NATION

PASSWORD

[DEFEATED] Repeal "Condemn The Pacific"

A carefully preserved record of the most notable World Assembly debates.
User avatar
Cormactopia II
Diplomat
 
Posts: 901
Founded: Feb 14, 2016
Ex-Nation

[DEFEATED] Repeal "Condemn The Pacific"

Postby Cormactopia II » Sun May 01, 2016 11:42 pm

Repeal "Condemn The Pacific"
A resolution to repeal previously passed legislation.

Category: Repeal | Resolution: SC#177 | Proposed by: Cormactopia II



Description: WA Security Council Resolution #177: Condemn The Pacific shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: The Security Council:

Acknowledging that the Pacific Order, formerly known as the New Pacific Order (NPO), the regional government against which the charges of SC#177 were made, continues to govern The Pacific;

Recognizing, however, that under the leadership of Pierconium, the Pacific Order has issued a public apology for past wrongdoing against other regions, most recently including its involvement in the 2015 conflict in Lazarus;

Recalling that senior nations involved in the Lazarus conflict have been expelled from leadership positions in the Pacific Order, and in several cases expelled from the Pacific Order altogether, by Pierconium;

Noting that the Pacific Order has conducted its affairs with other regions in a responsible and respectful manner in the year since condemnation of The Pacific;

Citing the precedent set by SC#71: Repeal "Condemn Unknown," in which the resolution of condemnation against Unknown for much greater offenses than those committed by The Pacific was repealed, following a change in both leadership and behavior in Unknown similar to that which has occurred in The Pacific;

Respecting the ideological and political diversity that characterizes regional governments chosen by their regional populations throughout the world, and recognizing the sovereign right of these regional populations to self-determination in selecting their forms of government;

Observing that, contrary to the claims made by SC#177, the regional government of The Pacific has enjoyed the support of its regional population for more than a decade, and that many nations actively involved in The Pacific's regional affairs find the long-term stability provided by the Pacific Order conducive to national, international, and regional development, rather than finding it oppressive;

Asserting that the attempt made by SC#177 to impose foreign ideological and political proclivities on the regional population of The Pacific is imperialistic in nature, disrespecting the sovereign right of the nations of The Pacific to choose their regional form of government; and

Repudiating the imperialistic approach undertaken by SC#177, to spread interregional peace and goodwill through rigid conformity and uniformity rather than through mutual respect and tolerance, as inconsistent with the values and aims of this Security Council:

Hereby Repeals SC#177: Condemn The Pacific.

As one of the co-authors of SC#177, and having lived and learned a bit more in NationStates since its passage, I've come to the conclusion that SC#177 was inappropriate from the start. It's not in the job description of the Security Council to tell regional populations which form of government they should choose, and there is no denying that the Pacific Order has enjoyed the support of its regional population for more than a decade. Many residents of The Pacific enjoy participating in the Pacific Order. I do not believe SC#177 would have passed under ordinary circumstances, and I believe it only passed because it was fueled by anger over the conflict in Lazarus.

Given the Pacific Order's sweeping public apology for past wrongdoing in November 2015, I believe it's time to follow the precedent set by SC#71: Repeal "Condemn Unknown" and repeal this condemnation. That past wrongdoing was probably the only element of the condemnation with any merit, and given the precedent of repealing condemnations following changes in leadership and behavior, the past shouldn't be enough to keep this condemnation on the books.
Last edited by Cormactopia II on Fri May 06, 2016 9:08 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Cormac Skollvaldr
Pharaoh Emeritus of Osiris (3x)

Awards, Honors, and WA Authorships

"And to the contrary, the game is insufferably boring without Cormac's antics" - Sandaoguo (Glen-Rhodes), 22 September 2016

User avatar
Bhang Bhang Duc
Senator
 
Posts: 4721
Founded: Dec 17, 2003
Democratic Socialists

Postby Bhang Bhang Duc » Mon May 02, 2016 1:09 am

Nicely argued, you make a good and compelling case for repeal.
Former Delegate of The West Pacific. Guardian (under many Delegates) of The West Pacific. TWP's Former Minister for World Assembly Affairs and former Security Council Advisor.

