Talk Elections

Hello to Atlasia from the Voice and the Independent, where the first Presidential debate will be held this cycle!  From the UDL we Have Conor, Marokai Blue and Ben, from the JCP we have Oakvale.  From the RPP we have Tmthforu94!  We will begin with opening statements from all candidates to be posted today by 4 PM PST.  Afterwards we will move on with questions throughout the weekend.  

Best wishes to each of you and here's to a fruitful debate!

I'm sure it will be a great debate. :)

My apologies for taking so long to get to my opening statement. I've been moving, ill, and having to deal with shoddy internet. It's a miracle I'm here at all. See, Atlasia? The things I do for you. :P

I'm running for President because the challenges that face this game are immense, and I've tackled problems in countless ways from a variety of offices. While Senator, I was active and ran the Senate efficiently and effectively, and passed numerous amounts of legislation, trying in a variety of ways to pass game reform measures and domestic policy proposals.

While Vice President, I took an active approach to the role, and proposed several pieces of legislation and debate in the Senate as an honorary Senator. While a Justice, I wrote detailed opinions and established much precedent. While AG, I have updated the wiki efficiently, revived an Intro thread that, prior to my efforts, went woefully underappreciated.

Purple State and I had an agenda when we won in June, and we followed through on those promises. We stepped down after that single term because the work we wanted to accomplish in that time was done. We've returned again with more ideas and more proposals to get this game moving on the much better framework that we built during our time together the first time.

I believe that I can prove to Atlasia that I am the most qualified person for the job and the most prepared. That's what these debates serve. To show differences of style and creativity. To contrast the proposals and the intelligence of the candidates.

Thank you.

First off, thanks to "The Voice" and "The Independent" for hosting this debate. I'd also like to thank my opponents, Attorney General Marokai Blue, GTO Ambassador Ben, Governor Oakvale, and Conor. Hopefully many great idea's will be shared in this debate. :)

Their are many great challenges facing this game, mainly activity, which is specifically poor in the Senate. I believe I have the experience and leadership abilities to lead Atlasia into a stronger,active future. As Governor of the Mideast, I successfully led the switch over to the regional government board (special thanks to Fritz for pulling through for all of us on that) and our Assembly has had one of it's most active sessions over there. I believe I have ran the Mideast region very thoroughly, maintaining a very active record and engaging in debate, as well as working myself quite a bit on legislation. I will carry those same qualities with me to the White House, if I am privileged to serve as your President.

I look forward to this debate, as well as the campaign, and hopefully by the end of this, Atlasians will have a solid opinion of every candidate and will know exactly what each of us would do as President. Thank you all. :)

I hope nobody objects that my opening statement is tardy, I'm a little under the weather and want to get the opening statement out of the way so I can tackle the questions when I'm feeling somewhat better. :P

First and foremost, I'd like to thank Archangel and The Voice and Independent for hosting this debate. We've got a great field of candidates, and I'm confident the discussion will be thought-provoking, open and broad. :)

I'd also like to thank Attorney General Marokai, Governor Tmth, Ambassador Ben and, er, Comrade Rocky for attending this debate.

Most of the attention paid to my campaign thus far has focused on the personality conflicts, the drama, the myriad controversies. I think everyone involved, on all sides, would agree that the conflict, while doubtless entertaining for some, has obfuscated the real issues that this election is about.

It's widely agreed that Atlasia is "broken" - Badger's sterling work as Game Moderator is ignored, the Senate is all too often inactive, and the rare new member that isn't scared off by the wild cries of "sock", or, dare I say it, "Hamilton!"  often ends up languishing in the regional assemblies, with an entrenched incumbency in the Senate providing an insurmountable obstacle for those without a strong base of friends and allies to propel them to national office.

I think all my opponents will agree with the somewhat obvious conclusion that Atlasia's institutions need fundamental change - where we will have the most enlightening and interesting debate is where we disagree on what kind of change is needed. Who knows, maybe we'll even have a few candidates change their mind after a particularly persuasive argument... although I wouldn't bet on it. :P

As President, I'll continue with the same kind of reform-minded agenda I've implemented as Governor. Obviously, the dreaded Real Life (tm) has prevented me from posting my formal platform, but I look forward to going into detail on my plans (they do exist! ;)) in this debate.

With all that said, I'll shut up until the questions begin.

Due to the remaining candidates not reaching the Opening statements deadline, we will move onto questioning.

We shall begin in the field of economics, where as you all know, Atlasia is having some hard times.  With the recent stock market crash and "Great Recession" along with perceived inactivity of the federal government, what is your plan for getting Atlasia back on it's feet?

You have 20 minutes to answer this question.

I'll not be giving a long opening statement.  I'll begin by thanking everyone for taking part in the Debate - this can show people who the candidates are.

Now, on to why I am running for President.  Atlasia has hit a lull.  I believe that something needs to be done to resurrect things.  I feel this can be done, first of all, by making foreign policy matter again.  To that end, should I be elected, I'll be making foreign policy a priority: I will create three deputy SoEA, each with the title of "Ambassador to _" - the UN, NATO, and the EU.  They will be required to submit bi-weekly reports to the new "GM for Foreign Affairs", who will create stories.  I will maintain the position of the GM, but shift some responsibilities to this new GM.

In addition, by increasing opportunities for activity - something my foreign policy ideas will - I see a way to bring Atlasia back.  If people are active, they will make the game more entertaining.

So, here I am.  Now let's go!

---

My internet crashed, so sorry :(

Now, to the question.  The way I see us being able to get the economy going is through targeted spending.  The spending should be focused entirely on job creation - that means spending on infrastructure and public works, as well as putting money in the hands of the less fortunate, who spend money, as opposed to the rich, who tend to save money.

