Democratic Party Platform

[migrendel]

I plan to oppose this class based affirmative action plank, especially in light of Brown's fiftieth anniversary tomorrow, with all that I can muster.

[migrendel]

Certain parts of the revised platform simply won't do.

I cannot stand to see the rights of women treated with such impunity as to the results of such an invidious attempt to revise them. Roe is far too narrow to adequately serve the interests of womankind, and I am compelled to urge a change. A third of the pregnancy goes unprotected with Roe. The viability rule means that the right to an abortion will be thrust into a legal grey area based upon changes in medical science. That decision was a major step forward for reproductive rights, but now is the time to take a further step. In addition, I cannot conceive of our platform turning a blind eye to the continuing life of such travesties as the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act and Laci and Conner's Law.

It will be fifty years since Brown tomorrow. Fifty years, and we have made progress. But I see that progress as halted. Many within our party wish to do away with the necessary and equitable institution of affirmative action. I fear for the future. The signs are very ominous, and a chill wind blows. We can only continue our long journey towards equal treatment under the law with affirmative action. I do believe there is discrimination based upon class, and we must fight that as well. But we mustn't use that as an imperative to disregard the fact that our nation has unfinished business with race. I plead with you, spare us from having to make up for ground lost in our war against racism. Let us continue to go forth, using what means are necessary, including affirmative action and busing. Please, preserve us from the past we have fought to escape from. Our future is in your hands.

[StevenNick]

Oh, God.  It just gets worse.

[migrendel]

Also, we must ensure that capital punishment exists nowhere, and same-sex marriage everywhere. We cannot give states an option as to whether they can be fair or not.

[StevenNick]

Also, we must ensure that capital punishment exists nowhere, and same-sex marriage everywhere. We cannot give states an option as to whether they can be fair or not.

The revolution of the proletariat must be nation-wide!

[Josh/Devilman88]

Also, we must ensure that capital punishment exists nowhere, and same-sex marriage everywhere. We cannot give states an option as to whether they can be fair or not.

The revolution of the proletariat must be nation-wide!

That is why we need a strong right party!

[migrendel]

I fail to see the link between Communism and concern about social conditions. But it did come from StevenNick, so it can't be taken seriously.

[StevenNick]

I fail to see the link between Communism and concern about social conditions. But it did come from StevenNick, so it can't be taken seriously.

Judging from the fact that you seem to accept this extremist platform, you can't be taken seriously either.

[7,052,770]

Personally, I believe we should support the partial-birth abortion ban, and strongly oppose race-based affirmitive action.  Giving benefits based on race is utterly and totally wrong.

[The Duke]

It seems that attempts to clean up vague elements has substituted radicalism for ambiguity.  The is a much more liberal platform, and much less compromising.  Ideologically, I obviously disagree.  But that is to be expected, hence I am not in your party.

Personally, I think you sound like radical protectionists who can't restrain their social leftism, and seek to redistribute wealth along fairly radical lines.

I also think there is some naivete when it comes to the deficit.  How can an administration spend large sums of money on liberal social programs, while persistently advocating not only a balanced budget, but also an effort to pay down existing debt.  You will have to either raise taxes, or cut spending.  You are not likely to do the altter, and the former is not popular.

On a positive note, I am proud that the Democrats in this forum have the guts to proudly say what they believe, unlike the real life Democrats who try to hide it and pretend they are something they aren't.  I anticipate an intellectually honest debate in this election based on ideas, something also missing from real-life politics.

[Nym90]

Where does it say that we intend to spend "large sums of money on liberal social programs"? We advocate a balanced budget and reduction of the debt along with increased spending on programs that will stimulate job creation, which will increase the federal tax base through the increase in employment. It was clearly stated twice that the balanced budget was our first priority, but I feel that in the long run the job creation that will result from the increased spending on schools, roads, bridges, and public transportation (all vital mainstays of our nation's infrastructure, and thus hardly radically liberal) will help balance the budget by increasing the income of those on the low end of the economic spectrum. Sort of "trickle-up" economics, if you will.

You also conveniently failed to notice the provisions about reducing bureaucratic red tape through review of programs and attempts to increase their efficiency.

We did state that we support a modest tax increase on the wealthy, basically a return to the tax rates that the wealthy had under the Clinton administration. Perhaps we should have been more clear about some of these specifics.