The West Pacific's Official Welshman, Astronomer and Old Fart
Pierconium wrote:I see Funk as an opportunistic manipulator that utilises the means available to him to reach his goals. In other words, a nation after my own heart.

RiderSyl wrote:If an enchantress made it so one raid could bring about world peace, Unibot would ask raiders to just sign a petition instead.

Sedgistan wrote:The SC has just has a spate of really shitty ones recently from Northumbria, his Watermelon fanboy…..

User avatar
John Turner
Diplomat
 
Posts: 961
Founded: Aug 21, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby John Turner » Mon May 02, 2016 1:33 am

Jesus jumped up Christ Cormac! How can you regret being one of the co-authors of this, when you did 90% of the goddamned research? All this proves is that you will do anything necessary to justify your little sideshow you are attempting to perform in Osiris. I can't believe you had the balls to send me a campaign telegram for this.

Nothing has changed in the Pacific and you fucking well know it. Now given the fact you are willing to collaborate with them, just because you want their recognition just goes to prove how weasly you can really be. When I read this, all I could see was Trump standing up on stage delivering this as a speech.

Opposed!
Sir John H. Turner
Imperial Minister of Foreign Affairs, United Federation of Canada
Premier, The North American Union
World Assembly Resolution Author

Socialism is not Communism
John Turner wrote:Oh.... And it wasn't drafted on the forums. That makes it automatically illegal, doesn't it?

User avatar
Cormactopia II
Diplomat
 
Posts: 901
Founded: Feb 14, 2016
Ex-Nation

Postby Cormactopia II » Mon May 02, 2016 1:48 am

Bhang Bhang Duc wrote:Nicely argued, you make a good and compelling case for repeal.

Thank you!

John Turner wrote:<snip>

I'm sorry you don't want the resolution you authored repealed. I don't think anyone ever really does, but these things happen.

It was wrong for us to tell the regional community of The Pacific how to govern themselves, and the Pacific Order has apologized for its past wrongdoing toward other regions and has behaved much more respectfully toward other regions since this passed a year ago. You had to know a condemnation against a Feeder wasn't going to stay on the books forever, once that Feeder mended damaged relations. Isn't the best purpose of a regional condemnation to try to get regions to engage in more peaceful and respectful interaction? The Pacific Order has met that standard over the past year. It's time for repeal.
Last edited by Cormactopia II on Mon May 02, 2016 1:50 am, edited 2 times in total.
Cormac Skollvaldr
Pharaoh Emeritus of Osiris (3x)

Awards, Honors, and WA Authorships

"And to the contrary, the game is insufferably boring without Cormac's antics" - Sandaoguo (Glen-Rhodes), 22 September 2016

User avatar
Guy
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1833
Founded: Oct 05, 2011
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Guy » Mon May 02, 2016 4:00 am

The system of government comments in SC#177 are controversial, and for the sake of consensus, should have been edited out.

However, it is far too early to repeal the resolution. I think it is very far from the position where we can say that they have 'changed', or even showed true contrition. An offender telling the Court that they are sorry will very rarely be interpreted as them being contrite, rather merely regretting their current situation, and trying to make the most out of it. This is unless, of course, there is something to suggest that actual rehabilitaition has occurred.

Unlike the situation described in Unknown's condemnation, we're talking about The Pacific being institutionally involved in the invasion of Lazarus. We're talking about NPO's forum being modified to accommodate the NLO. We're talking about a substantial part the their Senate being involved, planning it as a conquest for The Pacific. Ivan's words are to be looked at with cautious optimism, but no more than that.
Commander of the Rejected Realms Army

[violet] wrote:Never underestimate the ability of admin to do nothing.

User avatar
Transilia
Lobbyist
 
Posts: 11
Founded: Mar 04, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Transilia » Mon May 02, 2016 4:17 am

Speaking entirely as a player and not in my positions ex officio, I have no problems with this proposal and have approved it via my main nation. Best of luck, Cormac.
Nordic Councilthe WA Region — join today!
WA Dominatrix of Transilia

User avatar
Consular
Minister
 
Posts: 3019
Founded: Apr 10, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Consular » Mon May 02, 2016 6:33 am

I don't particularly dislike the Pacific for what happened. They made a bold play.

