Federalist Party of Atlasia: Policy Formulation Session (NOW OPEN)

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The Federalist Party: First Policy Development Meeting

Welcome Federalists,

I am cordially inviting all members of the Party to participate in this event. I urge cooperation, understanding and patience as we proceed with putting together the first of these, with little guide on how to do it. I think the best way to do it is to welcome submissions of ideas, policy outlines and even fully composed pieces of legislation, for either the Federal or Regional Legislature. Please include some background as to the changes being made from the status quo and what the status quo is on that issue or policy in question. As far as links go, the more the better. One of the side, fringe benefits of this is that we have the opportunity to raise awareness regarding the statutes and policies in other regions.

I plan to submit some stuff no later than Saturday morning. I would have started this earlier but some unforseen real life events have delayed me unfortunately. I look forward to many great ideas and contributions. Real quickly, there will be no spam, disrespect or insults tolerated in this thread.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Should I unveil the plan that we were discussing, Senator?

[TNF]

Federalists talking policy? I never thought I'd see the day!

[Napoleon]

Federalists talking policy? I never thought I'd see the day!

I told you we should not have let Yankee become chair.

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

Federalists talking policy? I never thought I'd see the day!

Yup. We're talking policy . Get used to Federalists trying to formulate a concrete vision.

[TNF]

Federalists talking policy? I never thought I'd see the day!

Yup. We're talking policy . Get used to Federalists trying to formulate a concrete vision.

I welcome it, honestly. Making Atlasian politics more idea oriented is always good in my book.

[sentinel]

Only a concrete vision? The People have an iron vision!

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

The concrete I speak of is laced with adamantium. Meaning unbreakable.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Since it seems that some people would prefer silly little quips over concrete discussion of the issues, I will be the first one to put something forward. Credit for this idea goes to Legislator, former Emperor, and Defender of the Realm Jbrase, but I would like to see the party to champion this.

     Currently, all Supreme Court Justices are confirmed by the Senate. In order to better represent the variety of interests that exist in Atlasia, I would intend that one Justice be confirmed by the Senate, one by the Regions, and one by The People. The Chief Justice would be chosen by the members of the Supreme Court themselves, in much the same manner that the Senate chooses the PPT.

[Dereich]

It's an interesting idea; who would nominate the popularly elected judge? Would the vote for that be done by the regions or by the SoFE?

[Associate Justice PiT]

     I think it's fine for the President to still nominate all of the Justices; the President will just have to care about nominating someone who will appeal to the interests of the group that will confirm the nominee. As for The People's Justice, I think that one should be elected in an election administered by the SoFE, since it is really an at-large election. The regional breakdown is not important.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The concrete I speak of is laced with adamantium. Meaning unbreakable.

Modern concrete is weak, precisely because the iron rebar (sp?) expands as it rusts and causes it to crumble.

Only a concrete vision? The People have an iron vision!

If concrete is weak it is largely because of the iron.

Now Ancient or dare I say "Classical" Concrete, is fully capable of standing the tests of time.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

     I think it's fine for the President to still nominate all of the Justices; the President will just have to care about nominating someone who will appeal to the interests of the group that will confirm the nominee. As for The People's Justice, I think that one should be elected in an election administered by the SoFE, since it is really an at-large election. The regional breakdown is not important.

As I recall we left off before the elections disrupted our discussions with how to organize those various confirmation processes.

So if anyone has ideas on how to structure the various processes, that would be much welcomed.

Also, now that PiT has broken the ice, I encourage others to dive in and take a stab at this.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     The big question for me is the regional confirmation process. Would we prefer confirmation by the various Legislatures or by the voters in a majority of regions? The latter would be more representative, but the former should tend to promote a greater diversity in views on the Court.

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

The concrete I speak of is laced with adamantium. Meaning unbreakable.

Modern concrete is weak, precisely because the iron rebar (sp?) expands as it rusts and causes it to crumble.

Adamantium can't rust.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

I'm intrigued.

