The Porcupine: At-Large Senator Special Election Debate

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

This will be the main debate thread. Only candidates for the At-Large Special Election and myself are to post in this thread.

I'll be opening up with the first question in a few hours.

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

OK. Most rounds of questioning will feature one question for all candidates, and then candidate-specific questions. However, I'm going to open up with just one question.


To all candidates: While this is just a game, none of us run simply for the sake of running (or shouldn't at least). So that being said, how do each of you justify your candidacy in this election? What problem(s) do you seek to ameliorate, and what makes you superlatively qualified for this seat? How do you plan to contribute to the institution that is the Senate of Atlasia?

[Adam Griffin]

To all candidates: While this is just a game, none of us run simply for the sake of running (or shouldn't at least). So that being said, how do each of you justify your candidacy in this election? What problem(s) do you seek to ameliorate, and what makes you superlatively qualified for this seat? How do you plan to contribute to the institution that is the Senate of Atlasia?

Thank you very much for holding this forum, and thanks for the question. I believe my candidacy is justified based on the fact that for many Atlasians, there would have been a very limited series of choices otherwise. That, of course, is not why I'm running, but it is worth considering. With that being said, I wanted to be sure that Atlasians had someone to consider who has a tried and tested history of being active in this game and in government, someone who possesses the skills to organize on their behalf, and someone who from day one can be just as engaged in the affairs of the Senate as its most senior Senator.

In regards to problems facing the country, I keep being reminded of the nature of terrorism that threatens us. This was not an issue that was heavily on my mind upon entering the race, but I can clearly see now that it is of dire concern. The same - in terms of lack of attention paid to it - could be said about our current government, which seems to be doing all of zilch in regards to taking proactive steps against its occurrence. As Senator, I will introduce legislation that ensures cross-regional cooperation on the matter can occur, that regions and the federal government have access to the intelligence resources that they need, and will do so in a libertarian-friendly way that ensures our civil liberties are not encroached upon.

One other issue that troubles me - from a game mechanics standpoint more than anything else - is the nature of activity. I cannot say with absolute certainty that any reforms that further ensure activity is maintained by our elected officers will pass in the coming term, but I can at the very least be a part of the solution by occupying 10% of the Senate.

Having served one term prior and electing more than a dozen different Senators/watching their progression and interaction carefully over four terms as Chair makes me qualified to return to the body I once inhabited. While I was never the micro-manager like some people made me out to be with respect to the Senate and how individual members of my party voted, it would be safe to say that I have occasionally been involved with the body's affairs when I felt it absolutely justified and therefore have had a consistent presence of sorts in its workings.

[Poirot]

I am a candidate because I want to contribute to the country by debating and voting on federal laws. This election is for an At-Large Senate seat. I believe in this method of election so it would be appropriate to elect someone like me who appreciate at-large. I have run multiple times before and I am still persevering.

There will be only one person elected in this at-large special election and an Independent being elected would be the best way to represent all citizens by not being tied to a political party. I try to stay informed on Senate bills when I see bills that interest me and I have voice my opinion or asked questions in the Senate protest thread when the topic was important to me as a private citizen. I will contribute to the Senate by participating in debates and voting. I can be active. When I was in the Northeast assembly at the time time for vote lasted 24 hours and I don't remember missing many votes. When I see the period of time for votes in the Senate I find it a lot and things look to move slowly.

In the short time remaining in this session I would like to improve the safety of tank cars carrying oil by rail. 

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

I jumped in because there are things I'm still trying to accomplish in terms of national policy. Just because of the recent blasting the right took doesn't mean the right is dead. If elected I'd like to work across party lines to get mass transit the cross country goals many of us have. This project will lead to massive job growth across all socioeconomic lines.

[Foucaulf]

Thank you for the question, Moderator.

I'll have to repeat the two themes my campaign is based upon: regional rights and common sense economics. Why do these two themes matter? Because, as far as the eye can see, the Senate in its current state doesn't give a crap about either. The Labour plurality has a sneering hatred of business, as well as for the regions. The opposition to Labour is not yet coordinated enough to tear down their agenda.