Also, how is it radical protectionism to insist on a more level playing field between the USA and countries with which we trade? Keeping jobs in the US helps our country's economy, and in the long run the raising of living standards in third-world countries will help to equalize conditions without the need for tariffs. The tariffs are only a stopgap.

I would offer Migrendel's strenuous opposition to parts of the social policy portions of the platform as evidence that we are not extreme social leftists.

Yes, we are proudly stating what we believe, as are you, which I appreciate. I still fail to see how these are radical solutions to the nation's problems, though.

[Nym90]

Migrendel--

Your oppositions have been noted, and I appreciate your comments. I would urge you to consider, however, that in order to effectively advocate for the changes that you propose, one must actually hold office, and this requires some degree of compromise. Also, you must be willing to be tolerant of those in our party who have dissenting views if you hope to form a majority sufficient to govern effectively. Our platform is an attempt to reflect the broad range of opinions within our party. I hope that you will not oppose the entire platform based on objections to positions on just a few issues.

[The Duke]

Mr. President,

The spenidng on social programs was an assumption on my part, and probably an accurate one.  Liberals tend to like big government.  I have no problem with that, I'm a big-government conservative, but I also accept that a balanced budget is not on the horizon if a big government type were President.

I know migrendel opposes certain elements of the platform, but migrendel is WAY out there on the fringe, so even a very left-leaning platform would not necessarily match migrendel's views.

I'd love to do an in-depth debate with either you or one of your cabinet members who tackles economic issues (maybe Fritz?) on whether the Democrat plan or the UAC plan is better for the economy.

[Nym90]

Please don't assume anything about our proposals unless we specifically put them in our platform, or state them in some other manner. I'll extend the same courtesy to the UAC. I fail to see the evidence for your statement that your assumption was accurate.

Yes, a debate would definitely be worthwhile. I look forward to it.

[migrendel]

I will not oppose most of this platform. It is generally a common sense, progressive document. However, I will do my best to defeat certain portions of the document that I feel are not in the best interests of the forum.

[Nym90]

I had cut and pasted the entire previous part of the platform, and then attempted to combine it with the rest...but it said my post was too long and needed to be shortened, and then when I tried to back up it was gone! Argh. Fortunately, I can remember most of what I wrote.

Education--The Democratic party strongly supports public school teachers. We feel that our nation's strength and standing in the world is largely due to the great success of our public education system. We support increasing teacher pay to levels comparable to that which those with similar educational backgrounds would make in the same geographical area. We feel that no one who wants to be a teacher should be deterred from doing so due simply to monetary considerations. It is in our nation's best interests to lure our best and brightest into the teaching profession, to help increase the overall level of education in this country and thus help the economy and reduce societal ills such as poverty and crime that are directly related to poor education. We do not support vouchers, or any other form of governmental assistance to private schools. We feel that government money should only be used to support schools that are required to accept students of all races, income levels, academic performance, etc. We support increased accountability in schools. We feel, however, that local school board officials, who are directly responsible to the parents in the form of elections, and whom work closely with parents, teachers, and students on a daily basis, are better qualified to decide what the unique performance standards of their district should be than federal lawmakers in Washington. We support local autonomy in the management of schools, but with federal assistance to help improve public schools.

Foreign Policy--We feel that the United States should be strongly interventionist in our foreign policy, and we reject isolationism. However, we do not feel that the United States should be the world's policeman. We feel that when vital US interests are at stake, such as when the US or one of our allies are under clear threat from another country, the US should act swiftly and vigorously, even if we do not have foreign cooperation. However, we should always go to war as a last resort. We support the United Nations, and we feel that problems that involve the entire world and not just the US should be dealt with primarily by a UN coalition. We feel that the United States has neither the obligation, time or money to be the world's policeman.

Iraq--The Democratic Party opposed the war in Iraq, on the grounds that no link between Al-Qaeda and Iraq was ever established or advocated by the Bush Administration. However, we strongly supported the removal of Saddam Hussein in principle, and feel that the world is a better place without him in power. We support going to the UN to attempt to establish a larger international coalition to deal with postwar Iraq. We feel that the United States should not have to bear as much as we currently are in terms of either expense or casualties, and that increased diplomacy and cooperation with our allies can convince them that it is in their interests to provide more help to the current effort. We strongly support increased consultations with local officials who have a better understanding than US politicians of the unique culture of Iraq, and that much local input is necessary for the new government to succeed. We feel that a government imposed on Iraqis by America alone is unlikely to be succcessful.

