Economic Rationalisation Bill of 2021 - Drumagh

Rationale

These adjustments modernize the law to balance competition and innovation while protecting access to housing, thereby strengthening the economy without loosing social cohesion.

Proposed Changes

	Law	Previous		Proposed
1	Competition & Monopolies	Proactively break up dominant firms		Active competition enforcement
2	Foreign Land Ownership	Ban all foreign ownership of land and property		Foreign ownership limited to commercial property only; residential banned

1

Competition & Monopolies

Previous law

Proactively break up dominant firms

Active competition enforcement

2

Foreign Land Ownership

Previous law

Ban all foreign ownership of land and property

Foreign ownership limited to commercial property only; residential banned

Proposer

Party

Radical Republican Union

A party funded by strongly anti-clerical republicans advocating for a centralised governance and economic interventionism. The Party advocates for a mixed welfare economy focused on national development through voluntarist policies. Their major cause is absolute and radical secularisation.

Core pillars

PS

Penelope Sinclair

Activist · Age 34

99,702 social followers

A political science prodigy who quietly shaped policy for years, Penelope Sinclair combines razor-sharp intellect with a willingness to exploit weaknesses in the opposition to push her vision forward.

🎓 Academic 🔬 Analytical 🎤 Fantastic Speaker 🏠 Reclusive 🗡️ Ruthless

Timeline

Draft

13 April 2021
Vote Open

18 April 2021
Vote Closed

17 June 2021
Did Not Become Law

17 June 2021

Vote tally

Live tally across each chamber. Weighted by seats held.

First Council of Ministers

Failed

42Yes 43No 15Not voted 100 seats

For: 42 / 100 seats (42.0%)

Against: 43 · Abstained: 0 · Not voted: 15

50.1% of those voting must vote in favour (actual = 49.4%)

Party	Seats	Vote	Reason
Centralist Unity	25	No	We vote NO. There's no "rationalisation" of the economy in allowing monopolies, which makes the national business leaders into corrupt, lazy and relaxed, to form. Nor is there in allowing for the desperately needed development of those leaders to be dragged down by the global elites that enforced an IMF intervention. Drumagh needs national capital and leaders able of using it to form and be dynamic, not another section of the global elite but that dresses our clothes and speaks our language.
For Radical Reforms!	0	Yes	This decision is good for preventing solo influence, corruption and national identity.
Radical Republican Union Proposer	42	Yes	No reason given
Revolutionary Maoist Communist Front	0	No	Under the guise of modernity and social cohesion, this liberal bill betrays the interests of the people of Drumagh. First, replacing the proactive breakup of monopolies with mere "active competition enforcement" protects capitalist cartels and urban elites instead of liberating workers from their grip. Second, allowing foreigners to own commercial real estate opens the door to the imperialist plundering of our national sovereignty. We fight for self-reliance and total expropriation, not for opening our lands to foreign capital.
Unified Marxist-Leninist Socialist Pact	1	No	We will not support this liberal bill that actively goes against the interests of the working class !
peopleswing	17	No	We support strong action against monopolies to protect consumers, workers, and smaller businesses. Drumagh shouldn't allow excessive corporate concentration to weaken competition.A blanket restriction on residential foreign ownership can be overly protectionist. We would prefer reasonable regulation and safeguards rather than broad bans.

The People’s Assembly

Failed

83Yes 87No 30Not voted 200 seats

For: 83 / 200 seats (41.5%)

Against: 87 · Abstained: 0 · Not voted: 30

50.1% of those voting must vote in favour (actual = 48.8%)

Party	Seats	Vote	Reason
Centralist Unity	50	No	We vote NO. There's no "rationalisation" of the economy in allowing monopolies, which makes the national business leaders into corrupt, lazy and relaxed, to form. Nor is there in allowing for the desperately needed development of those leaders to be dragged down by the global elites that enforced an IMF intervention. Drumagh needs national capital and leaders able of using it to form and be dynamic, not another section of the global elite but that dresses our clothes and speaks our language.
For Radical Reforms!	0	Yes	This decision is good for preventing solo influence, corruption and national identity.
Radical Republican Union Proposer	83	Yes	No reason given
Revolutionary Maoist Communist Front	0	No	Under the guise of modernity and social cohesion, this liberal bill betrays the interests of the people of Drumagh. First, replacing the proactive breakup of monopolies with mere "active competition enforcement" protects capitalist cartels and urban elites instead of liberating workers from their grip. Second, allowing foreigners to own commercial real estate opens the door to the imperialist plundering of our national sovereignty. We fight for self-reliance and total expropriation, not for opening our lands to foreign capital.
Unified Marxist-Leninist Socialist Pact	3	No	We will not support this liberal bill that actively goes against the interests of the working class !
peopleswing	34	No	We support strong action against monopolies to protect consumers, workers, and smaller businesses. Drumagh shouldn't allow excessive corporate concentration to weaken competition.A blanket restriction on residential foreign ownership can be overly protectionist. We would prefer reasonable regulation and safeguards rather than broad bans.

First Citizen

Passed

1Yes 0No 0Not voted 1 seat

For: 1 / 1 seats (100.0%)

Against: 0 · Abstained: 0 · Not voted: 0

Passes unless the office holder votes against (abstention counts as pass)

Party	Seats	Vote	Reason
Radical Republican Union Proposer	1	Yes	No reason given

Voting record

Every vote must state a public reason. Most recent first.

peopleswing

Voted May 4, 2021

No

“We support strong action against monopolies to protect consumers, workers, and smaller businesses. Drumagh shouldn't allow excessive corporate concentration to weaken competition.A blanket restriction on residential foreign ownership can be overly protectionist. We would prefer reasonable regulation and safeguards rather than broad bans.”

For Radical Reforms!

Voted May 3, 2021

Yes

“This decision is good for preventing solo influence, corruption and national identity.”

Unified Marxist-Leninist Socialist Pact

Voted May 2, 2021

No

“We will not support this liberal bill that actively goes against the interests of the working class !”

Centralist Unity

Voted April 22, 2021

No

“We vote NO. There's no "rationalisation" of the economy in allowing monopolies, which makes the national business leaders into corrupt, lazy and relaxed, to form. Nor is there in allowing for the desperately needed development of those leaders to be dragged down by the global elites that enforced an IMF intervention. Drumagh needs national capital and leaders able of using it to form and be dynamic, not another section of the global elite but that dresses our clothes and speaks our language.”

Revolutionary Maoist Communist Front

Voted April 20, 2021

No

“Under the guise of modernity and social cohesion, this liberal bill betrays the interests of the people of Drumagh. First, replacing the proactive breakup of monopolies with mere "active competition enforcement" protects capitalist cartels and urban elites instead of liberating workers from their grip. Second, allowing foreigners to own commercial real estate opens the door to the imperialist plundering of our national sovereignty. We fight for self-reliance and total expropriation, not for opening our lands to foreign capital.”