I will enter the Senate furiously, passionately, aggressively pro-regions and pro-business. I will dig down and fight for these two issues, the ones common Atlasians worry over the most. You won't see any other candidate in this race with as coherent a platform as mine, and as focused on the big issues.

I have produced extraordinary results in my time as a politically active Atlasian. I took the federal government to court for their enforcement of a blatantly unconstitutional law, and won. I ran for the Midwest Governor's race and produced the closest result for a right-wing candidate in four years, leading a campaign that even gathered the praise of Labour apparatchiks. Constitutionality and engaging the public - aren't those two issues the Senate also disregards these days?

There's a tendency these days for Senators to measure their reputation based on the number of votes they cast, the number of words they spew, or the number of endorsements they have. But aren't we losing the body's real purpose? The Senators are elected to enact legislation that is interesting and benefits the public. All else is secondary. In the days to come, Atlasians will see why I am the only candidate dedicated to that goal.

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

Thank you for your answers. Next round:


To all candidates: Who do you consider to be the best Senator Atlasia ever had, either past or present? How would you emulate their performance?
To Adam Griffin: As you would know, Labor is indisputably the majority party in this government. Bore won the Presidential Election in a rout, and Labor held three out of five regional Senate seats. If you win this election, Labor will have six Senate seats and the Presidency. How do you plan on avoiding the pitfalls that Labor encountered during the DemPGH administration, when Labor had similar control over government?

Expanding upon this, one noted initiative that you supported in your last tenure as At-Large Senator was nationalization of energy utilities. President-elect bore was a vote against your attempt, but had stated in the debate that he supported nationalization of utilities in some form. If elected, can voters expect a more nuanced attempt at nationalization, or is this a dead issue to you?
To JCL: You are notorious amongst Atlasia for your right-wing views. Given that the current make-up of the Senate is majority Labor, and several more of its members are left-of-center, how do you plan on working with the majority?

As Senator, your sole piece of legislation was the Taft-Hartley Reinstatement Act. Attempts to pass that were about as successful as the Bills' offense. Perhaps more publicized is a bill you sponsored as Mideast Assemblyman: the Mideast Right to Life Act. Can we expect more proposals like this from a hypothetical Senator JCL? If not, what issues do you plan on legislating?
To Foucaulf: You previously ran a colorful campaign for Midwest Governor where you criticized the Midwest's budget for what you considered to be fanciful revenue figures and unrealistic expenditures. You also recently criticized the 2015 Budget passed by the Senate and signed by Lumine.

Do you intend to relitigate the 2015 budget? If not, will you oppose potential spending projects that may be proposed by Labor in the future? How do you expect to work with the majority, given how critical you've been of Labor in the past?
To Poirot: You are well-known for your repeated attempts to obtain elective office. Other than a stint as Northeastern Representative, you have not succeeded. Some attempts were more successful than others. Why do you think you fail to resonate with voters?

In addition, can you expand upon your political views and what issues you may legislate if elected?

[Poirot]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I will pick a former Senator. Longevity must mean you do something right, so NCYankee. It was sad to see him not get the few months he asked for to finish some things.

I'm trying to emulate him by having a long series of the same electoral result, just that for him it's wins and for me losses. No really, I think he thought and acted for what he considered the greater good of the game. Besides some episodes later in his mandates he was active in the Senate debates. He made propositions to improve bills and to rally different sides. Not sure I could achieve all of that but I would be satisfied if I did.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I have not always succeeded but at least I have tried. I am not sure why I failed to resonate with voters. I've been told a few times that if I keep doing the same thing I will get the same result and I should join a party. So maybe a reason is I don't have a party support behind me. Maybe some people don't like me or don't take me seriously. Maybe I just don't know how to convince voters to support me.

If elected I will concentrate on the safety issue of oil transport by train. In my most recent campaigns I made suggestions for legislating on topics that I consider not divisive and could get broad support. Maybe I should try big ideas next time. I prefer the country spends on domestic issues rather than wars in foreign countries.   

[Adam Griffin]

To all candidates: Who do you consider to be the best Senator Atlasia ever had, either past or present? How would you emulate their performance?