[Potus]

It is important for Federalists to expand our efforts on what I'll call "pocket book issues." Things like healthcare(which we've begun to take action on), smart tax reform, job creation, and other pro-growth policies. This is the strong suit of a lot of our policy thinking because we have so many social libertarians that we all generally coalesce around the fiscal issues. Can't say that I disagree with the approach.

We also need to expand the field to issues that are traditionally leftist havens. These issues are the sort of an economic-social blend. I'm referring to things like poverty, education, and, in Atlasia, some family issues. A comprehensive Federalist policy discussion MUST include discussion of hitting the Left on their base issues.


On the pocket book issues, we need to articulate the issues better. In the real world, ALEC, the lobbying group, develops model legislation that it seeks to enact across the country. What would be best for the Federalist Party would be a sort of Contract With Atlasia with model legislation that avoids specific figures but still articulates a specific set of solutions. The fiscal, pocket book issues are a critical part of the "Contract"

On issues like poverty and education, too often do we get caught up in our own caricature. Rather than developing the argument and persuading people to support an agenda of school choice, we sort of embrace the tin foil hat persona of homeschoolers. The persona is not at all true. They're parents who care and want their kids to do well. On poverty, rather than proposing our plan that strengthens the opportunity and income mobility of the most vulnerable, we just hop on board with railing against the welfare state. Developing a clear path forward on these issues is vital to the Federalist platform.


The right-of-center in Atlasia seems somewhat reluctant to discuss social issues to a very large extent. I understand completely the reluctance because we end up playing into the caricature of us as some sort of vaginal probe for wanting to ban the abortion of a viable human being. Whenever we play too tactically with the issues we talk about and the principles we hold dear, we seem to concede that which we don't want to emphasize. This has happened with social issues. We've surrendered the fight on them to the Left. That can't be the case in a viable Federalist platform.

This isn't to say that we should revive old wounds and rehash issues like gay marriage. This doesn't mean that we should force out our libertarian friends. On the contrary, we need to work with them to develop a strong, pro-family(not just in name) set of policies that answer some of the most pressing questions of our time. A strong family and vibrant civil society are key to ending the crisis of chronic poverty, improving our lives, and keeping us safe.


Another issue that some factions on the right are divided and have in turn given to the left is on foreign policy. We as Atlasians have played a vital role in the world since our founding. We have always cared and, deep down, we always will care. We, as Federalists, must stand strong to maintain that crucial role in the world of defending human rights while in turn respecting the civil liberties of the Atlasian people. We must stand strong against irresponsible decisions that leave us vulnerable and the world more dangerous. I'm sure many of our libertarian friends will have their fair share of issues with that, but this issue is core to Atlasia's history. Ask yourself, would this world be better off if we had maintained a policy of non-intervention since 1900? Absolutely not. We'd all be speaking German now. Confronting the isolationist sentiment in Atlasia is step towards more diversity and a stronger Atlasian Right.


Allow me now to provide a far-from-comprehensive bulleted list of ideas under each category I've discussed:

Fiscal

-Smart tax reform
-Reducing regulatory burden
-Restoring sane labor practices
-Healthcare reform that makes life easier
-Freer markets, freer people
-Hold the line on fiscal issues, propose more legislation

Humanitarian

-Develop a strong approach to combating absentee parenthood
-Results-oriented education accountability with test reform
-School Choice
-Outline a series of incentives for a new era of welfare-to-work policies
-Repeal traditional welfare state and add the money spent to the BIG
-Streamline adoption
-Embrace gay marriage, gay adoption as path to stronger families
-Support tough penalties on crimes while offering rehabilitation
-Support the Right To Life

Foreign Affairs
-Strong national defense
-End domestic spying
-Forward the goal of global development
-Protect the internet from governmental involvement at a global level
-Protect Atlasian foreign humanitarian and strategic interests abroad

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

     The big question for me is the regional confirmation process. Would we prefer confirmation by the various Legislatures or by the voters in a majority of regions? The latter would be more representative, but the former should tend to promote a greater diversity in views on the Court.

I prefer the latter on personal taste, but weighed against the benefit of such diversity it is hard to say.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The concrete I speak of is laced with adamantium. Meaning unbreakable.