First of all, an economic response is half-policy, half-response time. The government needs to respond swiftly to be as effective as possible. That's why one of my proposals is allowing the President and/or Vice President to have their own legislative que slot on the Senate floor, to make proposals as swiftly as possible. It would give the executive any other legislative powers, of course, but it would allow quick facilitation of executive proposals.

The right course of action of course is the Senate's proposed stimulus bill. That sort of thing is precisely what we need. More important than anything is getting money directly into the hands of those people who spend it. Food stamps (http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3239) and unemployment compensation are two of the most effective stimulus measures that can be taken, and those are two things that should be as largely boosted as is feasible.

But one of my biggest proposals when if elected will be to implement a large set of new credit card regulations. Of course, thanks to my time as Senator, we passed a cap on credit card interest rates (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Fair_Interest_Rates_Act) that I will protect at all costs, but we can go further. I will propose policies similar to the "Credit CARD Act of 2009" passed in the real world, with a specific emphasis on the following provisions:

• Requires card companies give cardholders 45 days notice of any interest rate increases.
• Gives cardholders the right to cancel their card and pay off their existing balance at the existing interest rate and repayment schedule if an interest rate increase is imposed; gives cardholders three billing cycles after the rate increase to decline these new terms.
• Gives cardholders time to pay their bills by requiring card companies to mail billing statements 21 calendar days before the due date (14 days was the previous minimum).
• Requires that payments made before 5 p.m. EST on the due date are considered timely.
• Requires the due date to fall on the same day each month. If the fixed due date normally falls on a Saturday, Sunday or legal banking holiday, then the due date shall be pushed to the next business day after the date. This measure prohibits due dates to fall on a weekend or holiday.
• Directs card companies to provide on every statement, a phone and internet address that a cardholder can access for payoff balances.
• Prohibits card companies from charging late fees when a cardholder presents proof of mailing payment not less than 7 days before the due date.
• Requires card companies to offer consumers the option of having a fixed credit limit that cannot be exceeded.
• Prevents card companies from charging over-the-limit fees on a cardholder with a fixed credit limit.
• A credit card cannot be issued to someone under age 21, unless they have a co-signer (who is 21 or over), or can provide proof of a means to repay.
• Prohibits retailers from setting expiration dates less than 5 years after the card is purchased.
• Prohibits retailers from charging dormancy, inactivity, and service fees unless the card has not been used for at least 12 months. If fees are charged after this period, the details of such fees must be clearly established on the card, but retailers cannot assess more than one fee per month under any circumstances.

And a variety of other provisions. Protecting credit card holders is a key element in stabilizing the economy for years to come.

First and foremost, we must acknowledge that at any given second, this nation could plunge into a recession if China stops financing our national debt. As I've stated before, my first goal as President, if it isn't addressed before then, is to work with the SoEA and the Chinese government to find an acceptable solution here. We must convince them that this wouldn't benefit either side. If need be, I myself would travel to China to meet with their government. I plan to make this a key issue of my administration, as well as personally being involved in debates in the Senate and encouraging the Senators to act on GM reports.

One idea I have floated on is potentially creating 2 GM's. I know that being a GM can be a daunting task, and we're lucky to have someone as committed as Badger doing it. However, I know it can sometimes be overwhelming for him. My thoughts would be having one committed to national news as well as foreign affairs, while the other being more committed to regional affairs. This is just an idea, and I hope it can be intelligently discussed both in this debate and outside of it. By no means am I endorsing this...yet. ;)

To quickly add, before time expires, I agree with Ben that more spending should be focused on job creation. There are several areas spending will have to be cut in order to do this. With our weak economy, I believe we shouldn't be constantly adding onto our national debt, however, we shouldn't be putting a larger tax burden on the American people at the same time.

I'm sorry, this all I can fit into 20 minutes, as I myself didn't have an answer already planned out. ;) More economic views will be discussed in my campaign thread when my platform is released.

Thank you.

Nor did I. ;)

No.  You just gave a lengthy bullet pointed and annotated speech about credit card legislation that does very little to actually impact an economy in freefall.

The time limit is up, and I will move onto the next question.

With the fact that the federal stimulus has been enacted, what is your opinion of the current federal deficit and what is your plan of action regarding this?

You have 30 minutes to respond.

I'll keep my answer quick, since I'm pretty sure my time's already expired.

First things first, I'd like to back Ben's idea of 2 GMs, one for domestic and one for foreign affairs. I've had a similar idea for a while, which evolved from my - admittedly unworkable - original idea of regional GMs. The less said about that the better. :P

The main problem with the economic crisis isn't merely spending, or taxation, or the price of tea in China. The problem is that, by and large, it's being ignored.

I can't and won't tar all the government with the same brush - Senator North Carolina Yankee has been doggedly alerting people to Badger's warnings for months, myself included, and President Fritz has been paying attention - but most in the Senate and the executive branch have an attitude of "Crisis? What Crisis?"

It's a GM issue - we need to get the GM posting in the Senate, we need regular contact between the administration and Secretaries and the GM, we need the game running according to some kind of actual plot. One of the biggest flaws in Atlasia is that laws go into a legislative black hole and are never heard from again - this is especially prevalent on a regional level.

As President, I'd also give the GM a small team of 1-2 assistants, focusing on regional issues, something that my fellow Governors would agree has been ignored for too long. ;)

On an "in character" level, I subscribe to, I'm afraid to say, the conventional wisdom. Cut spending, cut taxes, and the economy will bounce back. Long term gargantuan deficits are not acceptable.

So, in short, and apologies for running over time - this crisis is largely due to people ignoring the GM until it was too late. Also, twenty minutes is too short a time. :P

Thank you.

EDIT: Bleh!

