District 1B Senate debate

[YRABNNRM]

I'd like to welcome Governor .Andrew to the debate. We have discussed several issues so far so you may want to review the questions and post your positions on the issues. If you'd like to continue now, just let us know.

I don't want to waste anytime, I would like to move onward from here. I will try to address those questions in upcomming campaign stops.

[Keystone Phil]

I'd like to welcome Governor .Andrew to the debate. We have discussed several issues so far so you may want to review the questions and post your positions on the issues. If you'd like to continue now, just let us know.

I don't want to waste anytime, I would like to move onward from here. I will try to address those questions in upcomming campaign stops.

Ok well since we are moving along, are there any questions out there?

[Akno21]

What is your stance on Preferential Voting, and why?

[Keystone Phil]

What is your stance on Preferential Voting, and why?

I believe we should get rid of preferential voting. I believe that if you have a list of candidates, you should not be able to say "well I'll support him but just in case he doesn't win I want her and in case she doesn't win I want him..." and so on. When you go into the voting booth you have to make a decision of who you want and stick to it.

The reason why I believe this system is unfair to candidates. Yes it did take my own defeat to realize this but that's the case here. I'm not going to sit here and try to twist a story saying "well I always thought this was unfair." That's not true. I didn't always think that. I never gave the system much attention. I even used preferential voting in the past election. But now I realize it is unfair to candidates. And with that said, I'd also like to mention that I will not be using preferential voting in this upcoming election and I hope others come to this conclusion also.

[YRABNNRM]

What is your stance on Preferential Voting, and why?

At first I was opposed to Preferential Voting, I believe that it was "unfair" and that every person should have a single vote. Recently I have come to see that Preferential Voting is not unfair and I fully support it. It gives the smaller parties a voice that they would not have if it wasn't for Preferential Voting, it gives voters more of an option and furthers democracy. With this system it also helps avoid multiple runoffs and standstills in the electoral process. For example when I ran for Governor we did not use Preferential Voting, therefore when there was a tie we had to have a runoff. Now we had another runoff and there was ANOTHER tie, now if it wasn't for myself and Siege comming to an agreement we would have to keep staging runoffs which would be a hassel for the candidates and the citizens.

[YRABNNRM]

Since my opponents asked each other a question I would like to ask them what is their position on homosexual marriage?

[Keystone Phil]

Since my opponents asked each other a question I would like to ask them what is their position on homosexual marriage?

I believe that we should defend the insitution of marriage. Marriage is a bond between a man and a woman. However, I did not support FMA. I felt that writing a ban on gay marriage into the Consitution was not the best way to handle the situation. While the amount of gay marriages being performed earlier this year was at an alarming rate, a Constitutional amendment was not the answer. I believe a bill similiar to DOMA would be appropriate for this situation.

[Keystone Phil]

My question to the Governor: Do you believe that seniors should be able to privatize a portion of their social security?

[YRABNNRM]

My question to the Governor: Do you believe that seniors should be able to privatize a portion of their social security?

I support something similar to the libertarian beliefs on social security. I believe that seniors should have the option to be able to invest in their own private retirement account that they control themselves, opposed to social security.

[Nation]

My question to the Governor: Do you believe that seniors should be able to privatize a portion of their social security?

I support something similar to the libertarian beliefs on social security. I believe that seniors should have the option to be able to invest in their own private retirement account that they control themselves, opposed to social security.

But would you allow Social Security itself to continue, for those seniors who want it?

[TeePee4Prez]

What is your stance on Preferential Voting, and why?

Favor it.  Avoids the "spoiler."

[TeePee4Prez]

Since my opponents asked each other a question I would like to ask them what is their position on homosexual marriage?

Favor it.  The only ramification I have against homosexual marriage is the children involved, but a person can adopt anyway so I am in favor of homosexual marriage.

[YRABNNRM]

My question to the Governor: Do you believe that seniors should be able to privatize a portion of their social security?

I support something similar to the libertarian beliefs on social security. I believe that seniors should have the option to be able to invest in their own private retirement account that they control themselves, opposed to social security.