Modern concrete is weak, precisely because the iron rebar (sp?) expands as it rusts and causes it to crumble.

Adamantium can't rust.

Would you be willing to offer us an example of a policy built on such a foundation of solidity?

[Potus]

In order to further the specific mission of this thread(detailed policy discussion), I'm going to pick a few of the bullets from my above post and elaborate on them.

Healthcare Reform

Where we are now:

Tmth has already proposed a stepping-stone of a bill to the Senate that reforms Fritzcare into a more market-oriented, pro-taxpayer system. Federalists can pontificate on the benefits of consumer- and patient-driven healthcare systems til they're blue in the face, but not of that matters if we don't have a clear plan.

Health saving accounts do a number of things when it comes to healthcare economics. In order to really understand the benefits of HSA's, we need to understand the flaws in the insurance model of healthcare. The insurance model, by nature, encourages "overutilization," meaning people will seek more care than they need. A good way of putting this in perspective is the following example:

If your insurance pays for 90% of a doctor visit(the spontaneous kind like you're sick and want a prescription), then that leaves the consumer of the care to pay for the remaining 10%. If the visit is originally $100, then consumers can have 10 doctors visits for the price of one. It encourages frivolous use of care. The kind of visit where the end result is that you're told to sleep, drink water, and eat right. Our current insurance model is essentially like paying for car insurance that covers your oil change.

It's important to understand the consequences of that frivolous use. The machinations of dispensing medical care are incredibly expensive. You're taking the time of the secretary, the nurse, the PA, the doctor, etc. You're medical records are updated to account for the visit. The cost incurred by just one visit is fairly large. When care is overutilized, a lot of those costs accumulate and put unnecessary stress on the healthcare system thus increasing the cost of care.

That brings me back to the health savings accounts. Tmth's bill in the Senate creates new options to allow consumers to save their money. This money will cover the predictable expenses of checkups, a little accident(cut yourself cooking or broke a finger), etc. When people are spending their own scarce resources on the care, they're more reasonable in their spending and don't seek out frivolous care. This reduces stress on the healthcare system which in turn lowers costs.The lower costs will benefit every consumer of care whether they have an HSA or not.

The bill also includes benefit adjustments to combat the overutilization that Fritzcare creates. These benefit adjustments encourage people to supplement their insurance with savings and, conditionally, high-risk coverage.

Not only does the bill do a lot of good at improving the Atlasian healthcare system, it does so in a budget positive way. The bill pays for itself in two way, one direct and one indirect:

1. The benefit adjustments above outright reduce the cost of the Fritzcare program. The savings from those provisions will be significant. This reduction in government spending doesn't have a social cost to it, either. The healthcare system isn't damaged in anyway by the decrease in government spending. It's the definition of a responsible cut.

2. With shrinking costs from the HSA's, charges made to Fritzcare will in turn decrease as well. When the checkup was $100 and Fritzcare paid $90 of it, that was a fairly large expense to the program. Reducing the cost of the checkup to say $70 would be a 30% cut in Fritzcare expenditure. The longterm effects of more market forces in healthcare, like the HSA's, drive down costs and in turn curbs government spending.



There are two other provisions of Tmth's bill. One deals with those with high levels of risk and high costs. The other handles a longer term goal of healthiness and cost containment.

The first provision, called high-risk pooling, creates high risk pools for people that seek an abnormally high amount of care. The reason they are pooled is to allow the government to negotiate and subsidize private insurance options for the pool's members. This removes the costliest members of the actuarial tables used by private insurance from the ledger. When you take out the high-end outliers, you in turn make high-quality private insurance more available and affordable. It also addresses the needs of those with high-risk. By having plans directly tailored to their situation and with negotiated premium support, we can reduce the likelihood that their chronic conditions develop into anything more damaging to their health or more expensive.

The high risk pools, similar to the HSA's, contribute to the efficiency of the healthcare system. By moving people that seek care a lot into a new, adjusted actuarial pool, healthcare providers will be able to charge different rates to the private insurers. The high risk pools provides the market with more information, in economics terms. The market will, naturally, adjust prices and make better decisions when that information is provided. Similar to how HSA's lower the cost of Fritzcare, high risk pooling does as well.