I don't know if it's necessarily a fair expectation for any Senator to emulate the "best" one, if only because being the best Senator is a highly subjective concept. During my time and in the periods I can recall, Nix was probably one of the strongest contenders for the title if it can be awarded based on shaping law. As much as he trolled and could be a pain in the ass, Napoleon was an effective Senator when he wanted to be (and was still effective even when trolling) with respect to whipping the votes. TNF is an absolute workhorse and has accomplished more of his personal agenda than perhaps any Senator in modern times. Bore was a steadfast and reliable Senator who brought dedication to the table through thick and thin.

I think those four traits are ultimately what a good Senator entails: being able to consistently introduce your own ideas in the form of original legislation, being able to shape all the legislation that comes through the chamber, being able to get passed what you want and stop what you don't, and being an ever-present force in the chamber's affairs.

To Adam Griffin: As you would know, Labor is indisputably the majority party in this government. Bore won the Presidential Election in a rout, and Labor held three out of five regional Senate seats. If you win this election, Labor will have six Senate seats and the Presidency. How do you plan on avoiding the pitfalls that Labor encountered during the DemPGH administration, when Labor had similar control over government?

I think it will be very easy, in that the vast majority of those who held office at that time are no longer in the Senate or the Presidency. Fortunately, we are not carbon copies of each other and as such, the same conditions will not be replicated. It is worth saying, however, that the power bill was a failure in large part because the entire Senate (save for 1 or maybe 2 people) was neglecting its duties at the time. A collective failure across multiple parties led to the result, I'd say.

In addition, this is a special election that will only be for a seven-week term. I've already made it clear that I would not seek a full term as Senator unless one of our current at-large Senators were to decide not to seek re-election, and even then, it would not be a certainty. In other words, people really have nothing to worry about with 6 Senators from my party being in the Senate because we very likely won't be there for very long. We also have bore, who I'm confident will prevent any catastrophe from happening of the sort with his veto pen.

Expanding upon this, one noted initiative that you supported in your last tenure as At-Large Senator was nationalization of energy utilities. President-elect bore was a vote against your attempt, but had stated in the debate that he supported nationalization of utilities in some form. If elected, can voters expect a more nuanced attempt at nationalization, or is this a dead issue to you?

I don't think any issue in Atlasia is dead in a permanent sense, but I imagine the idea would have to be scaled back drastically for it to pass in such a climate. All sides are obviously stigmatized when it comes to the mere discussion of the concept. That doesn't mean it is not a valid nor feasible one. Had the Senate as a whole done the due diligence of hashing out the bill when it was originally on the floor, this likely would have happened in the first place. Sadly, it did not. The public as a whole supports the broader idea; if there is an outpouring of public interest once again, then I'd consider reintroducing a framework on which hopefully all would come together to perfect.

[Foucaulf]

Thank you for your answers. Next round:
To all candidates: Who do you consider to be the best Senator Atlasia ever had, either past or present? How would you emulate their performance?

Such questions are better left to historians than lawmakers. I suppose I have a soft spot for Antonio V, who spent at least two years trying to push through a social security program that was quickly forgotten.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I don't regret what I said about the Midwest, and it's telling that they haven't tried to solve their endemic budget problems. What was particular about the Midwest is the regional government relied excessively on natural resource royalties to stay afloat, while wasting billions on white-elephant projects and "clean energy initiatives." While the federal government isn't as bad, it's not good either.

Here's the thing; the budget is only a plan of what spending should look like in the upcoming year. It does not print 3 trillion in revenues by magic. Judging from the chaos that swamped Atlasia last year and the Presidency's lackluster attempt at budgeting during rampant inflation, I bet tax receipts this year will be even worse than what is projected so far.

When Nyman's tax bureaus are not processing enough tax to keep the government afloat, I will reintroduce an amended budget. I would invite all non-Labour Senators and Labour Senators with common sense - namely, Talleyrand and Windjammer - to reach a consensual budget that address our budgetary crisis. I will not support a budget that doesn't reduce the deficit to less than 6% - and, trust me, it will be a lot worse than that.

