The Office of Senator Adam Griffin (SEN. GRIFFIN ANNOUNCES SOMETHING)

[Adam Griffin]

GRIFFIN FOR AT-LARGE SENATE - CAMPAIGN HQ



I've waited until now to open my headquarters, since we had a regularly-scheduled election in progress. I look forward to adding information and answering any and all questions over the next few days, and I will try to maintain a balance that is informative yet doesn't make people's eyes glaze over from too much banter.

It's good to be back. As someone who's been in the game for almost two years now, I've seen a lot for someone who is still so "new". Friends come and go, as do enemies; parties rise and fall; entire movements shift, crumble and emerge. The more things change, however, the more they stay the same.

It seems like Atlasia is now more competitive than I can remember at any point since joining shortly after dissolution. We currently have a Labor-friendly Federalist President, and a Senate that was completely divided until this most recent vacancy. Because of this, it is hard to accomplish anything of substance that has even an iota of controversy attached to it these days. Don't the people of Atlasia deserve better?

This Senate election may very well be the most important election since dissolution, and certainly will be the most important one since July of last year. The person holding this seat will determine whether we will have continued gridlock or a governing majority that matches our progressive, socialist, leftist and moderate hero constituencies.

To kick off this campaign, I introduce my first three policy concerns that I'd like to address if elected to the Senate:

IMPLEMENTING ALL OF THE A-CCM

Last year, President Marokai, Vice President Duke, the Senate and myself as GM worked hard to pass the Atlasian-Canadian Common Market Agreement. As you know, this cemented an increased amount of economic and cultural connectivity for our two countries going into the future, but some loose ends remain in the amendment. The past two Registrars General have refused to acknowledge the most exciting part of this amendment - the part that allows Canadian and Atlasian residents who are Atlasian citizens to vote in our elections. If elected to the Senate, I will aggressively push for the necessary amendments and/or statutes to ensure that we can all have fun in Canada.

RESPECTING REGIONAL RIGHTS

I have always supported regional rights, especially when it was to my benefit. Way back when, my Five Region Strategy was successful in bolstering activity through all regional governments, and I wish that the strategy would have been continued. It is no secret that the Midwest and Pacific have had informal talks about merging their two regions. I am not sure of the exact count, but it would appear that a majority of residents in each region support this measure. Frankly, without a sixth progressive, leftist and/or Labor Senator, this will never occur.

The Senate has the power with a simple majority to address this issue. Unfortunately, progress has been thwarted because some are worried about an imbalance being created that cannot be solved via constitutional amendment. I reject this notion, and will work tirelessly to ensure these regions are allowed to pursue the pathway that is best for them. I will elaborate further on remedies to solve the resulting imbalance that would be present with one "missing" Senator in the coming days.

NATIONALIZING ELECTRICITY

I have always stood for regionalizing key utilities at the regional level, and have supported similar intents federally, too. Energy is not a job-dense industry; energy companies can essentially drain dry all the natural resources in this great country without creating anywhere near the number of jobs that we'd expect in other industries for similar profits to be made. The result is very little competition, higher prices, accumulation of liquidity and in some cases, increased income inequality - all of which lead to a volatile, unnecessarily expensive scenario in which potential economic growth is ignored in the idea of the "free market", something of which does not exist in the slightest in the energy sector.

By eliminating the concept of profit from the equation - and only breaking even on labor/operating costs - we free up anywhere from 1-2% of GDP for direct injection by consumers into other aspects of the economy - where profit actually equates job growth. Such a move over the long-term would provide an additional ladder for millions with which they can climb out of poverty and be a part of a thriving, healthy economic engine. It also will reduce energy costs for businesses of all sizes.


This is all - for now. I look forward to any questions you may have (so long as they're not catty).

[Flake]

Endorsed

(you know, except for the nationalization part)

[TNF]

Endorsed (especially on the nationalization part)

[Хahar 🤔]

Национализация исторический императив.

[Associate Justice PiT]

RESPECTING REGIONAL RIGHTS

I have always supported regional rights, especially when it was to my benefit. Way back when, my Five Region Strategy was successful in bolstering activity through all regional governments, and I wish that the strategy would have been continued. It is no secret that the Midwest and Pacific have had informal talks about merging their two regions. I am not sure of the exact count, but it would appear that a majority of residents in each region support this measure. Frankly, without a sixth progressive, leftist and/or Labor Senator, this will never occur.