The final provision of the bill is a longer-term cost containment program. The bill creates employer-sponsored Employee Wellness Programs with incentives. There are certain tax incentives provided to the employer for participating but the real meat of the program is what the employees get. When the employees set their health goals, the goals are evaluated for intensity and ambition and assigned a dollar value. If the goal-setter accomplishes the objective, they are paid the dollar amount into a health savings account. While a small step, the program will, over time, increase the general health of the population. This, of course, cuts medical costs and reduces the expense of the Fritzcare program.





Where We Can Go:



The Atlasian healthcare system is currently deprived of consumer choice and too government-driven. Reform is vital to ensuring that we have an affordable, accessible, economically and fiscally viable healthcare system for generations to come.

The path ahead must be molded to built consumer options and increase the quality of care. The first solution I would propose for my party's officials to adopt beyond the current bill is this:


A reduction in Fritzcare spending used to finance a standard, refundable tax credit(appx. $7,000 for individuals and $15,000 for families) for purchasing private insurance alongside the formation of a health savings account. The deduction is not tethered to the cost of the plan purchased in order to encourage the  "cafeteria mentality" of take what you want, leave what you don't. By encouraging the purchase of frugal plans and providing HSA benefits to those doing so, we increase the efficiency of our healthcare system even more. This further reduces the cost of Fritzcare reimbursement.

As I said above, the credit would be refundable. This part is key because it makes private insurance available to those with low incomes and essentially serves as a more economically responsible subsidy for frugal insurance plans.


A very large driver of healthcare costs is chronic disease. The Federalist Party, friends of the innovator, should advocate for a Public-Private Partnership on Chronic Disease Research to encourage pharmaceutical companies and research institutions to develop cures and vaccines for chronic diseases within ten years. Make participation in the program extremely lucrative for the companies and beneficial for university funding to greatly encourage research. However, after the provision sunsets in 10 years' time, it must not be removed. We can't allow our devotion to innovation and want for a stronger, healthier population to devolve into a system of corporate welfare that pads the bottom line of megacompanies.






In summary, we're making progress on healthcare reform but there is still a lot of progress to make. Increasing efficiency, containing cost, and expanding patient choice are currently-overlooked vital aspects of a healthcare system. While I prescribe future policy prescriptions, there are many more that are just as valuable. I encourage my fellow Federalists to seek out creative and unique solutions to our citizens' great problems. I just hope the work I've done and plan to do motivates others to join me in creating a better healthcare system for all.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

I have some ideas about moving the party forward:

1. I think we need to embrace social tolerance and focus on economic issues.  Since there is a wide range of opinions on social issues within our party, I don't think it's smart to be putting them into our platform.  While I am part of the socially conservative wing, I realize there are many socially moderate & liberal Federalists as well, and I don't think it's smart to alienate anyone based on those issues.

2. Embrace a market-based approach to environmental protection, obesity, and other such issues.  While we should stand firm against more government regulation, it's important to recognize that these are real concerns and that incentives should be created for the free market to help solve them.

3. Support federal legislation that would allow health insurance to be purchased across regions.

4. Support welfare-to-work and other welfare reform measures

5. Adopt a strong but pragmatic foreign policy, or, as Theodore Roosevelt put it, "speak softly and carry a big stick."

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Recorded via Skype
Imperial Legislature
Nashville, TN

Good afternoon, Federalists, and thank you again for welcoming me as a member of your great party.  During my tenure as both member and Speaker of the IDS Legislature, we have passed a multitude of reforms addressing our economy, government reform, and crime.  I have had the pleasure of working with Federalists, as well as Democratic-Republicans, on areas where we can find common ground.

Over the last two months, I have focused my efforts on crafting a plan that will curb the problem of homelessness in our region: indeed, an epidemic that affects all people, rich and poor, from small towns to large cities.  Homelessness is a problem that is seldom addressed by politicians, and when they do, little is done to change the course.  Politicians and the media too often frame the debate to be a question of 'balancing the budget versus caring for those in need.'  But as one American state, has shown us, this need not be the case.