I'm not categorically opposed to spending increases. Even Hayek recognized the need for a single-payer health insurance system, for example. What I cannot accept is Labour thinking that it's okay to extort the masses to fund their fantasies. The only fiscal ideology they follow is "tax the rich" or "seize the rich's assets." BS - we can raise tariffs, or implement a value-added consumption tax, or reduce entitlement payouts, or pass antitrust legislation, or privatize public corporations, or freeze wages. But, knowing Labour, I'll be shocked if they consider even one of those six.

[Adam Griffin]

^^^ Uh....

1) Averroes Nix, myself and others spent months in 2013 in an attempt to revamp the budget and ensure that it more accurately reflects real life conditions. This is why the expenditures increased so drastically in the FY2014 budget.

2) Lumine actually increased spending in FY2015, but the amount that the budget increased by thanks to Labor Senators was less than 0.15%.

[Foucaulf]

1) Averroes Nix, myself and others spent months in 2013 in an attempt to revamp the budget and ensure that it more accurately reflects real life conditions. This is why the expenditures increased so drastically in the FY2014 budget.

I'm not sure how that criticism is relevant to what I said, Adam. My point is that, given Atlasia has gone through a civil war in the past year, not to mention chronic inflation, an oil price shock and rising unemployment, we need to start the whole process over.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Again, I am speaking in real terms. If budget revenues (or maybe you meant expenditures, who knows) increase by 0.15% in nominal terms, you have to subtract the rate of inflation to get an accurate measure of real revenue. Since inflation has been around 8-9%, real revenues decreased by 8.2%, let's say.

I can spend the rest of the debate talking about Atlasia's disastrous inflation (at rates not befalling any developed country since the 1970s), but maybe a politician is just not fit to do an economist's job.


EDIT: Let me take this time also to take a comment from the peanut gallery, who says I'm "pro-austerity" and believe antitrust legislation will be "a panacea for the budget deficit."

I'm not going to get into a debate about legalities - who would, honestly? - but the point is this: if you don't regulate corporations, they'll only respond to your higher tax rates by moving their capital. And it is a fact that Atlasia has no consistent set of corporate regulations outside of seizing their property. Antitrust legislation can help limit the size of corporations; if they have market power, they can better coordinate the movement of capital across borders. In a competitive market, they can't risk moving capital as freely due to liquidity reasons.

I'm not calling for any "panacea" to the budget problem. We as Atlasians have to stand together, taking multiple perspectives on solving our budget crisis. The Labour politburo, of course, can't handle messaging on more than one issue at once.

[Adam Griffin]

Yes, expenditures. My second point was that Lumine increased the size of government in a nominal sense, while yes, at the same time, real expenditures actually decreased. Those are obviously contradictory points for me to make, but it was pointed out because a right-wing President did not cut the budget in absolute terms (and likely wouldn't have acted differently regardless of the inflation level; I doubt that even entered into the budget discussions).

My first point was that - as far as the reporting we have goes - Labor has not drastically increased the scope of government outside of making realistic adjustments to the budget in 2013, so it's a bit disingenuous - again, within the confines of what we've been given in terms of game reporting - to attack us for increasing revenues or expenditures.

As many people obviously know, I am a firm proponent of taking at face value what the Game Moderator et al hand out to us.

[Adam Griffin]

I can spend the rest of the debate talking about Atlasia's disastrous inflation (at rates not befalling any developed country since the 1970s), but maybe a politician is just not fit to do an economist's job.

Yes, and it hinges on your answer to what I just said, but it sounds like you should be in the running for Game Moderator, not Senator.

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

JCL, you can still respond to the previous question but I'm going to post the next round.

To all candidates: The position of Secretary of External Affairs has been an important position for years. Superique seems to have been doing a good job. However, other than luminaries such as Hashemite and Nix, Presidents have sometimes struggled filling this position. Similarly, in my time in Atlasia, the Secretary of Internal Affairs has often seemed like a Postmaster General with an identity crisis. My good friends NiK and MattVT struggled to make purpose out of the office. Since then, it has become a bit more purposeful as an assistant to the Game Moderator, and Hagrid served competently in the office.