But they also failed, and that has consequences.

While I dislike some of the resolution I think the Pacific probably still deserves to be condemned for what it did.

User avatar
Solorni
Minister
 
Posts: 3024
Founded: Sep 04, 2007
Ex-Nation

Postby Solorni » Mon May 02, 2016 7:55 am

Considering that the Lazarus government deposed at the time was brought in power by a coup and a purge of its citizens, I am not sure how one can consider condemning The Pacific while doing nothing about Lazarus. Particularly when members of Lazarus were more than willing to accept foreign aid to help them coup the region. So I'm not sure what makes that coup different from the one the Pacific has been condemned for. Particularly when the Pacific had taken steps to remove those who had engaged in that.
Lovely Queen of Balder
Proud Delegate of WALL

Lucky Number 13

User avatar
The Stalker
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1274
Founded: Jan 04, 2012
Father Knows Best State

Postby The Stalker » Mon May 02, 2016 8:02 am

Strongly opposed, I echo the sentiments of John Turner.

Really seems like the only reason your doing this is because of what your doing in Osiris.

And really this isn't about how they govern their own people it's the repeated imperialistic intervention on their fellow feeders/sinkers over the years. This is too soon at best.
The Mad King of Hell
I am the "who" when you call, "Who's there?"
Hell's Bells: Ask not for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for thee.
This isn't Wall Street, this is Hell. We have a little something called integrity.
And I heard as it were the noise of thunder, One of the four beasts saying come and see and I saw, and behold...

User avatar
Drasnia
Minister
 
Posts: 2601
Founded: Feb 02, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Drasnia » Mon May 02, 2016 8:12 am

I'm always in favor of a well-written repeal no matter who wrote it or what their outside motives may have been, as some people have alleged.

I too am of the opinion that the SC shouldn't have condemned the Pacific. It astounds me that some people believe that the only form of government that is both stable and liked by the regional populace is democracy. Monarchies and dictatorships work very well in NS, but that's a conversation for another day.

For.
See You Space Cowboy...

User avatar
Benevolent Thomas
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1483
Founded: Jun 10, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Benevolent Thomas » Mon May 02, 2016 8:19 am

If there was a campaign, it is going to reach quorum. If it reaches quorum it is going to pass. All of the GCRs excluding Lazarus and TRR are going to vote for it, because they are all "special" or something and several large UCRs will vote in favor of the repeal to spite Lazarus at the behest of their imperialist overlords. There is no point in fighting this. Your effort is better spent applauding Cormac for his bravery in taking on such a controversial topic and having the maturity to be able to evolve on it.

:clap:

I always knew you had it in ya, buddy :hug:
Ballotonia wrote:Personally, I think there's something seriously wrong with a game if it willfully allows the destruction of longtime player communities in favor of kids whose sole purpose is to enjoy ruining the game for others.

User avatar
ROM
Envoy
 
Posts: 311
Founded: Mar 23, 2012
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby ROM » Mon May 02, 2016 8:41 am

Too soon for the NPO to lose their Condemnation, I think. Against.
Author of SC Resolution #186 Commend Travelling Region

User avatar
Solorni
Minister
 
Posts: 3024
Founded: Sep 04, 2007
Ex-Nation

Postby Solorni » Mon May 02, 2016 9:33 am

Benevolent Thomas wrote:If there was a campaign, it is going to reach quorum. If it reaches quorum it is going to pass. All of the GCRs excluding Lazarus and TRR are going to vote for it, because they are all "special" or something and several large UCRs will vote in favor of the repeal to spite Lazarus at the behest of their imperialist overlords. There is no point in fighting this. Your effort is better spent applauding Cormac for his bravery in taking on such a controversial topic and having the maturity to be able to evolve on it.

:clap:

I always knew you had it in ya, buddy :hug:

This is pretty nonsensical.
Lovely Queen of Balder
Proud Delegate of WALL

Lucky Number 13

User avatar
Imperium Anglorum
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 12659
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Mon May 02, 2016 12:05 pm

I feel I should put it on the record for why I approved this proposal. I have no intention of voting for or against the proposal. Europe is neutral. However, I do feel that this question should be put to a vote, and therefore, approved it.

