Permitting automation without strong worker protections risks inequality; transition rights ensure economic gains benefit everyone.
| Law | Previous | Proposed | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Automation & the Workforce |
Market-led automation
|
Permit automation with strong retraining/transition rights
|
Live tally across each chamber. Weighted by seats held.
For: 290 / 348 seats (83.3%)
Against: 0 · Abstained: 0 · Not voted: 58
| Party | Seats | Vote | Reason |
|---|---|---|---|
| Marianne's Communist Front | 0 | Yes | Supporting workers and defending them against ruthless, market-driven automation is crucial. |
| National Conservative Rally | 0 | No | We dont support this bill |
| The Greens Of Marianne Proposer | 290 | Yes | No reason given |
| The Marianne Liberty Alliance | 0 | No | Stifling markets with rent seeking legislation only leads to a long-term decrease in wealth growth, hurting the poor much more than the wealthy. |
| The National Refoundation Front | 0 | No | The "Automation Transition Rights Act" is nothing but a disguised tax - a desperate attempt by the Left to stifle progress under the weight of paralyzing bureaucracy. History is clear: technological advancement is not a threat, it is the engine of national greatness. Trying to slow down automation with mandatory "transition rights" condemns our companies to stagnation and hands a decisive advantage to foreign rivals who aren't waiting for unions to give them the green light to innovate. We do not want a nation of workers hooked on government handouts, living in fear of the future. We want bold citizens and a shock-driven economy. Automation must be guided by the market, not by socialist dirigisme. Those who seek to protect the past against the future will end up losing both. By rejecting this act, we choose excellence and competitiveness. Progress belongs to the strong, not the cautious! |
For: 188 / 577 seats (32.6%)
Against: 325 · Abstained: 0 · Not voted: 64
| Party | Seats | Vote | Reason |
|---|---|---|---|
| Marianne's Communist Front | 0 | Yes | Supporting workers and defending them against ruthless, market-driven automation is crucial. |
| National Conservative Rally | 140 | No | We dont support this bill |
| The Greens Of Marianne Proposer | 188 | Yes | No reason given |
| The Marianne Liberty Alliance | 111 | No | Stifling markets with rent seeking legislation only leads to a long-term decrease in wealth growth, hurting the poor much more than the wealthy. |
| The National Refoundation Front | 74 | No | The "Automation Transition Rights Act" is nothing but a disguised tax - a desperate attempt by the Left to stifle progress under the weight of paralyzing bureaucracy. History is clear: technological advancement is not a threat, it is the engine of national greatness. Trying to slow down automation with mandatory "transition rights" condemns our companies to stagnation and hands a decisive advantage to foreign rivals who aren't waiting for unions to give them the green light to innovate. We do not want a nation of workers hooked on government handouts, living in fear of the future. We want bold citizens and a shock-driven economy. Automation must be guided by the market, not by socialist dirigisme. Those who seek to protect the past against the future will end up losing both. By rejecting this act, we choose excellence and competitiveness. Progress belongs to the strong, not the cautious! |
| Empty seats | 218 | Not voted |
For: 0 / 1 seats (0.0%)
Against: 1 · Abstained: 0 · Not voted: 0
| Party | Seats | Vote | Reason |
|---|---|---|---|
| The Marianne Liberty Alliance | 1 | No | No reason given |
Every vote must state a public reason. Most recent first.
“Supporting workers and defending them against ruthless, market-driven automation is crucial.”
“We dont support this bill”
“Stifling markets with rent seeking legislation only leads to a long-term decrease in wealth growth, hurting the poor much more than the wealthy.”
“The "Automation Transition Rights Act" is nothing but a disguised tax - a desperate attempt by the Left to stifle progress under the weight of paralyzing bureaucracy. History is clear: technological advancement is not a threat, it is the engine of national greatness. Trying to slow down automation with mandatory "transition rights" condemns our companies to stagnation and hands a decisive advantage to foreign rivals who aren't waiting for unions to give them the green light to innovate. We do not want a nation of workers hooked on government handouts, living in fear of the future. We want bold citizens and a shock-driven economy. Automation must be guided by the market, not by socialist dirigisme. Those who seek to protect the past against the future will end up losing both. By rejecting this act, we choose excellence and competitiveness. Progress belongs to the strong, not the cautious!”