Afghanistan--We strongly supported the war in Afghanistan, and, as with Iraq, support increased local input into what form a new government should take.

Homeland Security--The Democratic Party strongly supports civil liberties, which we feel are fundamental to the basic rights of liberty and the pursuit of happiness. However, we feel that civil liberties can be preserved while still increasing national security. We support the formation of a bipartisan commission to review the Patriot Act, and offer recommendations as to how it can be improved, and parts that can be strengthened or weakened, as well as new provisions that can be added or certain provisions that should be eliminated. We feel that Bush Administration officials should have no problem demonstrating to the commision that the Patriot Act has been effective in reducing the threat of terrorism while not placing an undue burden on civil liberties, if this is indeed the case. We feel that both sides of this issue should be given the opportunity to make their case, and that this will be more effective than the current level of discourse on this issue. We support increased cooperation between the various intelligence agencies. We feel that increased information sharing is critical in preventing future terrorist attacks. We support the war on terror, but we feel that a successful balance can be achieved between increased security and preservation of civil liberties.

[Nym90]

And here's the first part again, no modifications from when I originally posted it.

Abortion--The Democratic party supports Roe vs. Wade. We are greatly committed to upholding a woman's right to choose an abortion. We feel this intensely personal decision should be left to a woman and her doctor, not to government bureaucrats. We recognize that there are differences of opinion on this issue, and that many people hold opposing views for moral or religious reasons. We feel that abortion law, as it currently stands in the United States, is not in need of modification. We oppose any attempts to change the current US laws on abortion.

Gay Marriage--The Democratic party is in favor of giving all people the right to marry whomever they choose. We do not feel that it is the place of government to decide who is worthy or unworthy of obtaining a marriage license, as we do not feel that such personal judgements of the strength of a relationship between two people can be made by government bureaucrats. We feel that the institution of marriage will be strengthened by allowing all couples who love each other enough to desire to enter into a marriage to get married. We feel that individual states should be permitted to allow gay marriage if they so choose. We oppose any attempt to amend the Constitution regarding gay marriage.

Affirmative Action--The Democratic party strongly supports racial equality. We do not feel that giving someone a preference soley on the basis of their race, without considering any other factors of the person's qualifications or character for the position in question, is right or proper. We encourage all citizens to judge people, as the late Martin Luther King Jr. said, "not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." We support giving preference to those who come from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds, as these people are at a fundamental disadvantage in life, and we feel that some compensation for this is appropriate when considering decisions of hiring, promoting, and college admissions. We feel that the particulars of each individual affirmative action program should be considered to determine its overall worth, and that no legislation should be passed that would create blanket standards for affirmative action. Individual corporations and schools should be permitted some leeway to tailor programs to the unique need of their workforce or student body.

Death Penalty--The Democratic party does not feel that the death penalty is an appropriate remedy for crime. We do not feel that vengenance is the appropriate response to heinous crimes, and we do not feel that it is in the best interests of society to perpetuate and further the culture of violence by condoning government-sanctioned murder. However, we feel that judges and juries are qualified under extreme circumstances to give out punishments they feel are appropriate, and that each case should be reviewed on its merits to determine the appropriate punishment. We trust those who have the intimate knowledge of the particulars of a case to weigh all of the pros and cons of the death penalty. We support continuing to allow individual states the right to make their own policy on the death penalty.

Economy--The Democratic Party supports a balanced budget. We do not feel that this country can continue to spend more money than it takes in. We feel that there are long term consequences to deficit spending, and that it is highly irresponsible to pass on debt to future generations. However, we would oppose any attempt to mandate a balanced budget by law, whether through legislation or Constitutional Amendment, as we recognize that there are circumstances in which short-term budget deficits are sometimes necessary, and we feel that the decision should be up to Congress and the President to decide when this is just and proper. Any such deficits, however, should be prompty paid back once the extenuating circumstances that required the deficit have passed.