If people feel so strongly against this — stomp it into the ground. Most of the people posting in this thread have the ability to do so, or get someone else to do so anyway, so you can do it.
Last edited by Imperium Anglorum on Mon May 02, 2016 12:05 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Author: 1 SC and 56+ GA resolutions
Maintainer: GA Passed Resolutions
Developer: Communiqué and InfoEurope
GenSec (24 Dec 2021 –); posts not official unless so indicated
Delegate for Europe
Elsie Mortimer Wellesley
Ideological Bulwark 285, WALL delegate
Twice-commended toxic villainous globalist kittehs

User avatar
John Turner
Diplomat
 
Posts: 961
Founded: Aug 21, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby John Turner » Mon May 02, 2016 12:08 pm

Imperium Anglorum wrote:I feel I should put it on the record for why I approved this proposal. I have no intention of voting for or against the proposal. Europe is neutral. However, I do feel that this question should be put to a vote, and therefore, approved it.

If people feel so strongly against this — stomp it into the ground. Most of the people posting in this thread have the ability to do so, or get someone else to do so anyway, so you can do it.

Europe is neutral huh? Even when it comes to an ally?
Sir John H. Turner
Imperial Minister of Foreign Affairs, United Federation of Canada
Premier, The North American Union
World Assembly Resolution Author

Socialism is not Communism
John Turner wrote:Oh.... And it wasn't drafted on the forums. That makes it automatically illegal, doesn't it?

User avatar
Imperium Anglorum
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 12659
Founded: Aug 26, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Imperium Anglorum » Mon May 02, 2016 12:28 pm

John Turner wrote:
Imperium Anglorum wrote:I feel I should put it on the record for why I approved this proposal. I have no intention of voting for or against the proposal. Europe is neutral. However, I do feel that this question should be put to a vote, and therefore, approved it.

If people feel so strongly against this — stomp it into the ground. Most of the people posting in this thread have the ability to do so, or get someone else to do so anyway, so you can do it.

Europe is neutral huh? Even when it comes to an ally?

Embassies do not connote an alliance. They show that we are on speaking terms and that full relations between our associated regions have commenced. We believe that embassies are a commitment to friendship and peace, not to unconditional support. If you would like to tell me that this is really not this way, feel free to do so. I'll just tell you otherwise.
Last edited by Imperium Anglorum on Mon May 02, 2016 12:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Author: 1 SC and 56+ GA resolutions
Maintainer: GA Passed Resolutions
Developer: Communiqué and InfoEurope
GenSec (24 Dec 2021 –); posts not official unless so indicated
Delegate for Europe
Elsie Mortimer Wellesley
Ideological Bulwark 285, WALL delegate
Twice-commended toxic villainous globalist kittehs

User avatar
John Turner
Diplomat
 
Posts: 961
Founded: Aug 21, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby John Turner » Mon May 02, 2016 12:32 pm

Imperium Anglorum wrote:
John Turner wrote:Europe is neutral huh? Even when it comes to an ally?

Embassies do not connote an alliance. They show that we are on speaking terms and that full relations between our associated regions have commenced. We believe that embassies are a commitment to friendship and peace, not to unconditional support. If you would like to tell me that this is really not this way, feel free to do so. I'll just tell you otherwise.

Fair enough. I am not fully versed on the treaty obligations Europe is currently bound by, so I asked a question. Thank you for clarifying.
Sir John H. Turner
Imperial Minister of Foreign Affairs, United Federation of Canada
Premier, The North American Union
World Assembly Resolution Author

Socialism is not Communism
John Turner wrote:Oh.... And it wasn't drafted on the forums. That makes it automatically illegal, doesn't it?

User avatar
Elegarth
Envoy
 
Posts: 305
Founded: Feb 08, 2006
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Elegarth » Mon May 02, 2016 1:29 pm

Bhang Bhang Duc wrote:Nicely argued, you make a good and compelling case for repeal.

I agree and will support it
Elegarth, The Seeker of Power
Royal Duke of The West Pacific
Patio Emperor of The West Pacific
Former Dragon Delegate of The West Pacific

The Delegarth

User avatar
Ramaeus
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1024
Founded: Dec 18, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Ramaeus » Mon May 02, 2016 2:19 pm

I'm for this proposal.

