The Porcupine: At-Large Senator Special Election Debate

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.