I explained efforts on shortening response time, supported the use of further stimulus, and more specifically, food stamp and unemployment compensation legislation, in addition to proposing credit card regulations which have a major impact on individual Atlasians and can stabilize and protect the economy for the future. It is critical not to undersell any impact these policies can have. Credit cards, for better or worse, are a major part of most modern economies, and they go woefully underregulated.

(Also, the question was about economic policy more broadly. Not about being in "freefall.") There's no need to bicker.

I'm at heart something of a Keynesian, although not one of those who believes that the deficit is little more than a political football.

My basic position is that deficit spending may be needed to power the economy out of a crisis like the one we're facing, but that we should strive to eliminate long-term deficits as quickly as reasonably possible when we're in a more favourable economic climate.

In short, I back the stimulus passed by the Senate. It's a necessary evil. But as President I'll clamp down on wasteful spending - and even from the level-headed Senators of Atlasia, there's a lot of it - and I'm not afraid to say I'd even raise taxes to bring the deficit down to acceptable levels. I'm of the fairly uncontroversial belief that people tend to know what to do with their money better than the government nine times out of ten, but that one time out of ten applies here - the deficit needs to be reduced, and it's not going to be pain-free. But we can't go on spending like drunken sailors around the clock.

When we're living off borrowed Chinese money, we're living off borrowed time. It's not sustainable, it's not acceptable, and it's not going to last under an Oakvale Presidency.

That about wraps that one up. :)

EDIT: I'll go into more detail on this question in my campaign thread in the coming days, I'm just getting paranoid about the time limits. :P

The deficit is of course a problem, but long term, rather simple to actually deal with. As Oakvale said, I myself am something of a Keynesian, and sometimes a deficit is something we must deal with for a short time when there are matters of much greater import. Having no deficit doesn't do us any good when our economy is in shambles, afterall.

While Senator, I proposed the "Fiscal Responsibility Act (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Fiscal_Responsibility_Act)", something I'm very proud of, which goes a long way to reducing the deficit on it's own. While I believe we need to spend money in the short term to gain in the long term, that Act itself will allow us the occasional fall-back when the going gets tough, as some peace of mind in knowing the deficit is on the retreat:

Our national deficit is obviously too large. To prevent our debt from getting much larger, I would veto a bill drastically raising the debt ceiling. Small cuts should be made across the board until we can get this under control, specifically in military spending, I believe. More of a focus should be on job creation. I realize that cutting into our national debt will take time, especially now, during an economic crisis. Because in these trying times, some extra spending will be needed, the Stimulus Bill, for example, to help revitalize our economy.

I cannot stress how vital it is for our federal government to act quickly in times of crisis, such as the current issue with China. As Oakvale stated, we're living on borrowed time. If such crisis ever occurred under my administration, I can assure you that a fast and appropriate response would be made to prevent our nation's economy from getting any worse.

*Pulls a George HW Bush and checks his watch*

Whew, looks like I'm good on time. :)

I'm sure this violates the rules, but I should just butt in to add that I disagree with Tmth that vetoing a bill to raise the debt ceiling is the right course of action. I'm all for tough love, but that wouldn't help anyone, IMO, and would just cause an unneeded financial crisis.

The solution is cut spending in a gradual, sustainable way, over a period of several years, as opposed to the traumatic (and dramatic) moves favoured by those who are even bigger "deficit hawks" than I. :P

The rest of the Governor's answer I broadly agree with.

*is hushed by moderator*

I concur with Oakvale regarding the debt ceiling. Refusing to raise it (should a thing such as that come up) would cause all hell to break loose.

As the time limit is up, we will move on to the next question.

From the SoIA's report to the Senate, unemployment rates across the country have reached record highs.  What will your administrations do to help remedy this situation?  You have 20 minutes to answer this question.

I would also like to state that in response to Oakvale, I will allow responding to each other within the debate, providing that things remain civil and controlled.

With hope, the stimulus package will have some impact, but we shouldn't be content with that alone.

A major part of what needs to be done is encouraging the regions to act and make their own efforts to reduce unemployment. The federal government can make a significant effort on their own, but we alone cannot do the job. Several parts must act together for maximum impact.

When I was Vice President, Purple State and I proposed (and I penned) the "Social & Economic Development Zone Improvement Act (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Social_%26_Economic_Development_Zone_Improvement_Act)" which improved on the idea first proposed by Afleitch. The Act has numerous bonuses to specific regions declared a Social & Economic Development Zone.


As President I would very strongly encourage regions to declare areas within their regions a SED Zone and give them increased attention. There are many areas of Atlasia that have been ignored with the passage of time, and with the GM's help we can estimate the number and placement of SEDZ to "fuel" employment (stealing a phrase from my June campaign!) and then the federal government and do our part by pledging the money necessary for the infrastructural development of those said Zones.

The SEDZI Act was a landmark piece of legislation. It's time to use it!

Unfortunately, I have to get going shortly - I'll answer any questions I miss in the meantime in my campaign thread. :)

To quicky address the unemployment question, I'd first of all agree with the Attorney General that, hopefully, the major stimulus passed will have some impact.

In keeping with his second point, which I agree with, on regions combatting unemployment on a more local level, I've made a couple of efforts to address the situation in my own region - the most notable being a regional hiring incentives initiative when President Purple State vetoed - IIRC - a national bill with similar aims.

The most fundamental truth of economic theory is that people - and businesses - respond to incentives. We need to give businesses an incentive to start hiring again. The obvious thing to do is to implement large tax credits for a businesses hiring an unemployed worker, but there are other things we can do. If it will create jobs, lowering the minimum wage slightly will actually help rather than hurt people - the minimum wage will still be higher than welfare after all. This might not be the obvious thing for a "left" candidate to do, but if it creates jobs I don't much care if it's Milton Friedman or Karl Marx. ;)

Another major way to fight unemployment is education, education, education. Also, education.