In hindsight, the Condemnation was rushed.

Solorni wrote:This is pretty nonsensical.

Agreed, Rach. That was honestly pretty baffling of Thomas.
Just some weeb.

User avatar
We Are Not the NSA
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1542
Founded: Nov 25, 2013
Father Knows Best State

Postby We Are Not the NSA » Mon May 02, 2016 3:51 pm

Goddamnit Cormac! You managed to write a proposal that is completely devoid of spelling and grammar errors, as well as lacking in any clauses that are either easy to argue against or make jokes about. Way to take the fun out of the Security Council. :P

I'm torn on this, because on the one hand, I have never had any issues with the NPO, and I echo BBD's sentiment that this is extremely well written and well argued. On the other hand, I also partially agree with John Turner, there is probably some politicking going on behind the scenes here.

I tentatively support.
\▼/We Are Not the NSA | Nohbdy | Eumaeus\▼/

Raiding HistorySecurity CouncilDear NativesTWP Raid

Retired Raider | He, Him, His | Bisexual

User avatar
Consular
Minister
 
Posts: 3019
Founded: Apr 10, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Consular » Mon May 02, 2016 6:27 pm

So have we all decided it is not in fact a bad thing for a GCR to subvert and supplant the government of, and then outright invade, another GCR with the intention of turning it into little more than a permanent colony? That's in fact not a condemnable action?

User avatar
Drasnia
Minister
 
Posts: 2601
Founded: Feb 02, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Drasnia » Mon May 02, 2016 6:45 pm

Consular wrote:So have we all decided it is not in fact a bad thing for a GCR to subvert and supplant the government of, and then outright invade, another GCR with the intention of turning it into little more than a permanent colony? That's in fact not a condemnable action?

I believe the repeal acknowledges what the NPO did but uses evidence of Pierconium's attempt to rectify the past indiscretion as evidence that The Pacific has changed. Whether you believe that is a good reason to repeal the original resolution or not is up to you to decide.
See You Space Cowboy...

User avatar
Christian Democrats
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10093
Founded: Jul 29, 2009
New York Times Democracy

Postby Christian Democrats » Mon May 02, 2016 9:29 pm

I'm happy to say that I was the first person to vote on this proposal, and I voted AGAINST.

1. This proposal is factually inaccurate. The ruling party of the Pacific still calls itself the New Pacific Order. All one has to do to see this is view its main page.

2. The Emperor behind the attempted overthrow of Lazarus is still a high-ranking official (a praetor) in the party.

3. This repeal proposal's claim that Pacificans have a right "to choose their [own] regional form of government" is laughable. The same dictatorial structure has been in place for a decade. Only democracies offer people a genuinely free choice. Totalitarianism will succeed in a democracy if the people want it.

4. This condemnation ought to serve as an eternal warning. We're idiots if we think the NPO has amended its ways. The only evidence that I would find convincing is a complete overhaul and democratization of the government.
Last edited by Christian Democrats on Mon May 02, 2016 9:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Leo Tolstoy wrote:Wrong does not cease to be wrong because the majority share in it.
GA#160: Forced Marriages Ban Act (79%)
GA#175: Organ and Blood Donations Act (68%)^
SC#082: Repeal "Liberate Catholic" (80%)
GA#200: Foreign Marriage Recognition (54%)
GA#213: Privacy Protection Act (70%)
GA#231: Marital Rape Justice Act (81%)^
GA#233: Ban Profits on Workers' Deaths (80%)*
GA#249: Stopping Suicide Seeds (70%)^
GA#253: Repeal "Freedom in Medical Research" (76%)
GA#285: Assisted Suicide Act (70%)^
GA#310: Disabled Voters Act (81%)
GA#373: Repeal "Convention on Execution" (54%)
GA#468: Prohibit Private Prisons (57%)^

* denotes coauthorship
^ repealed resolution
#360: Electile Dysfunction
#452: Foetal Furore
#560: Bicameral Backlash
#570: Clerical Errors

User avatar
Cormactopia II
Diplomat
 
Posts: 901
Founded: Feb 14, 2016
Ex-Nation

Postby Cormactopia II » Mon May 02, 2016 9:51 pm

Christian Democrats wrote:1. This proposal is factually inaccurate. The ruling party of the Pacific still calls itself the New Pacific Order. All one has to do to see this is view its main page.