The state of Utah guarantees every citizen without a home an apartment room.  With that, they are appointed a caseworker to help them find work and become self-sufficient, and if they fail, they are allowed to keep their apartment.  Other states in the US have been looking to replicate this program, and very soon, the IDS Legislature will consider a bill that will do just the same.

How can this work, you might ask?  How can government crack down on the homelessness problem without adding a dime to the deficit?  Simple.  In 2005, Utah figured out that the annual cost of E.R. visits and jail stays for homeless people was about $16,670 per person, compared to $11,000 to provide each homeless person with an apartment and a social worker.  That means it would cost the state less to provide homes to individuals and families than to only provide band-aids and temporary support when basic survival is impossible.

Utah teaches us an important lesson: it's not a matter of 'big government' versus 'small government,' it is a matter of the government doing what's right for the people it serves.  That's why I am challenging all Federalists to encourage similar policies in their regions and the federal government.  Together, we can eliminate homelessness.  But we can only do it if we have the willpower and the right approach to doing so.

Let us work to amend our platform so that it supports a great initiative like this.  Let's lead Atlasia toward the path of equal opportunity and prosperity - one city, one state, one region at a time.

Thank you.

[Prince of Salem]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for this opportunity to express our ideas as Federalists.

I would like to express my personal concern on the issue of government spending in this nation. After reading some recent bills passed by the Senate, I've find worrying that new spending has been created to fund almost any funny thing that was found "nice" by our legislators. My fellow Federalists, isn't government's duty to provide for the common defense and promote the general welfare, as it is written in the Constitution? Then why are many unnecessary laws and overspending being passed at the expense of the taxpayer? Why is the federal government taking over responsibilities that should remain in the hands of the people of Atlasia? Overspending isn't just an issue of balancing income and outcome, it also affects our daily lives by increasing inflation and weakening our economy, with low-income families being the most affected.

This is why I propose we address the fiscal responsibility issue, making it one of our priorities. It will not be about slashing working welfare programs, but about cutting unnecessary spending and giving the people of Atlasia an incentive to take more care about their own lives and the people around them. Right know the majority in the Senate doesn't seem to share this views, and neither the people of my region, the Northeast, seem to embrace them. But this is about our economy, our freedom and the strength of our nation.

[Cassius]

I am not an elected Representative (though I am a candidate for the Mideast assembly), so I can understand if my basic proposals are not given much time. After all, much more detailed submissions have already been made by more experienced people. However, I do have a rough idea of what policies, or, perhaps more specifically, values I would like to see adopted by the Federalists:

1. A strong, assertive Atlasian foreign policy, one that is not afraid to use both the stronger methods of diplomacy, and, if pushed, force, to get results that benefit the nation.

2. Tough policies on crime. I would argue that police forces need to be given more freedom of action, and more freedom from potential prosecution (subject to rules and regulations obviously). Support for the death penalty (in the most severe of cases) and the use of the birch on certain offenders could be given consideration.

3. Maintaining support for a heterogeneous variety of ways of educating the young, from private schools, to religious schools, to homeschooling (subject to some basic regulations of course).

4. Balanced budgets. A cornerstone of my thinking is that the state, though it obviously has responsibilities to it's citizenry in terms of provision of infrastructure, security and basic welfare, should always attempt to maintain a balanced budget (in order to enable the more rapid repayment of government debts). Therefore, I would advocate a balanced budget act, which would insist upon budget surpluses in times of peace and growth, with an allowance for a small budget deficit in times of war and during economic downturns.

5. Support for historical and cultural sites and museums. In order to better educate Atlasians, both young and old, about their nations (and the world's) rich history, I say that the Federalists should advocate ploughing extra spending into these institutions in order to enable them to thrive to an even greater extent. Similar support, with the possibility of expansion, should also be given to the national parks.

Obviously, this set of suggestions will probably not be accepted by the majority of the party. However, it is merely that, a set of suggestions.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I want to thank those that have participated so far, but I would also like to encourage more get involved and encourage members to interact respectfully with each other on their proposals.