But would you allow Social Security itself to continue, for those seniors who want it?

I think the door could remain open for those seniors, although I believe the system I talked about would work better for them. So overall I guess you could say that I think their future should be in their hands.

[Akno21]

I fully endorse Handzus26 for Senate. He represents the values that are neccessary to have a great nation, and he is a dedicated poster, frequently showing intelligence and smarts when posting. You can trust Handzus as your Senator, and I hope I get the honor of working with him.

[Keystone Phil]

I fully endorse Handzus26 for Senate. He represents the values that are neccessary to have a great nation, and he is a dedicated poster, frequently showing intelligence and smarts when posting. You can trust Handzus as your Senator, and I hope I get the honor of working with him.

This is a debate, Senator. Please take endorsements elsewhere. Thank you. Any questions for the candidates?

[Fritz]

If you have a debate thread open for your particular Senate race, you may answer this question there.  As a person who has been out of work for some time, I am very interested in all Senate candidates response to this question.

What economic policies should the federal government pursue to stimulate job creation?

[Keystone Phil]

If you have a debate thread open for your particular Senate race, you may answer this question there.  As a person who has been out of work for some time, I am very interested in all Senate candidates response to this question.

What economic policies should the federal government pursue to stimulate job creation?

I'll be very honest with you, Fritz, I don't know much about job creation so I'm not going to act like I do. I'd be research options if elected to the Senate to make sure everyone who wants a job, gets a job.

[TeePee4Prez]

I can answer that Fritz.  For one we need a fair tax code.  One that closes all of the loopholes that make it easy to outsource jobs offshore.  And if a company dares to do that, I would tax them hard for ding so.  I would also give tax credits to companies that hire people in certain economic sectors and geographic areas where there is a depressed economy.  

I would re-evaluate NAFTA and the WTO to include provisions for labor, safety, and environmentla regulations.  To do this, we need a strong United Nations to help enforce these policies.  On that note, we must move Atlasia to worldwide international accounting stanmdards and work towards a global currency.  This can not be finished overnight, but we should work towards it.  Countries like China are purposely lowering their currency to make exporting goods back to Atlasia much easier and it is costing jobs at home.

I can not be anti-business, but at the same time I can not be anti-labor.  One hand washes the other and if one fails, Atlasia fails.  A fair and balanced economic system is the best means of achieving Democracy.  "Trickle-down" economics is one step closer towards monarchial feudalism where a few control a lot of resources.

[Keystone Phil]

Polls open in about two hours (if I'm not mistaken) so before the votings begins, I am willing to take any questions.

[Akno21]

Yes, what is your opinion on the amount of information the press should be entitled to? Every day it seems, newspapers or networks are suing courts or the government to release files. Should the media have access to that stuff?

[Keystone Phil]

Yes, what is your opinion on the amount of information the press should be entitled to? Every day it seems, newspapers or networks are suing courts or the government to release files. Should the media have access to that stuff?

I thank the Senator for his question and I will be happy to answer it. I don't believe that a network or newspaper or any form of the press should be able to sue for information regarding a candidate's personal life. I use that example because it is the most likely situation when the election roles around. Example: Jack Ryan in Illinois.

  Mr. Ryan and his ex-wife wanted to keep their divorce records sealed and for good reasons. However, the media didn't seem to care about the candidate and his ex-wife's wishes and just went right through their personal lives. This is wrong and I would support limits on the information that the media can receive regarding a candidate's private relations. If a husband and his ex-wife or a wife and her ex-husband wish to keep their records sealed, that is their right to privacy.

[Akno21]

Yes, what is your opinion on the amount of information the press should be entitled to? Every day it seems, newspapers or networks are suing courts or the government to release files. Should the media have access to that stuff?

I thank the Senator for his question and I will be happy to answer it. I don't believe that a network or newspaper or any form of the press should be able to sue for information regarding a candidate's personal life. I use that example because it is the most likely situation when the election roles around. Example: Jack Ryan in Illinois.

