Requirements for a Political Party Bill

[Colin]

Well I would first like to say that I support such a Bill and that it will codify the electoral system as it concerns the political parties and force such parties to become more structured and more active. In response to Porce I believe that political conventions can be great forums for candidates and that a strong political convention helps bring the political sphere alive. I remember several sukch conventions from my time here that were hard fought between several candidates and led to realignments within parties and within the political structure itself.

I also think that this would do away with one person parties and inactive parties while recognizing and rewarding those parites that have achieved a level of cohesion and activity.

As for Senator Porce's questions I would consider moderate sufficient for a political ideology qualification but I think it would hlep the SoFA and the voters to know a little more about each party. I don't think we should descriminate against parties that contain diverse viewpoints, though I would consider the JCP centre-leftist social democratic and social liberal in nature.

A feature that I believe would be nice, and that I have seen used in other political simulations and micronations, is a 50-word statement proposed by every party stating their intentions, beliefs, and their plan for government. Just a short statement to tell the voter's and prospective members of the party what they stand for.

[Colin]

I think a 50 word statement would be easier for people to create though I think a 200 word platform is doable as well.

[Colin]

Considering the Senate repealed the section of the Miscellany Act pertaining to a party platform I would like to vote Nay and hope that Brandon create include a platform definition in the bill itself.

[Colin]

Alright then:

Aye

[Colin]

Aye

[Colin]

Nay

[Colin]

Aye though there is now basically no use for this bill.

[Colin]

It has been pointed out to me that the bill may be unconstitutional being a breach of Article V, Section 1, Clause 8:
"Any political party of five or more members is considered to be an organized political party. The benefits of being an organized political party may be determined by the Senate by appropriate legislation."

This bill would appear to allow an organised political party have less than 5 members, so I'm inclined to agree that it may not be constitutional.

On this basis, I change my vote to Nay.

I must agree with Jas on this. While I support the bill in what it is trying to achieve I can, in no way, see how it is constitutional  as it would go against the above mentioned section.

I change my vote to Nay, as well.