Midwest Senate Debate

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Sioux Falls, SD

Welcome to the Midwest Senate Debate. The rules are simple; each candidate will be asked a standard issue question about what they will do if elected and once both have answered that, a series of general questions about certain issues will be asked, and the two candidates will debate each issue until I tell 'em to stop. The idea is to generate some real debate; too often "debates" become throttled by their own rules and turn into a sterile beauty contest that is of no help in helping voters decide who they want to represent them for fourth months.

The candidates are Ernest of Colorado (current Justice on the Supreme Court and former Governer of the Southeast) and Lewis Trondheim of Montana (former Senator, Lt Gov. of the Pacific and Presidenti-Elect of Atlasia).
And the first question is:

"What are your priorities going to be if you are elected?"

[minionofmidas]

If elected, my priorities in the Senate will be to stop badly drafted and/or economically far-right legislation, and to seek a solution to Atlasia`s electoral woes that doesn`t take us back to fptp, and that reduces the number of pitfalls a voter has to navigate to cast a valid ballot.

I`d like to add that I also have some pieces of progressive legislation prepared that I want to try and pass ... but that would be lieing. I would definitely be ready to work with other Senators on these if elected, though. I know I`m often better at amending other people`s ideas, spotting the weaknesses in them, than at drafting something from scratch. Personality flaw, if you will.

Oh, lest I forget. Hi, audience! Hi, audience watching on tv! Great to be here in South Dakota.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I intend to be a voice of reason in the Senate.  I have shown in my previous service as Governor of the Southeast that I pay attention to the details on a wide variety of issues both small and large.  My main priority will be to widen the discourse of the Senate so as to bring several minor, but interesting and practical, issues to light.  In short, I hope to bring fun back into Atlasian politicans without having to veer into the totally silly.

[minionofmidas]

Next question?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Never!

Er... O.K...

"Where do you stand on voting reform?"

[minionofmidas]

I oppose all attempts to reintroduce first past the post (as I said above...)
Beyond that, I'm very open to suggestions. I think, however, that we need to cut down on the number of rules governing elections, and to make bureaucratic reinterpretations impossible.
To give an example of what I mean by that, originally the consensus in Atlasia was, no editing of votes. This meant, once you cast a vote you couldn't unmake your vote. This quickly changed to its opposite, with people editing their vote to void it and thence change the outcome of the election. Instead, voters who edited spelling errors in their vote had their vote discounted. That's the sort of garbage that needs to be prevented. I'll admit it's gone down recently, probably because we have far fewer first-time voters.

Personally, I would also like to see the Senate elected proportionally, which would remove the old contentions of redistricting and of uneven regional populations, but I understand there is no chance of winning a political majority for this idea.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I'll admit that voting reform isn't my first priority.  I would not be adverse to taking advantage of the facilities of this forum to allow vote editting so as to avoid spoilt ballots.  The SOFA or one of the voting booth moderators can lock the thread at the end of the election period to prevent vote tampering once the election has closed.  As for changes beyond the voting booth, I see no need to revisit how the Senate is apportioned at this time, especially since doing so would require yet another constitutional amendment.

[minionofmidas]

Ah yes, thanks for reminding me of that. Forgot to mention that: "Voting reform would likely include an amendment that moved all but the most basic principles of how elections are held out of the constitution and into ordinary law."

[Filuwaúrdjan]

O.K... next question...

"What should be done about the economy?"

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

In the short term, nothing.  The legislative process is inherently too cumbersome to respond to short term spikes and dips in the economy.  However, the long term macroeconomic effects of our policies is something that the Senate should focus on.

The major economic problem that faces Atlasia today is benefits: medical, retirement, and other benefits.  We have a tax code that views workers as if they are serfs tied to their company.  That's fine so long as the company prospers, but when it doesn't: Oops! There goes the retirement savings!  There goes the medical coverage! There goes the kids college fund!

We need to radically shift the paradigm away from employer provided benefits. Either a system that focuses on supporting individually procured benefits or on government provided benefits would be better than our current system that hampers our industry with burdens that have nothing to do with their core business.  We need to go back to companies having a small payroll office instead of large human resource departments.  Expecting every company to handle benefits well is ludicrous and inefficient.

[minionofmidas]

Eh, what can I say... Ernest is spot-on on that.

As to the current debates about the budget deficit, slash and burn on government services while introducing ever further tax breaks for businesses is not the answer and can never be the answer. Believe me, I came to Atlasia from a country where nothing but that has been tried for the past 20 years. We'll have to see towards broadening the tax base by repealing subsidies and tax breaks that don't benefit the needy. That would be the general direction, I have no concrete proposals at this point.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

O.K... so...

"any plans to change the laws on wedge issues etc?

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Could you please be more specific?  Between the general weakness of our political parties and the tendency of each focusing on a narrow range of issues, I'm not aware of any current wedge issue that threatens to split a party apart.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Could you please be more specific?  Between the general weakness of our political parties and the tendency of each focusing on a narrow range of issues, I'm not aware of any current wedge issue that threatens to split a party apart.

Sorry, habit. I meant wedge issue as a euphemism for the sort of the issues that are equally euphemistically labed as "social issues".

[minionofmidas]

No.
Of course I would still vote on any that might come up during my Senate term, but I'm not going to introduce any bills on that field.

Oh wait ... going by my experiences last year I suppose health care counts as a wedge issue here ... I don't have any specific plans at the moment on that front either, but I wouldn't rule out bringing something up...

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

None of the several bills I've prepared touch directly upon the social issues as they are usually construed.  The law as it exists in Atlasia on these issues is largely in agreement with my preferences.

I do intend on revisiting the issue of the minimum wage, tho I'll grant my reasons are more because of the technical challege of crafting a bill that would withstand the inevitable Bono v. Atlasia III should it pass than because of any strong sentiment on the issue on my part.

[Yates]

I am grateful to Al for inviting me to participate in this debate.

Shall I simply "jump in" or would everyone prefer if I answered all questions posed from the beginning?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I am grateful to Al for inviting me to participate in this debate.

Shall I simply "jump in" or would everyone prefer if I answered all questions posed from the beginning?

Seeing as the purpose of this is to help undecided voters make up thier minds, it'd be best if you answered the questions already asked.