Taxes--The Democratic Party opposes any attempts to reduce current tax rates on the wealthiest Americans. We feel that the wealthy bear a responsibility and obligation to society to help support those who are less fortunate, and we feel that the current progressive system of taxation is just and fair. We support reducing the complexity of the tax code, and closing loopholes in the tax code that give corporations a benefit from relocating overseas. No corporation should have an economic incentive given to it by the government to leave America, thus taking with it vital jobs. The Democratic Party opposes any attempt to raise taxes on the poor or middle class. We support a modest increase in tax rates for the wealthiest Americans, and a cut in the tax rate for lower and middle class Americans. We support giving corporations economic incentives via tax credits to move into areas that have high unemployment rates. It is in the best interests of our nation to create more equality of opportunity for all Americans, regardless of their socioeconomic status or geographic location.

Tariffs--The Democratic Party supports tariffs as a method of equalizing competition between American workers and foreign workers.  We do not feel that American workers should be forced to lower their current standards of living due to foreign competition. However, we do not support tariffs as a permanent solution; we support raising the standard of living of people in foreign countries instead. We support putting diplomatic pressure on countries that have low labor and environmental standards to raise these standards, and we support providing foreign aid to countries with which we desire to trade, if necessary to help enable them to do so. We support the establishment of a bipartisan commission on trade to evaluate the particulars of each country and help revise US trade policy in such a manner as is appropriate to achieve a workable balance that will help raise the standard of living in both countries.

Spending--The Democratic Party supports increased spending on governmental programs which will help job creation. We support increased spending on roads, bridges, schools, and other vital infrastructure. We feel that the economic health of our nation is dependent on having a high quality, safe, and efficient infrastructure. We support increased federal funding for public transportation, such as trains, buses, subways, etc. in order to help give those who are economically disadvantaged equal access to freedom of motion throughout their cities, counties, states, and the nation. We support universal health care for all Americans, and feel that access to affordable health care should be a fundamental right. However, we do not support deficit spending other than during extenuating circumstances, and would oppose any spending proposals that would put an undue burden on our future generations. We support studying the economic benefits and costs of each individual proposed and existing government program to determine whether or not it is operating in an efficient manner. We feel that the overall size and scope of government can be reduced by increasing the efficiency of government, and that there are reductions in spending that can be made without reducing the quality of service provided, and that improving the efficient operations of government should be a high priority.

[The Duke]

Spending--The Democratic Party supports increased spending on governmental programs which will help job creation. We support increased spending on roads, bridges, schools, and other vital infrastructure. We feel that the economic health of our nation is dependent on having a high quality, safe, and efficient infrastructure. We support increased federal funding for public transportation, such as trains, buses, subways, etc. in order to help give those who are economically disadvantaged equal access to freedom of motion throughout their cities, counties, states, and the nation. We support universal health care for all Americans, and feel that access to affordable health care should be a fundamental right. However, we do not support deficit spending other than during extenuating circumstances, and would oppose any spending proposals that would put an undue burden on our future generations. We support studying the economic benefits and costs of each individual proposed and existing government program to determine whether or not it is operating in an efficient manner. We feel that the overall size and scope of government can be reduced by increasing the efficiency of government, and that there are reductions in spending that can be made without reducing the quality of service provided, and that improving the efficient operations of government should be a high priority.

Well, I guess it wasn't an unfair assumption.

You support
1. More infrastucture spending
2. More spending on transportation
3. Government programs tied to "job creation"
4. Universal health care

Again, I'm not particularly clear on how you will balance the budget while increasing social spending, especially when you are starting out with a $500 billion deficit.  I'm sure I'll find out in the debates to come.

[Nym90]

I explained that the job creation programs, which include the investments in transportation and infrastructure, will help increase the standard of living for those who obtain the new jobs, thus they will pay more in taxes since they'll earn more, thus the government will get more money back in the long run than it is spending. So not only will life be better for those on the bottom, but the programs will more than pay for themselves. Plus the extra money that these people earn will mostly be pumped back into the economy, since poor and middle-class people tend to spend a large percentage of their income, and spend it in the US. Kind of the opposite of the supply-side trickle down theory, really, but since I already explained that in my last post, I didn't think that it needed to be repeated.

Also, the platform clearly states that we would oppose spending that we can't afford, and that balancing the budget would be the first priority. Did you read the platform carefully, or did you happen to forget certain portions of what we wrote and insert your own personal assumptions instead?

Sounds like the debate has already begun.