The Cabinet Reform Amendment failed, in part due to low turnout amongst the Senate. Would you have supported the Cabinet Reform Amendment? Do you think these departments should be redefined, kept as is, or abolished?
To Adam Griffin: In the past you have stated your opposition to US intervention in Iraq to stop ISIS. Secretary Superique, who is to be retained by Bore, has called for multi-lateral action against ISIS. Do you agree with this approach? If not, what (if any) solution would you offer?
To JCL: Regarding ISIS, you said during your presidential campaign:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You have also mentioned support for a declaration of war on ISIS. Is this a measure that you would support as Senator? If not, how would you work as Senator to fight ISIS?
To Poirot and Foucaulf: What action, if any, do you think needs to be taken against ISIS?

[Adam Griffin]

To all candidates: The position of Secretary of External Affairs has been an important position for years. Superique seems to have been doing a good job. However, other than luminaries such as Hashemite and Nix, Presidents have sometimes struggled filling this position. Similarly, in my time in Atlasia, the Secretary of Internal Affairs has often seemed like a Postmaster General with an identity crisis. My good friends NiK and MattVT struggled to make purpose out of the office. Since then, it has become a bit more purposeful as an assistant to the Game Moderator, and Hagrid served competently in the office.

The Cabinet Reform Amendment failed, in part due to low turnout amongst the Senate. Would you have supported the Cabinet Reform Amendment? Do you think these departments should be redefined, kept as is, or abolished?

Considering this deals with an issue that I have recently faced (the 24th Amendment), I would have worked to clarify the part about who can hold what offices. It doesn't seem to address Senators being able to hold select cabinet positions (which is currently the case, excluding GM/DoFE/RG), so I'm unsure if it attempted to abolish that or just didn't address it (currently, there is a a) and b) to V-I-1 and the amended portion mostly comes from a) but a) is not listed in the Amendment and b) is not referenced whatsoever).

All in all it seemed OK, but it's one of those things that I would have needed to do a lot more research on to ensure that there were no remaining inconsistencies like the one I mentioned above.

To Adam Griffin: In the past you have stated your opposition to US intervention in Iraq to stop ISIS. Secretary Superique, who is to be retained by Bore, has called for multi-lateral action against ISIS. Do you agree with this approach? If not, what (if any) solution would you offer?

I oppose military intervention in Iraq. I'm familiar with all the common justifications and "buts" given to justify it, and I still oppose it. We made a mess there once before; we're not going to fix it by going back, nor do we have any moral obligation to attempt to do so, which would just cause even more of a mess. I would possibly support limited air support for a multi-lateral effort led by another country or countries, but anything that commits ground troops or has us involved for a period of more than what the President has precedence to do on his own (which is just a unit of measurement for me; I'd still want Senate approval) is a no-go for me. 

[Foucaulf]

To all candidates: The position of Secretary of External Affairs has been an important position for years. Superique seems to have been doing a good job. However, other than luminaries such as Hashemite and Nix, Presidents have sometimes struggled filling this position. Similarly, in my time in Atlasia, the Secretary of Internal Affairs has often seemed like a Postmaster General with an identity crisis. My good friends NiK and MattVT struggled to make purpose out of the office. Since then, it has become a bit more purposeful as an assistant to the Game Moderator, and Hagrid served competently in the office.

The Cabinet Reform Amendment failed, in part due to low turnout amongst the Senate. Would you have supported the Cabinet Reform Amendment? Do you think these departments should be redefined, kept as is, or abolished?

A former President once told me his attempt at making the Senate care about foreign policy. He had written out an elaborate timeline with crises and drama, but the result was as he expected: the Senate did not care. They would rather engage in their fantasies of decriminalizing incest, bathing in the blood of capitalists or whatever.

Anyone signing up to be SoEA or SoIA must accept that it is a job done in isolation. A few can muster the energy to keep going on his own, but most cannot. If no one is reading what you're writing, why write?

It is very obvious that the Senate picks and chooses which international relations issue to engage with. War is cool, so they engage with that. Iraq is cool, because they have unresolved angst with Bush II. The other parts of foreign policy - trade deals, diplomatic crises, even espionage - are ignored.

The same goes for the SoIA. There are a lot of unresolved questions in Atlasia worth asking: law and order, natural resource protection, transportation and our budget deficit. Again, the Senate picks these on a piecemeal basis.