Seriously, though - the unemployment rate for college-educated workers is much, much lower than those with a high school diploma. There's a reason for that - if Atlasia is to have near-full employment, we need, to borrow the cliché of Ireland's current government, a "smart economy".

To this end, my administration will invest heavily in education (especially adult education), a field, incidentally, which Tmth and I have co-operated on in the past. :)

Thank you.

What's been presented in the past obviously hasn't worked too well, as our unemployment numbers are still extremely high, and currently going up, not down. I also am hopeful that the recently passed stimulus package will provide a boost to the economy, and I'm sure that in the Mideast, we will be able to use this money given to us effectively. An issue I feel is important is entitlement reform. We've continued to kick that can down on a long road, and now, that road has ended. As President, I will do my best to not create any more taxes.

Something else, which was highly touted by former Senator Barnes that I resoundingly approve of, is green energy. In the past, reform has been made on encouraging green jobs in the Mideast and Senate, and I hope to continue that work. On top of that, for creating jobs, I believe it is important that we provide incentives to businesses who hire new employee's, which I remember being partly covered back under the Purple State administration.

Agreeing with Oakvale (again), I believe investing in education is investing in our future, a stronger future for our nation, and specifically, our economy. I'm a big supporter of educational funding, ask anyone who knows my work in the Mideast. ;) I hope to continue that commitment to our youth as the next President. All of these issues will be better outlined when my platform is released.

(Stupid Rosie, forced me to write a rushed post :P)

I would simply like to agree with Tmth's statement regarding taxes. I too agree that we certainly need no more taxes at this point.

Due to the fact that I must get going early, I will put up a series up questions:

What is your current opinion of the financial regulations the Federal Government currently has for corporations?  Is it fine as it is or should it be changed?  How and Why?

Which Federal programs are the most important to keep financially stable at this time?  Which ones, if any, should be cut?

Is the current healthcare system adequate for Atlasia?  Would you institute any majour changes to this system or not?  Why?

Currently, overseas trade policies are not in the spotlight, however, Atlasia is known on the world stage as a trade hub.  Do you believe that trade with other countries, especially with China and Russia, should be increased or decreased and why?

The military of Atlasia is a standing military, and fairly advanced.  However, with the lack of foreign conflicts or many foreign interests, what should be done with the military, especially financially?

Is the current tax policy adequate in Atlasia, and what is your position on taxation of businesses and individuals of different income brackets?  Would you also consider religious institutions viable for taxation?

Energy is a pressing matter in Atlasia today, specifically alternative and green energy sources.  How much do you believe the federal government should be involved in the growth of alternative energy and do you believe that it could be a lifesaver for the economy?

Do any of you believe that any of the pressing issues in terms of the economy and government spending can be solved within your term?

Please answer these questions by 9 AM PST tomorrow.  Debate will continue at 9 AM PST tomorrow.  Please feel free to use the time until then for free candidate discussion - specifically on the issue of the economy.

I'm disappointed no one mentioned my green energy bill which included tax incentives for businesses dedicating themselves to reducing their carbon footprint. Shameful, guys. Who am I gonna vote for now?

While I didn't specifically mention your bill, I was the only candidate who mentioned green energy and tax incentives (though for job creation, not reducing carbon footprint). ;)

True. But that bill was specifically for saving mother earth, yo. My other bills were aimed at job creation like the highway creation and such. You know the scoop. ;)

Errrything I do, I do it big.

I would try to make more efforts to reduce tax loopholes, if anything, but I'm reasonably content with the overall picture of business regulation in this country. I'm always startled by statistics I see that show how little income taxes corporations actually pay. I'd ask the GM to evaluate tax loopholes in regard to corporations, at the very least, and take action from there. It's very important to involve the GM as much as possible.


The food stamp program is essential in these times, and must be supported and expanded as efficiently as possible. As Senator, I also wrote legislation that created (something that seems to be a common theme!) the Home Energy Assistance Administration, (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Home_Energy_Assistance_Administration_Act) which is a public program designed to help subsidize poor Atlasian's home energy bills. During these winters, some parts of the country suffering severely, it is essential that we don't allow the HEAA to go under and we support it to the fullest.

This is also entirely unrelated to economic concerns, but I would also ask the GM for an evaluation of the Postal Service. A public postal service, in some capacity or another, is something I believe that is essential, especially for those in remote or rough parts of the country. We should most definitely support it.


Major changes? I seriously doubt it. Our healthcare system is superb. A robust public healthcare system with the option of going private, should the person decide to do so, that provides all or most necessary care at little to no cost to the individual. It is also roughly deficit neutral. Our healthcare system should be the desired balance for all nations.


While I don't believe trade with China has been an entirely positive experience to say the least, ceasing trade with either Russia or China at this point would be wholly unreasonable. The bigger problem right now is the manipulation of the Chinese currency being perpetuated by their government, not necessarily trade.


We've cut the military time and time again over the years, so I think a review of military spending is in order, if nothing else but to establish how much at this point we're actually spending. Once the GM has established that, we could make decisions from there. I'm always more than open to making defense cuts when made intelligently.


As the author of the current income tax brackets (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Fiscal_Responsibility_Act), I'm very proud of our current system of taxation. People are individually taxed fairly, large chain stores are taxes more than others, the sales tax for business being done across state and regional lines has been made fair, etc. I would retain the current tax rates across the board.

As for religious institutions being taxed, I've never personally understood the religious exemption. I would be open to keeping the exemption on smaller religious institutions, but beyond a certain point, it ceases to be a sincere and honorable place of worship and turns into what could only be described as a business. Mega-churches, for example, are obscene and arguably a perversion of religion in the first place, and should most certainly be taxed, in my opinion.

