and people who lost their supporting partner.
 * 45) The amount of income and dependent people within the family is to be taken into consideration when determining the benefit.
 * 46) Such benefits are only to be granted to beneficiaries who's income is below the mandatory minimum income of 1200$.
 * 47) Any beneficiary can apply for such a benefit with a social worker appointed by the Social Assistance Service.

Social Security! It's on Marcus's list, and this is a great bill. Vote, please. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 11:16, October 14, 2011 (UTC)

Pro

 * 12 Votes, —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 11:16, October 14, 2011 (UTC)
 * 13 votes --O u WTBsjrief-mich 13:29, October 14, 2011 (UTC) (CCPL, LMP, RMP)
 * 11 votes HORTON11  13:46, October 14, 2011 (UTC)
 * 19 votes, with joy 16:58, October 14, 2011 (UTC)

Contra

 * --O u WTBsjrief-mich 13:30, October 14, 2011 (UTC) (PNO, RTP)

Abstain
I too felt it was incomplete, but it can be worked (an amendment). Also it didn't seem (to me) worth it to scrap such a fine piece of legislation. HORTON11 21:33, October 14, 2011 (UTC)
 * 1 Vote, I think it may be slightly incomplete. (LDP) —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 11:16, October 14, 2011 (UTC)

✅ By a 55% majority. —TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 20:29, October 14, 2011 (UTC)