That's all of my reasoning. Here's my answer: I support keeping the cabinet as is, and I would've voted against the Cabinet Reform Amendment. The legislation proposed so far don't seem to get at two principles Atlasia needs. First, cabinet members must regularly report to the Senate, and alert them if their policies are infeasible. Second, the Game Moderator must exist independently of the Senate, because his role is to discipline the Senate at his pleasure.

And, before Adam accuses me of running for the wrong position again: Senators can still run and they should still have powers. But truth is stranger than fiction, and an enforced realism will make lawmaking more exciting. The problem with inactivity isn't that people are naturally lazy; it's because no one knows where to go next.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I support the SoEA's current decision to engage occupied regions of Iraq aerially with limits. But it's not enough; we need airstrikes, we need bombing and we need action. What I also refuse to tolerate is any attempt at negotiating with these terrorists. Our mandate is to defend sovereign nations in the Middle East from this genocidal horde, and meant to restore order rather than taking any side.

Senate should authorize further bombing in Iraq and Syria and the deployment of military advisors to support Iraqi and Kurdish forces. I won't stand, however, for "troops on the ground." We've lost too many lives to this damn region already.

[Poirot]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If I look at the goals of the amendment, it was to regroup Cabinet matters at the same place. If it makes it easier to consult I have nothing against that. It creates five departments with new names. I'm used to the old names but if a majority of people prefer new names I can adapt. It's probably not important enough for me to vote against.

It allows Cabinet members to hire deputies. I don't like big Cabinets but if an officeholder needs help on a specific issue or too much workload, it will help to do his job properly, As long as it's not creating automatically many deputies job, I'm ok. Finally the Senate dismissing the GM without Presidential approval. I guess I have an eccentric view because I don't mind the President having a say in dismissing the GM. Not sure if it's enough for me to vote against because I know it will not change.

I would keep the departments. I think I would let a Senator be RG. Not a Cabinet position but something could be done about the VP. This person does almost nothing in public. An inactive player can even get elected for it and someone can have the role for a full term without being elected by the voters.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm for increased surveillance and intelligence activities to avoid terrorist acts or support on our soil, stop entry of ISIS linked people in our country, fight brainwashing of our citizens. I'm not for participating in ground war against ISIS.

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

All relevant responses from the two rounds
----------------------------------------------------------

It depends on what common ground issues we can come together on. Just look at my recent proposal to amend the Mideast Constitution. Giving the Lt. Governor the power to break ties is something to promote more activity in the legislative process. It has widespread support left, right, and center. Also my advocacy and support for improvements on rail transit is something I've worked with the left on. I'd do the same nationally. What I will not do is propose bills dictating social policy from Nyman. That is strictly for the regions to decide. The recent court ruling in Roe vs ZuWo made that perfectly clear.

Yankee has been a consummate professional and it would be an honor to see him return to the senate. I'd try to emulate his example.

It's dissapointing to see The Cabinet Reform Amendment fail by shear reason of senatorial nonvoting. Lumine and Windjammer have proposed something that will improve the game regardless of what your views are.

I stand by my comments regarding the Islamic State. It is an indisputable fact that they have killed Atlasians. What I think would be foolish would be to fight ISIS like we did Sadam Hussien the second time. Several of the other candidates have stated supported a multilateral approach in dealing with ISIS. I happen to agree.

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

To all candidates: Since the DemPGH administration, there were several attempts at "revolution" (more specifically, Alfred's Papal Batch and Snowstalker's posts.) While both posters in question were prosecuted for these actions, do you think that posts such as these should have actual bearing on the game? While President, Cranberry briefly mentioned negotiating with Alfred's movement before being overwhelmingly rebuked by the public. Should these be ignored and not considered canon to Atlasia?
To Adam Griffin: You've served several times in the Atlasian Senate. Since your departure, the rules have been overhauled. Have you studied these rules, and are you confident in your command of them?
To JCL: When the Senate was debating the Protecting People from Explosives amendment, you accidentally voted Aye when intending to vote Nay - thus making the difference in the amendment's passage. In the event that you are elected, are you confident that you will give more diligence to legislation as it's being voted on, to ensure you know what you're voting for?
To Poirot and Foucaulf: Neither of you have been elected to the Senate before. When I served as Senator and Vice President, I sometimes used Yankee as a crutch when I was unsure of the proper procedure. However, Yankee no longer serves in the Senate, and the most senior Senator is TNF. If elected, will you take the initiative to study the Senate rules?
Submitted questions:
To all candidates: What do you think is the best way to move forward on economic growth?
To all candidates: What is your view on the current debate about inactivity?