We should, at the very least, also be more vigilant in making sure churches truly are being fair, and not trying to influence the political habits of it's churchgoers.


I do believe it could be a major source for economic growth. Good examples of legislation on this front would be the Green Power Act (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Green_Power_Act), the Green Homes Act (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Green_Homes_Act), and the Atlasia Clean Energy Act. (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Atlasia_Clean_Energy_Act_of_2010) We need to very strongly encourage the private sector to grow green jobs and expand the amount of alternative sources of energy that we use, and we need to encourage individuals to actually use them. It most definitely is the future.

At some point, however, incentives may not be enough and we may have to force the hand of the private sector with mandates and subsidies, as has been done to some extent already, to jump-start the process. It is a very long process, but it will definitely save us economically and just generally so.


I would be extraordinarily surprised if we could at least get a handle on the economy within a first term. With swift implementation of our policies, and of course, smart and efficient policies, I believe we could, at the very least stabilize the economy within the first half of a term.

But of course, that all depends on the Senate's ability to function as it should. Something that's been called into question lately and something my running mate, Purple State, will make sure continues to move along.

 Strong financial regulations are necessary to ensure that a) derivatives are properly rated b) financial companies can't trade with banks. However, sometimes these can be too strong, and we must be careful in making sure than the government doesn’t have too much control over corporations. One thing I would certainly support is trying to reduce the tax loopholes, a current problem in our government.


Our entire education department is one department that I will work hard to keep any cuts in to a minimum. I’m a strong believer in Atlasia investing in our future through education, and will actively fight to make sure it’s funding stays the same.


I cast an AYE ballot on the Atlasian National Health Care Bill. This was a carefully constructed bill with bi-partisan support that gives America one of the greatest health care systems in the world.



I agree. While trading with the Chinese isn't perfect,I wouldn’t support a decrease in trade at the current time.


As I’ve stated several times throughout this campaign, I would support decreasing military funding in this relatively peaceful period. I’d support across the board cuts in Military Spending, not necessarily retirement, though. I’d hope to end most military operations within four months in Afganistan, where we are still investing over $100 billion.



In order to secure our national debt, I would not seek to lower taxes across the board. To provide more relief to middle-class Atlasians, I would support a small, middle class income tax cut from it’s current 25% level.

In regards to religious institutions, I do not believe all should be forced to taxation, however, we must be extremely observant and make sure there is no political influence in the church.


As I stated earlier in the debate, I am a supported of “green jobs”. I was happy to vote for the  Green Power Act (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Green_Power_Act) and as a Senator, maintained a record as a “Green Senator”. I will continue that same commitment to dream jobs in the White House.

In not too many years, our world could be out of oil. What happens then can be determined by what we do now. I want this nation to be prepared for that day by investing early in alternate, clean energy solutions.

I think it’s time for both the federal and regional governments to look into ways of energy conservation, as well. From recycling to solar panels to florescent light bulbs, the federal government needs to get the word out to it’s citizens that we support energy conservation. I wish we still has Barnes around, because this is his best area.


I know many of you have severe concerns about the economy, and are ready for it to be okay again. We’ve gone down the same, liberal path of high taxes and  more government spending, something I believe helped us get into this mess, for years. Has it worked? Obviously not, because our economy is in the tanks. My administration will support bi-partisan legislation that will hopefully get our economy back on the right track midway though our term. It won't be an easy, quick fix, so I ask the people to be patient with whoever assumes the office of President.

One thing I will personally do everything in my power to do is increase Senate activity, and that will be a top goal of mine as President. We’re not going to be able to get anything done if we don’t have an active Senate. I’m not quite as concerned on political positions in regards to the upcoming Senatorial elections as I am on activity. I sincerely hope that all 5 regions will send an active voice to the Senate. The Southeast and Midwest will both be sending ones, it appears, but no other race is completely certain just yet.

Welcome back to Day 2 of the Senate Debate in Atlasia.  To cover up the fact that I couldn't get to a computer until now (;)) and to finish up on this subject, will all candidates please post what the major points of their economic and spending plan is, as well as the reasoning behind it?  I'll give an hour since this is rather a hefty question.

I will be leaving fairly shortly for work and will not be home till around 6:30 PST. As I stated yesterday in my campaign thread, all questions that both myself and Dallasfan miss will be answered there.

My spending, in addition to the necessary spending such as entitlements and defense (neither of which will see much of a change in total amount spent) will be based on two areas: shoring up our infrastructure, and investing in education.

First, to infrastructure.  Not only is infrastructure critical to transportation of goods (and to public safety), but it is a major job generator, and thus an economic stimulus.  By modernizing our infrastructure, we are creating jobs, we are making it easier to transport goods, and we are putting money into the economy.

Now second, I will spend to invest in education.  In order to succeed in the 21st Century, we must invest in education.  The types of challenges Atlasia faces can only be truly overcome with knowledge, and with innovation.  By funding research in the sciences, we can develop new forms of energy, more energy efficient machines; basically create the 21st Century's version of the steam engine.

I will be gone until 3:30, please use the time as a recess and to answer any questions you have missed so far.

Now that we're back, I have a new question for you all.  I won't set a time limit this time since I have no clue who's actually here this time around:

Atlasia has been mostly an isolationist state for it's existence.  Do you support the status quo foreign policy?  Would you like to see Atlasia more interventionist in foreign affairs?

I have always advocated an interventionist and internationalist foreign policy, and I will continue to do so as President.  One of my major innovations is going to be setting up Embassies, and appointing Ambassadors, to the UN, EU, and NATO.  In addition, I will be appointing a Deputy-GM for Foreign Affairs, which will enable there to be more foreign policy stories, thus allowing Atlasia to be more active to begin with.  As President, I will be making foreign affairs a priority, since I feel that is an untapped way to make Atlasia more interesting, and thus get more people involved and active.