The Senate has the power with a simple majority to address this issue. Unfortunately, progress has been thwarted because some are worried about an imbalance being created that cannot be solved via constitutional amendment. I reject this notion, and will work tirelessly to ensure these regions are allowed to pursue the pathway that is best for them. I will elaborate further on remedies to solve the resulting imbalance that would be present with one "missing" Senator in the coming days.

     Ah, the Five Region Strategy. While I didn't like the way you went about it, I do miss the days of the IDS's population not declining.

[Adam Griffin]

RESPECTING REGIONAL RIGHTS

I have always supported regional rights, especially when it was to my benefit. Way back when, my Five Region Strategy was successful in bolstering activity through all regional governments, and I wish that the strategy would have been continued. It is no secret that the Midwest and Pacific have had informal talks about merging their two regions. I am not sure of the exact count, but it would appear that a majority of residents in each region support this measure. Frankly, without a sixth progressive, leftist and/or Labor Senator, this will never occur.

The Senate has the power with a simple majority to address this issue. Unfortunately, progress has been thwarted because some are worried about an imbalance being created that cannot be solved via constitutional amendment. I reject this notion, and will work tirelessly to ensure these regions are allowed to pursue the pathway that is best for them. I will elaborate further on remedies to solve the resulting imbalance that would be present with one "missing" Senator in the coming days.

     Ah, the Five Region Strategy. While I didn't like the way you went about it, I do miss the days of the IDS's population not declining.

Yes, it is truly a shame to see it so deflated. I weep for my homeland, but at least I can see North Carolina from my house.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Are you willing to serve as GM in the event you are elected to the Senate if the President is able to pull some strings to make it happen? If not, are you prepared to deal with the consequences?

[Adam Griffin]

Are you willing to serve as GM in the event you are elected to the Senate if the President is able to pull some strings to make it happen? If not, are you prepared to deal with the consequences?

If all of that were to play out and no one qualified were able to fill the position, absolutely. You know I love to serve this country in as many ways as possible, and you even more so

[Fritz]

The past two Registrars General have refused to acknowledge the most exciting part of this amendment - the part that allows Canadian and Atlasian residents who are Atlasian citizens to vote in our elections.

What exactly have I "refused to acknowledge"?  Is there a law I don't know about, permitting registrations in Canada?  If so, why have I not been sued?

[sentinel]

I endorse you for GM.

[Adam Griffin]

The past two Registrars General have refused to acknowledge the most exciting part of this amendment - the part that allows Canadian and Atlasian residents who are Atlasian citizens to vote in our elections.

What exactly have I "refused to acknowledge"?  Is there a law I don't know about, permitting registrations in Canada?  If so, why have I not been sued?

Perhaps I'm mistaken in your case (and I'd love to be), but I definitely recall being told that you would not enforce the provision below. I left about two weeks before you became RG, so maybe something got lost in translation? At any rate, I would think that someone would have moved to Canada by now under other circumstances. I know that homely refused to acknowledge Article V Section 5 of the Atlasian-Canadian Common Market Agreement as RG due to a lack of clarification, which states:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm guessing no one sued because of laziness?

[Fritz]

Forgive me, but I had no idea that existed.  Seeing it now, I am inclined to permit Canadian registrations.

Could you post a link, please?

[Adam Griffin]

Forgive me, but I had no idea that existed.  Seeing it now, I am inclined to permit Canadian registrations.

Could you post a link, please?

Here's the Wiki link and the original debate:

https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Atlasian-Canadian_Common_Market_Agreement
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=174563.0

[Adam Griffin]

TOWN HALL - ELECTIONS AND WHATNOT

With so much buzz in the air about various electoral and constitutional issues, let's talk about them! I hope y'all have some questions. I've been thinking about three items in particular today that relate to this topic, so I thought I'd express them and see what the public also thinks about these issues.


Between the recently vetoed deregistration rights that would eliminate deregistration, the issue of invalidated ballots in close elections and the discussion of who exactly should be in charge of operating voting booths for constitutional amendments, there's a lot to discuss.