[Lunar]

Looks great.  I would be updating the campaign HQ but it won't stay on the front page for more than an hour.  We really need three or so forums for the fantasy stuff.

[Nym90]

Thanks Lunar. Keep coming out with new ads though anyway, even if they do get bumped off of the front page. We can keep bumpin' them up.

BTW, have you seen Htmldon's ad? Is there anyway you can do something like that? If you can't I completely understand.

[Lunar]

I'll make some wave files sometime, but I don't have the knowledge for movies.

[Nym90]

That's cool. Keep up the good work!

[Nym90]

I see a few more things that need addressing...

War on Drugs--The Democratic Party does not feel that the current war on drugs has been worth the expenses incurred. We support legalization of certain drugs for medicinal purposes, if a doctor determines that this would be medically beneficial. We also support a review of the current war on drugs, and that the overall effects and dangers of each drug in question should be considered in determing whether it should be legal or illegal. We feel that, overall, adult Americans can be trusted more than legislators to make their own decisions regarding drug use.

Environment--The Democratic Party strongly supports a clean environment. We do not, however, feel that environmental protection and economic growth are at odds with each other. We support providing tax incentives for businesses to reduce energy usage and pollution emissions in areas in which this is a serious problem. We feel that protecting the environment for future generations to enjoy is paramount; however, if done properly, economic growth can continue to flourish and even be encouraged by environmental protection. We support increased funding for research into alternative energy sources to replace fossil fuels. We feel that use of new energy sources will help rather than hurt the economy, and that diversifying our energy sources and thus reducing dependence on foreign oil will also help to improve our diplomatic position in international relations. We support gradually increasing the Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards for cars. We support ratification of the Kyoto Treaty. We oppose drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, as we feel that it should be preserved for future generations to enjoy and that we should focus more of our time and energy on energy conservation and research into alternative sources rather than spoiling a great tract of wilderness.

Welfare--The Democratic Party does not support welfare as a way of life. We support the idea that welfare should provide a temporary lift for those in need, however. We feel that those who are on welfare should be required to find work as quickly as possible; however, we feel that there should be flexibility within the system for those who are unable to find work. We support most provisions of the 1996 Welfare Reform Act, but we feel that there should be a comprehensive review of it by a commission to determine whether or not it has been effective in meeting its goals and whether or not the current program is working in the most cost-effective manner.

Health Care--The Democratic Party supports universal health care for all in principle. However, we also do not want health care to be run as a government bureaucracy. We feel that the federal government should work as a partner with insurance companies to provide financial incentives to provide health care for all. We support having the federal government provide some subsidization, in the form of a voucher or otherwise, for citizens to obtain private coverage. We support the concept of a prescription drug benefit for the elderly, but we oppose the recently enacted prescription drug bill, however, as too costly. We feel that given the current budget deficit, we cannot afford the currently estimated cost of $520 billion.

[TeePee4Prez]

Certain parts of the revised platform simply won't do.

I cannot stand to see the rights of women treated with such impunity as to the results of such an invidious attempt to revise them. Roe is far too narrow to adequately serve the interests of womankind, and I am compelled to urge a change. A third of the pregnancy goes unprotected with Roe. The viability rule means that the right to an abortion will be thrust into a legal grey area based upon changes in medical science. That decision was a major step forward for reproductive rights, but now is the time to take a further step. In addition, I cannot conceive of our platform turning a blind eye to the continuing life of such travesties as the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act and Laci and Conner's Law.

It will be fifty years since Brown tomorrow. Fifty years, and we have made progress. But I see that progress as halted. Many within our party wish to do away with the necessary and equitable institution of affirmative action. I fear for the future. The signs are very ominous, and a chill wind blows. We can only continue our long journey towards equal treatment under the law with affirmative action. I do believe there is discrimination based upon class, and we must fight that as well. But we mustn't use that as an imperative to disregard the fact that our nation has unfinished business with race. I plead with you, spare us from having to make up for ground lost in our war against racism. Let us continue to go forth, using what means are necessary, including affirmative action and busing. Please, preserve us from the past we have fought to escape from. Our future is in your hands.

I think the class based affirmative action is great.  Just becuase you or I are white doesn't mean were automatically priviledged.  Hey, it seems that black men are taking white women I'm looking at in bars and clubs.  Whah, can I bitch about that?  Of course not, sh**t happens.  I do believe in racial equality though.