My apologies. I was distracted today due to getting online rather late in the day and also the Giffords news.

Anyways, I've always favored a more tempered foreign policy. Both extreme isolation and extreme intervention are insane and unrealistic, and get us in more trouble than good. I believe it's best as a general rule to leave nations to their own affairs as long as they don't put others in danger beyond it's borders, but these things are a very touchy issue, and foreign affairs, to me, should be handled on a case by case basis and a careful and calm mind. Military action should always be a last resort, no doubt about it.

I'm fairly comfortable with the way Atlasia currently is in regard to foreign affairs.

Like Ben, I believe Atlasia needs to do more in foreign policy, as it has been pretty well ignored for the last few terms. I also support having two GM's, with one being able to focus on national news as well as foreign affairs, the other sticking more to regional affairs. Both would work together on the economical side of things.

I'll have to disagree with Ben, though, on one thing: I don't think it is in Atlasia's best interest to be an interventionist nation. In most conditions, I would not support Atlasia attacking another nation unless they are a severe threat to us, or especially if they attacked us on the home front.

I would also support a very small reduction in foreign aid to other nation's. While I believe it is important that we are ready to help other nations, it is also important that we first take care of our own citizens.

We absolutely need to focus more on foreign affairs. Too often we're focused on domestic concerns in this game. It would be my hope that my Game Advisors proposal would allow more leeway for GM reports on foreign matters in addition to the current frequency of domestic updates.

Foreign policy is so crucial in the real world. Not just the last few administrations, I’d say that ever since I’ve been part of this game, foreign policy hasn’t taken nearly the role it should. Maybe once or twice, but even those times were only in short spurts. Hopefully whoever is the SoEA under any of our administrations will give us some creative issues to work with., and hopefully we can have a Senate who will actually act on it.

I'd like to answer this, since nothing else seems to be going on, and the more information the better in these debates, afterall!

As explained earlier, what I'd really love to do is focus more on the SEDZI Act which has gone very underutilized. The benefits of a SEDZ (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=130332.msg2776356#msg2776356) are incredible, and would go a long way in improving the employment numbers in those specific zones. In addition, I'd like many new of the aforementioned (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=130332.msg2776293#msg2776293) credit card regulations.

Of course, I would support further efforts, such as a proposal to grant a 100% tax deduction for small businesses that invest in new equipment, or replacement equipment, for their business, for the next year or two. And one of my first domestic policy efforts would be an abolishment of any wait-times of limits to receiving heating assistance (https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Home_Energy_Assistance_Administration_Act) or housing vouchers. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_8_%28housing%29)

If you meet the qualifications to receive them, you should get the assistance, regardless of what number you are in line. It's disgusting and immoral to allow people to go cold or homeless because the 'quota' for assistance in any particular day has been met.

I would also re-propose a "Cash for Clunkers" style program that I wrote once myself over a year ago, but didn't pass the Senate, which I believe would be an incredible boost to the economy, and the automotive industry more specifically, which in Atlasia, isn't faring too well because of the refusal for temporarily nationalization in June/July/August of 2009.

As you can see, my Administration will have a multitude of economic policies on the table from Day 1.

Welcome to Day 3 and the final day of the First Presidential Debate.  Today, we will be covering out of character topics, such as party politics and game reform.

First off, would the candidates please state what is the centerpiece of their game reform plans?

My major reforms will be centered on increasing activity.  To that end, I will be continuing the Commission on Recruitment, as well as making foreign affairs part of the game again.  I firmly believe that foreign affairs stories can increase activity, and my plan to create a new GM for foreign affairs will do just that.  I will also form a Commission on Activity, to formulate other ideas to increase activity.

^^^ A key part of my goals for game reform is increasing the amount of active players by getting new members who could otherwise become "zombie voters" active and engaged in the game. I would start that by creating a "Welcoming Committee", which would be a bi-partisan "task force" which will involve welcoming new members and teaching them the basics of the game. Also, I believe the current registration requirements are too high, with a new member having to attain 75 posts and be a resident of the forum for 15 days. I'd work with the Senate on a fair compromise acceptable to both sides, lowering both numbers.

A problem with many of our regional governments is that they have little to work with from the Game Moderator. In reality, many actions by state legislatures stem from specific reports, and we aren't getting those reports in Atlasia. That's why I would encourage the creation of a second Game Moderator, specifically focusing on the regional aspect of the game.

Creating an active Senate is easier said than done. While we can create new legislation, such as expelling a member who misses a certain number of consecutive votes, who's really responsible here is the people, as they elect the Senators. We must do our own part by electing members to the Senate with proven records of activity and commitment. With a GM able to focus heavily on the federal government, my hope is that their more frequent information, as well as myself and Dallasfan personally engaging in debate and helping move things along, that we will be able to eventually bring to the Senate back to where it was a couple years ago when I was a part of it.

On top of the ideas I've named above, I'm sure there are plenty of other ideas that will be suggested during this campaign and even during my candidacy. I cannot stress enough that my administration will be an open administration, and we will welcome ideas from all sides.

We'll move on then with three questions, due by 6 PM:

Do you believe that out-of-site membership should be encouraged (as in branching out to other political sims and inviting them to join us)?

There's been constant talk about a GM board so to say to be a created.  Do you believe that there should be multiple GMs that develop storylines?

What is your personal opinion of the recent surge in Atlasia's parties, more specifically the split on the left and the strengthening of the RPP?