They have been referring to themselves as the Pacific Order in official statements. Regardless, this is incidental to the proposal.

Christian Democrats wrote:2. The Emperor behind the attempted overthrow of Lazarus is still a high-ranking official (a praetor) in the party.

The proposal does not contend that all nations involved in the Lazarus conflict were expelled from leadership positions. Those primarily responsible -- Feux, Milograd, A mean old man, and Stujenske -- were.

Christian Democrats wrote:3. This repeal proposal's claim that Pacificans have a right "to choose their [own] regional form of government" is laughable. The same dictatorial structure has been in place for a decade. Only democracies offer people a genuinely free choice. Totalitarianism will succeed in a democracy if the people want it.

4. This condemnation ought to serve as an eternal warning. We're idiots if we think the NPO has amended its ways. The only evidence that I would find convincing is a complete overhaul and democratization of the government.

This is an example of the ideological imperialism to which the proposal refers. Just because you, a foreigner, do not agree with The Pacific's governing institutions doesn't mean actual native residents of The Pacific feel as you do. There is no clamoring for the forum oligarchy you misleadingly refer to as "democracy." Residents of The Pacific seem to be happy with their government. Who are you, who is Chester, and who am I to tell them that forms of government that consistently make residents of several other Feeders and Sinkers very unhappy would be preferable?
Cormac Skollvaldr
Pharaoh Emeritus of Osiris (3x)

Awards, Honors, and WA Authorships

"And to the contrary, the game is insufferably boring without Cormac's antics" - Sandaoguo (Glen-Rhodes), 22 September 2016

User avatar
Christian Democrats
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10093
Founded: Jul 29, 2009
New York Times Democracy

Postby Christian Democrats » Mon May 02, 2016 10:02 pm

Cormactopia II wrote:
Christian Democrats wrote:3. This repeal proposal's claim that Pacificans have a right "to choose their [own] regional form of government" is laughable. The same dictatorial structure has been in place for a decade. Only democracies offer people a genuinely free choice. Totalitarianism will succeed in a democracy if the people want it.

4. This condemnation ought to serve as an eternal warning. We're idiots if we think the NPO has amended its ways. The only evidence that I would find convincing is a complete overhaul and democratization of the government.

This is an example of the ideological imperialism to which the proposal refers. Just because you, a foreigner, do not agree with The Pacific's governing institutions doesn't mean actual native residents of The Pacific feel as you do.

The idea that democracy is imperialistic to its subjects is totally absurd. You do realize that democracy gives people a choice as to their government? If the New Pacific Order is so great, it surely could win open elections.

Cormactopia II wrote:There is no clamoring for the forum oligarchy you misleadingly refer to as "democracy."

Cormac, we pretty much agree on this point. I've been an opponent of forum oligarchy for longer than you've played this game. It's one reason why Right to Life, the region I founded, elects its president/delegate on the main page. (Voting is open to all WA residents.)
Leo Tolstoy wrote:Wrong does not cease to be wrong because the majority share in it.
GA#160: Forced Marriages Ban Act (79%)
GA#175: Organ and Blood Donations Act (68%)^
SC#082: Repeal "Liberate Catholic" (80%)
GA#200: Foreign Marriage Recognition (54%)
GA#213: Privacy Protection Act (70%)
GA#231: Marital Rape Justice Act (81%)^
GA#233: Ban Profits on Workers' Deaths (80%)*
GA#249: Stopping Suicide Seeds (70%)^
GA#253: Repeal "Freedom in Medical Research" (76%)
GA#285: Assisted Suicide Act (70%)^
GA#310: Disabled Voters Act (81%)
GA#373: Repeal "Convention on Execution" (54%)
GA#468: Prohibit Private Prisons (57%)^

* denotes coauthorship
^ repealed resolution
#360: Electile Dysfunction
#452: Foetal Furore
#560: Bicameral Backlash
#570: Clerical Errors

Next

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to WA Archives

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Advertisement

Remove ads