First of all, I support the status quo when it comes to deregistration. It should be an option, and I have the experience to say that it should only be used in dire situations. We have mechanisms in place to prevent the most likely impulsive deregistrations from occurring (to my knowledge, the 24 hour rule has caught no fewer than five people since it was adopted). People should be able to leave the game completely if they choose.

As far as the process of constitutional referendums go, I tend to agree with my opponent that the federal government should adopt an expanded presence in their administration. This is not an issue on which I'm blinded by hyper-partisanship; I'd be inclined to support the current system if the current system produced consistent handling of the process. Unfortunately, however, the ongoing flaws of the regional system exacerbate this problem and make it an issue. Perhaps if the underlying regional issues had been addressed sooner, I'd feel differently. Since that hasn't been something that a super-majority of regions has decided to deal with just yet, I lean the way I do for the time being.

Finally, what can said about invalidated ballots? The most recent brou-ha-ha exposes weaknesses in our voting system, but no clear solution to the problem is apparent (to me, anyway). I'm not so sure that this is an issue that can, will or even should be addressed given the (presumably) large amount of effort it'd take to enforce the countermeasures. What do you think?

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

Finally, what can said about invalidated ballots? The most recent brou-ha-ha exposes weaknesses in our voting system, but no clear solution to the problem is apparent (to me, anyway). I'm not so sure that this is an issue that can, will or even should be addressed given the (presumably) large amount of effort it'd take to enforce the countermeasures. What do you think?

If we had a secret ballot (like every other democracy) this wouldn't be a problem. Just saying.

[Adam Griffin]

Finally, what can said about invalidated ballots? The most recent brou-ha-ha exposes weaknesses in our voting system, but no clear solution to the problem is apparent (to me, anyway). I'm not so sure that this is an issue that can, will or even should be addressed given the (presumably) large amount of effort it'd take to enforce the countermeasures. What do you think?

If we had a secret ballot (like every other democracy) this wouldn't be a problem. Just saying.

Yes, that is the one thing that came to mind while typing that out. It can be done and I thought of a way it could be handled pretty well many months ago, but it'd be quite a time-consuming process in how the ballots would need to be generated and/or handled in order to provide public verification (people would still vote publicly, but no one save for election administrator and a supervisor would know for whom they voted). Overall, the effort would be complex to handle legislatively and probably equally so once in practice, and we know how discussions about complex things always go around here. Did you have a specific plan considered? I'd love to see if there's another way to do it that I've not considered.

[windjammer]

Endorsed!

[Хahar 🤔]

Finally, what can said about invalidated ballots? The most recent brou-ha-ha exposes weaknesses in our voting system, but no clear solution to the problem is apparent (to me, anyway). I'm not so sure that this is an issue that can, will or even should be addressed given the (presumably) large amount of effort it'd take to enforce the countermeasures. What do you think?

If we had a secret ballot (like every other democracy) this wouldn't be a problem. Just saying.

It would take a great deal of fun out of the game. On a fundamental level, this is an elections game, and the highlight of the game is elections.

[Napoleon]

If elected, will you sponsor a bill to allow Traffic-based Corporal Punishment?

[Adam Griffin]

If elected, will you sponsor a bill to allow Traffic-based Corporal Punishment?

While that almost sounds hot, I am not entirely convinced a) that there will be significant support for such a measure in the Senate and b) that we should be encouraging our men and women in uniform to beat on people even more so than they do already. This would be a more-apt way to address the problem, I feel.

[Gass3268]

Endorsed!

[President Tyrion]

Endorsed!

[Adam Griffin]

FREEDOM TO TRAVEL

One of the first issues I brought up a couple of days ago relates to the Atlasian-Canadian Common Market Agreement. We have initially had difficulties with bringing to fruition all of its components, naming the one relating to limited jurisdictional authority (being able to move to Canada). Since then, the RG has investigated this issue and we appear to be on the verge of resolving this issue! I'm very excited that we may very well be able to address one of my initial policy concerns before the election even begins.