I'm afraid I don't. There is incredible potential for abuse in that sort of practice, and almost always makes people suspicious of newcomers that were recruited from offsite. Honestly, I think that if Atlasia was meant to be a standalone political simulation, it would be Atlasia. Besides, it's difficult to actually trust people put in charge formally of offsite recruiting. If a right-winger was put in charge of offsite recruiting, could that person resist the temptation to recruit only people which would help his causes? Not to cast aspersions or anything, but pretty much all of the new recruits lately have not exactly been Social Dems, if you catch my drift.


Yes, it's a central part of my platform to allow for multiple people with GM powers. The key difference would be, mine would be considered more of a team, whereas the other candidates have multiple GMs practically competing against each other. My proposal is a team, with something of a command structure, allowing people to work together on the direction of the single GM.


My personal opinion on the details of it all could be turned into a novella, but more generally I think it's a good thing for their to be actual competition now. It's for the better in the long run. The party system was far too predictable for far too long. Sadly, even now, good people will likely lose because of voters who seldom actually pay attention to Atlasian affairs, even if they put in by far the most effort, but that's just one of the hazards of our system I suppose, like it or not.

As for my opinion of the RPP, it's higher than it used to be, but my only commentary on the RPP would be that the name doesn't seem to make much sense lately. It's a "Regional Protection Party" half made up of people that either don't care too much about making it a rallying cry, or outright don't care about regions at all beyond simply favoring their existence.

I wish we actually had party names that meant something. The Populares doesn't really mean anything as a name. The JCP is nondescript and is more of a party that exists for the sake of gaining power rather than having something specific in any sort of name that defines them. The "RPP" as a name means very little at this point. The "UDL" on the other hand, as a name, actually has a purpose. I guess you could say I don't like "zombie parties" at this point either. The RPP was on the verge of collapsing at one point a year or so ago, and it should've, not for my political benefit, but because it would've allowed something more genuine and actually political to rise up in it's wake, instead of the RPP being sustained solely for the sake of being sustained.

But oh well, I suppose I'm rambling on that issue.

As President, I won't be pushing for off-site recruitment, and would not continue the President's task force on it. Teddy and I were both put in charge of off-site recruitment, and while I did manage to get one person to register to the forum, they never even got back on. I'm not quite sure what Teddy did on the matter. ;) However, if a member ever was recruited off-site, I think we should be welcoming of them and give them a fair chance to succeed in this game.


Don't let Marokai fool you; Under my administration, we would have two CO-Game Moderators, who would be working together as a team. Marokai trying to suggest that my idea would have GM's competing against each other is based off absolutely no evidence at all.

Unlike Marokai, I believe elected legislatures can be important and beneficial to the game, and think that they'd be even more productive than they already are if they had an adequate amount of information from the GM, close to like we had in the day's of Purple State as GM. :) I do not believe I would support specific roles for each GM, rather let them work together and come to a decision on who does what, between regional governments, national affairs, foreign policy, and anything else. An amendment I would support would be that both GM's would have to accept a post before it being submitted, and if one happened to make a post despite the other's objection, the post would be ignored until an agreement was reached.


I think it's creating an interesting election. :P This certainly has already been one of the most dramatic and intense elections we've had in a long time, and we still have over a month to go!

Regarding the RPP, I'm glad to see how our party has developed, and I look forward to it being able to continually compete on the national level. I don't think the name of the party necessarily matters, like Marokai does. We stayed with the name because it stuck, unlike other names that would make more sense for our party as a whole. The same thing with the JCP. I mean, the JCP was successful despite the awkward name, and they dominated the game for a couple years. They still remain the largest party in the game.

1.  I am very wary of off-site recruiting.  I think there is too much potential for abuse, and too much of a risk.  I rather like the idea of Atlasia as community for Forum posters, and want it to stay that way.
2.  One of the key parts of my platform is creating a GM for Foreign Affairs, and a GM for Domestic Affairs, splitting the position.  I also want to take issue with Marokai (perhaps unintentionally) characterizing my proposal as having the GM's "competing" against each other.  Under my proposal, the GM's would work together, whenever their stories have an impact on each other's field.  There is no competition.
3.  I'm overall pretty excited by upswing in parties.  The "split" on the Left is overstated.  Because of our system, if one liberal is defeated, the votes transfer to the other.  What this means is that the JCP is no longer in a monopoly of liberal support.  As to the RPP, I am not particularly impressed.  I see a lot of people who will vote a couple times, and then drop off.  Talk to me again in 6 months.

Sorry about going AWOL earlier in the night, I was sidetracked by some important business.

Would each candidate please give a closing statement to end this first debate. (I may do a poll about who won it later)

Throughout the course of this debate, I've tried my best to give a small look at the policies my ticket will propose in office, and to show the country that I am the most prepared for the office. If you support Marokai/Purple State, we will get to work immediately, we will have a pile of legislation ready right out of the gate.

In my history in Atlasia, I have always dedicated myself to whatever office I've ever held. No position in office I've held in my Atlasian life has been taken for granted, and I would continue to work as hard as I can as your President.

Atlasia faces many problems right now, and my platform (the only one formally introduced so far of all the candidates!) has a variety of proposals on all fronts. Reviving interest in foreign policy, making the Senate more active now and in the long term, improving elements to the game that go ignores, and introducing multiple domestic policy proposals to revive interest, I hope, in economic policy.

I don't do well with speeches, I readily admit. My best qualities can be found in my work, and in my political debate. I believe I've made my best case, not in my opening and closing statements, or in my whimsical efforts to poke fun from time to time, but in how I propose my policies, build them, and defend them. And so, I will simply leave you all with this:


Thank you all for listening, and thank you for this debate.

I'd like to once again thank Archangel for hosting this debate, and I'd like to thank my opponents for particpating. :) Some important questions were answered, and I think everyone learned a lot from this experience.

This campaign is already intense, and we're just getting started. I want to take this opportunity to remind Atlasians that this election isn’t about the left or right winning. This election is about preserving this game, and making the future stronger than the past.