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

Thank you for that question Dallasfan. I consider that vote my most embarrassing decision in the entirety of my history as a public servant. It's led to my new approach in collaborating with folks on both sides. I'm glad that there's a couple Senators I'm confident that I can do that with.

I think what I said best at the Middle Class Monday Rally fits here:

Economic freedom is as important as social and political freedom. When I read the comments made by the left honorable Senator TNF essentially flipping off one of the most essential pieces of a free society I had to speak. What we have here is Labor speaking out of both sides of their collective mouths. Claiming to be champions of the working class when many of them want to tax the higher earning working class folks like they are frillionaires. Wether that's through the steeply progressive income tax or colluding with big labor unions. We all know that those union dues go into Labors political coffers and many of those workers don't share their views on the government's role in economic affairs.

These folks are much closer to our way of thinking. One thing I can tell you as a Assemblyman, Senator, and Former Presidential candidate I consistsntly fought to level the playing field by proposing tax policies that all Atlasians could be proud of. Sadly when I was in the senate, my tax proposal wasn't even given fair consideration and President Bore himself casted it off as radical. I ask our president this again. What is wrong with a top marginal rate of 40% with most paying 20% or less in income taxes? It's essentially the Clinton Era tax rates but flattened into five brackets. What's radical about that?

Inactivity in a regional assembly is a matter I'm addressing at this very moment. That's why I'm in the mist of debate regarding giving our Lt. Governor the power to break ties in the Mideast. I know it's not a big dent but it's a small and calculated step to promote activity.

[Adam Griffin]

To Adam Griffin: You've served several times in the Atlasian Senate. Since your departure, the rules have been overhauled. Have you studied these rules, and are you confident in your command of them?

I've only served one term in the Senate, just to set the record straight. I can understand that since I'm so infamous and well-connected, though, that it'd be easy to think I've been a career politician.

You're absolutely, right, however, in regards to the rule changes. One of my dearest friends in the game - who just so happens to now be Speaker - has been helping me catch up with the changes and learn more about the procedural differences. I'm lucky to have him helping me, since he probably is familiar with the rules more so than just about anyone else at the moment. I'd be lying if I gave the politically-expedient answer of "Yes, I know absolutely everything and am 100% prepared!", but I feel confident enough at this point with respect to navigating the body if/once elected.

[Poirot]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

An individual's action has no official effect if it's not recognized by the other players or the government. If I decide something happens and nobody follows I guess it has no effect on the game. A post by a private citizen is not supreme authority. The problem is when an action has consequences for other players or region. For example if you want to take part of a region, other citizens should have a democratic say. The Papal patch did not modify the current setting of the country and it could have been like having another country or entity in the game. It was a period when people tried to create some action because they wanted to try to make the game more interesting. There was chaos in government and citizens wanted a piece of the action too.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If I'm elected I will study the Senate rules like I read through the Northeast assembly rules when I was elected. The text of the Senate rules should be included in the welcome package for new Senators if it's not. If I have questions about rules and procedures I will ask the Speaker who seems available to help on these matters.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I think to have good economic growth we need a healthy and innovative private sector. The government should lay out rules that are competitive internationally. Tax rates for individuals should be kept at a reasonable level and used as a tool to fight income inequality. The government can help workers by encouraging manpower training.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Activity is essential for the game to be interesting. If it's inactive it slowly dies. The responsibility should be on players who want office to determine if they can contribute. Having activity rules is useful if someone is absent so it can be a way to replace the person. It also sends a signal to keep a minimum activity level. Before impeaching someone because of inactivity I want warnings sent well before so the person is fully aware of the situation and has a chance to remedy the situation. I don't want inactivity rules to be used as a silent trap to come out suddenly and use it as a reason to replace someone for political or personal reason. The officeholders elected by the voters should have a higher activity level than offices like Cabinet who are often not very active.