But what is the future for Atlasia and how we interact with our neighbors? Trade and relations with Latin America present an array of opportunities for us to broaden our country's clout and improve the lives and working conditions of (potentially) hundreds of millions of people who do not reside within our country or within its aura of limited jurisdictional authority.

Mexico is obviously the biggest and most prime example of where a future expansion of such policies could take us. We need assessments from our SoEA and discussion throughout the country on this important possibility, and so I'd like to begin the discussion of how or if we should embark upon such an agreement with Mexico like we did with Canada.

[Marokai Backbeat]

I'm happy to see someone pushing electricity nationalization, among all these other things. The former never got far back when, but I'm happy to support you all the same and hope you have better luck. You would make a great Senator. I endorse you.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

It seems like Atlasia is now more competitive than I can remember at any point since joining shortly after dissolution. We currently have a Labor-friendly Federalist President, and a Senate that was completely divided until this most recent vacancy. Because of this, it is hard to accomplish anything of substance that has even an iota of controversy attached to it these days. Don't the people of Atlasia deserve better?

I would hate to think that the 30 plus bills and record setting 91 amendments to legislation were all just so much trash. At the very least those who worked hard on passing them would consider them to have been of substance.

This Senate election may very well be the most important election since dissolution, and certainly will be the most important one since July of last year. The person holding this seat will determine whether we will have continued gridlock or a governing majority that matches our progressive, socialist, leftist and moderate hero constituencies.

How is record setting numbers of legislation in spite of a record number of amendments and redrafts to be considered gridlock? And the percentage of failed bills is about the same as previous Senates, around 20%-25% or so. Just because nationalization and so forth is rejected, doesn't mean we have gridlock, even from a Progressive standpoint.
 

RESPECTING REGIONAL RIGHTS

I have always supported regional rights, especially when it was to my benefit. Way back when, my Five Region Strategy was successful in bolstering activity through all regional governments, and I wish that the strategy would have been continued. It is no secret that the Midwest and Pacific have had informal talks about merging their two regions. I am not sure of the exact count, but it would appear that a majority of residents in each region support this measure. Frankly, without a sixth progressive, leftist and/or Labor Senator, this will never occur.

The Senate has the power with a simple majority to address this issue. Unfortunately, progress has been thwarted because some are worried about an imbalance being created that cannot be solved via constitutional amendment. I reject this notion, and will work tirelessly to ensure these regions are allowed to pursue the pathway that is best for them. I will elaborate further on remedies to solve the resulting imbalance that would be present with one "missing" Senator in the coming days.

Anything can be solved via a Constitutional Amendment as far as I know. Also, I am pretty sure the Senate approved merging the governments of the Midwest and the Pacific by a wide margin. There is a reluctance understandably to wade into "Senate Altering" measures that could easily lead to what would otherwise indeed be passed by a simple majority, to instead end up failing miserably when the region was in crises and there was a sense of urgency.

NATIONALIZING ELECTRICITY

I have always stood for regionalizing key utilities at the regional level, and have supported similar intents federally, too. Energy is not a job-dense industry; energy companies can essentially drain dry all the natural resources in this great country without creating anywhere near the number of jobs that we'd expect in other industries for similar profits to be made. The result is very little competition, higher prices, accumulation of liquidity and in some cases, increased income inequality - all of which lead to a volatile, unnecessarily expensive scenario in which potential economic growth is ignored in the idea of the "free market", something of which does not exist in the slightest in the energy sector.

By eliminating the concept of profit from the equation - and only breaking even on labor/operating costs - we free up anywhere from 1-2% of GDP for direct injection by consumers into other aspects of the economy - where profit actually equates job growth. Such a move over the long-term would provide an additional ladder for millions with which they can climb out of poverty and be a part of a thriving, healthy economic engine. It also will reduce energy costs for businesses of all sizes.

My preference would be to break up the monopolies with regionalized or even localized electrical co-opts that don't just buy from and resell, but can even somehow compete directly with the power monpolies. I doubt the ability of a federally nationalzied system to reduce costs to the consumer and businesses, if for no other reason then the risk for politically motivated decision making and the lack of a more localized community focus. In fact there was a meeting here in NC just today or yesterday between an Environmentalist group and the Libertarian Conservative John Locke Foundation to dicuss just how Duke Energy could be reigned in.