  Mr. Ryan and his ex-wife wanted to keep their divorce records sealed and for good reasons. However, the media didn't seem to care about the candidate and his ex-wife's wishes and just went right through their personal lives. This is wrong and I would support limits on the information that the media can receive regarding a candidate's private relations. If a husband and his ex-wife or a wife and her ex-husband wish to keep their records sealed, that is their right to privacy.

Did Bill Clinton have a right to privacy? Or was that a special situation?

[Keystone Phil]

Yes, what is your opinion on the amount of information the press should be entitled to? Every day it seems, newspapers or networks are suing courts or the government to release files. Should the media have access to that stuff?

I thank the Senator for his question and I will be happy to answer it. I don't believe that a network or newspaper or any form of the press should be able to sue for information regarding a candidate's personal life. I use that example because it is the most likely situation when the election roles around. Example: Jack Ryan in Illinois.

  Mr. Ryan and his ex-wife wanted to keep their divorce records sealed and for good reasons. However, the media didn't seem to care about the candidate and his ex-wife's wishes and just went right through their personal lives. This is wrong and I would support limits on the information that the media can receive regarding a candidate's private relations. If a husband and his ex-wife or a wife and her ex-husband wish to keep their records sealed, that is their right to privacy.

Did Bill Clinton have a right to privacy? Or was that a special situation?

I knew the question was a setup to this and I'm actually glad you asked. What Clinton did was in the Oval Office inside the White House. Clinton has a right to privacy but when these relations take place in the Oval Office, people should know.

[Akno21]

Yes, what is your opinion on the amount of information the press should be entitled to? Every day it seems, newspapers or networks are suing courts or the government to release files. Should the media have access to that stuff?

I thank the Senator for his question and I will be happy to answer it. I don't believe that a network or newspaper or any form of the press should be able to sue for information regarding a candidate's personal life. I use that example because it is the most likely situation when the election roles around. Example: Jack Ryan in Illinois.

  Mr. Ryan and his ex-wife wanted to keep their divorce records sealed and for good reasons. However, the media didn't seem to care about the candidate and his ex-wife's wishes and just went right through their personal lives. This is wrong and I would support limits on the information that the media can receive regarding a candidate's private relations. If a husband and his ex-wife or a wife and her ex-husband wish to keep their records sealed, that is their right to privacy.

Did Bill Clinton have a right to privacy? Or was that a special situation?

I knew the question was a setup to this and I'm actually glad you asked. What Clinton did was in the Oval Office inside the White House. Clinton has a right to privacy but when these relations take place in the Oval Office, people should know.

So then can we know what Dick Cheney's Environmental Task Force meetings were about? (I don't mean to be debating you in a debate that isn't my own, but sometimes it's important to press people for answers)

[Keystone Phil]

Yes, what is your opinion on the amount of information the press should be entitled to? Every day it seems, newspapers or networks are suing courts or the government to release files. Should the media have access to that stuff?

I thank the Senator for his question and I will be happy to answer it. I don't believe that a network or newspaper or any form of the press should be able to sue for information regarding a candidate's personal life. I use that example because it is the most likely situation when the election roles around. Example: Jack Ryan in Illinois.

  Mr. Ryan and his ex-wife wanted to keep their divorce records sealed and for good reasons. However, the media didn't seem to care about the candidate and his ex-wife's wishes and just went right through their personal lives. This is wrong and I would support limits on the information that the media can receive regarding a candidate's private relations. If a husband and his ex-wife or a wife and her ex-husband wish to keep their records sealed, that is their right to privacy.

Did Bill Clinton have a right to privacy? Or was that a special situation?

I knew the question was a setup to this and I'm actually glad you asked. What Clinton did was in the Oval Office inside the White House. Clinton has a right to privacy but when these relations take place in the Oval Office, people should know.

So then can we know what Dick Cheney's Environmental Task Force meetings were about? (I don't mean to be debating you in a debate that isn't my own, but sometimes it's important to press people for answers)

If the media wants to sue for that information as long as it doesn't infringe on Cheney's personal records that he and others want sealed, then that's fine. It is up to the courts if the records should be made public but look at it like this...eventually the media would want to sue for other documents that are official White House buisness and there is some point where you have to draw the line.