I love this game. What I don't love, though, is the direction this game is going. For the past year, this game has gone in a steady decline. Ever since last Spring, the Senate's activity has gone downhill, and valuable citizens are leaving the game. The past hasn't worked, and I think many Atlasians have come to understand that.

I have a proud record of experience and dedication to stand on, and I’ll stand by it any time. Not only do I have the valuable experience of already running a government, I also have the experience of serving in the Senate. I can promise every Atlasian that under a 94/65 Administration, you will have a very active, bi-partisan government, where every voice is heard. Who we will take advice from won’t run along party lines. If you have a good idea, let it be known. I’m sure I’ll find some great idea’s to implement from my opponents’ campaigns, and I hope they’ll like some idea’s I’ve suggested as well. ;)

Thank you all. :)

I'm glad to see my green energy bill was mentioned. My day is complete! :D

As my opening was short, so will my conclusion as well.  I believe that I am the best suited candidate to be President.  I am the candidate most focused on activity, and my proposals would create a whole new aspect of the game - that of foreign policy.  My proposal for multiple assistant GM's relating to foreign affairs, and creating a second GM, will revitalize the game - giving it life it desperately needs.  So please, I urge you to vote Ben!

I realize the debate is over, but before heading home I'm going to post a question here rather than copying and pasting in all your various campaign threads:

"If you are elected president, will I still have my job?" :P

Please respond in 1-2 words, preferably one beginning with "y".

I remember when PS and I were trying to find a new GM after PS got elected. I don't want to go through that again. The answer is "yes." :P

In tmth's defense, the multiple GM proposal was first proposed by A-Bob, I believe, on our forums. I don't think anyone holds exclusive rights to the idea. The GM position is obviously a difficult job that requires a certain degree of creativity, so the more minds the better, as long as it doesn't turn into a political appointment aimed at benefitting one side over another.

I too realize that the debate is over, but I hope it won't be too much trouble if I provide a brief closing statement before the switched-off cameras and empty seats. :P

First and foremost, thanks to Archangel for hosting this debate. It's certainly been one of the more interesting discussions I've partaken in recently.

While I unfortunately missed the second half of this genuinely interesting and engaging debate due to falling ill, I enjoyed arguing and, on occasion, agreeing with my three opponents - it shows that, if you'll excuse the massive cliché, what unites us is stronger than what divides us. Most obviously, we all agree that a second GM is needed to draw further attention to the storylines that supposedly run the game. We may differ on the details, but the fundamental is an accepted truth.

Whoever wins in Febuary, myself, Tmth, Marokai or Ben, this debate has made me hopeful that Atlasia will be better off for it. We're not going to get saddled with an inactive or incompetent administration, and I think that's something to be glad for.

I hope you've all got a sense of how I'd govern, and what my policies would be as President. The brief flash of drama we had the other week is, thankfully, fading, and it's nice to see we're focusing on what the election should be about. If elected, I will strive day and night (well, day) to shake some life into Atlasia's creaking, dusty institutions. If there's one thing I've learned as Governor, it's that fundamental change requires changing the fundamentals. [1] That's what I propose to do.

Without further ado, I'll get off my soapbox. Vote Oakvale/Snowguy.

Thank you. :)


[1] Sorry.


PS: Yes, Badger, you'd still have a job. ;)

PPS: You can read my responses to the questions I missed here (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=130116.msg2780797#msg2780797), here (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=130116.msg2780818#msg2780818), and here (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=130116.msg2780860#msg2780860).

You will have a job in my Administration.

Can I have a nice job if my evil, nonexistent opponent wins Midwest Senate race?

If you lose, you'll be a top candidate for a position in my administration.


Badger, to your question, here are my two words: you're awesome.

You will have a job in my administration as well. I promise.

To Ben and Duke: Er, thanks, but does 'a' job, mean this one (GM)? I realize this might change somewhat if there are multiple GM slots created, but for sake of argument.... ;)

BTW: For what its worth here's my take on the idea of multiple GM's in case anyone missed it/cares.

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?action=post;quote=2780845;topic=130090.105;num_replies=110;sesc=f1850a9d58dab4671e97706863818638

Summary: Good idea for assistant GM's to help with workload and create wider source of ideas/input. Investing SoIA and SoEA with assistant GM powers for domestic and foreign affairs respectively would work well (and is working on an informal basis currently). Still should be one overall GM, however, as domestic and foreign affairs today affect each other so closely that there needs to be one final arbiter to synthesize the two rather than the real possibility of 2 GMs working at cross purposes and disputing "jurisdiction".

Though I don't expect it to go here, I couldn't think where else to bring it up...:P

I hope the candidates for President, myself, Oakvale, and Marokai, will be able to fit in another debate before the election begins, maybe even two. :) Was Yelnoc going to do the next debate, or someone else?

I'm open to as many debates as you'd like.

Yelnoc was but I haven't heard anything from him as of late.  I could possibly moderate another one but my schedule is currently packed so I'm not so sure yet.

I too would enjoy another debate, if it can be organised.

Why can't this be started?

Archangel sent out a private message to all remaining candidates several days ago about the debate, and asked for everyone to respond so we can begin. So far, I'm the only one who's responded, which is certainly frustrating, as I know both of you have had plenty of time to respond to the message. If the two of you really want another debate, I ask that you please respond to Archangel ASAP.

Lord have mercy.

I've responded to him many times before asking for more debates but apparently I need to hold everyone's damn hand by responding with a specific time before we can actually move forward. Okay, sure.

He asked in the message what time works best for everyone to avoid scheduling the debate at a time inconvient for one of the members. When someone asks me a question like that, I try to at least respond with a "Whatever works for you". I don't see what's so crazy about that request.