 

[Foucaulf]

Since the DemPGH administration, there were several attempts at "revolution" (more specifically, Alfred's Papal Batch and Snowstalker's posts.) While both posters in question were prosecuted for these actions, do you think that posts such as these should have actual bearing on the game? While President, Cranberry briefly mentioned negotiating with Alfred's movement before being overwhelmingly rebuked by the public. Should these be ignored and not considered canon to Atlasia?

There's no contradiction between recognizing their existence and acknowledging what they really are: separatist elements. Of course, Atlasia usually hums along well enough that these sentiments don't arise. When they have, it's either in response to a Labour administration or by those sympathetic to Labour.

Calls for revolution should have impact on the game in the sense that we should prosecute those who declare them. As someone who suffered through the Lebron Fitzgerald Governorship in the Midwest, I know too well that many Atlasians get drunk on power. Without an Attorney General that prosecutes them, they think they can get away with treasonous or criminal activity. And maybe that's what they want - but we, as a society, will not tolerate it.

Being someone who supports realism is to demand that acts passed by the Senate and statements made by Atlasians should have real consequences. It makes for a more interesting game that way.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The only good policy Labour has supported in the past year is reforming Senate procedure. Here's some Atlasian history for you all: the original Senate rules were imposed by Sam Spade and deliberately designed to confuse Senators. Yankee, as far as I know, is the only one who took it seriously. This is not to disrespect the former Senator, but it's about time the rules changed.

Not only will I study the Senate rules, but I will make an active effort to strip the rules to the essence of what it should be. Many of what's needed for the Senate to function is a Robert's Rules system, and that makes up much of Article IV of the Rules. Much of Article III and VII, on the other hand, are superfluous and requires cutting. The fewer needless clauses we have, the more we can prevent abuses of power (such as TNF's borderline criminal passage of electricity nationalization).

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It's about time we moved past beyond the rhetoric of "The Worker" in Atlasia. We've gone through a civil war, have intolerable inflation and unemployment and faces a major budgetary crisis. What we need is to talk about "Job Creators."

Job Creators innovate and advance us as a nation. They can be a blue-collar worker, an entrepreneur or anything; what defines them is a want to do something different. Labour's extortionary and stifling fiscal policy, on the other hand, turn Job Creators away. Atlasia under Labour isn't a country of Job Creators: it's a country of employees engaged in menial labour, petty workplace disputes and smoking cannabis.

One of my major plans is to disband the cooperatives regime brought under Labour and encourage a more flexible system, where government keeps its hands out of the private sector except to correct market failures. And a diverse, vibrant economy of Job Creators is better for everyone.

[Foucaulf]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'll repeat what I said in an earlier question: The problem with inactivity isn't that people are naturally lazy; it's because no one knows where to go next.

For a nation that has decriminalized almost every sinful activity you can imagine, Atlasia is remarkably conservative on participation in the game. The only policy they know of is punishment: we're going to sweet-talk you into participation, but we'll dump you as soon as you're confused and have other commitments to follow. I'm pretty sure most Atlasians think there's something wrong with that kind of relationship.

If Labour and its ilk wants a solution to inactivity, here's one: inactivity is not solved by adding the barriers of entry to lawmaking. Most people have better things to do than to draft legislation. The solution to inactivity is to rebuild civil society.

The solution to inactivity isn't to spew blocks of text and wait for people to notice; the solution is to reach out to others and make them care about what you do. The solution to inactivity isn't to make drafting legislation exciting, because it isn't. The solution to inactivity is to run exciting elections.

I remember when Atlasia was divided between the left-wing JCP and the centre-right RPP. Their dominance and machine politics stifled civil society, and in an unprecedented move they both agreed to disband themselves. The same thing is happening today with Labour's machine politics. But, if they don't agree to disband, then I'll have to take the fight to them.

And, despite my many other commitments, I've given thoughtful responses to all questions asked, knocked on Atlasians' PM boxes, canvassed in IRC and tried to keep my speeches snappy. Labour, get on my level.