NationStates

New Zepuha wrote:Senator Nuckerberg is now open to questions.

Pyreneesia wrote:

New Zepuha wrote:Senator Nuckerberg is now open to questions.

What is your opinion on the current LGBTQ pride parade going on?

Grand Longueville wrote:

Pyreneesia wrote:What is your opinion on the current LGBTQ pride parade going on?

The Reverend Senator reminds the good Senator Nuckerberg that he has no obligation to answer this.

Pyreneesia wrote:

New Zepuha wrote:Senator Nuckerberg is now open to questions.

What is your opinion on the current LGBTQ pride parade going on?

Quebec and Atlantic Canada wrote:

Trotskylvania wrote:Secretary-General Tal is open for questions.

What are your thoughts on the civil war in Syria, and what do you think is the best course of option there?

Saul Califas - Communist Party

Account Name: Free South Califas
Occupation: Consultant (human relations; linguistics of politics and law)
Party Position(s):

Senior Whip

Positions in Government:

1st Deputy Leader of the Opposition

Constituency: Meiderup (310)
Political Ideology: Libertarian Communist
Family: Domestic partner
Background: Labor union organizer, democratic workplace organizer, disability rights activist, management consultant specializing in HR policies driving greater inclusion of cognitive difference and attacking unemployment. Education in linguistics with a focus on intersections with sociocultural anthropology.
Faith: Secular Humanist
Likes: Representation by delegation, free federalism, express positive mandate, instant recall, community assemblies, popular law, abolition of police and prisons, free education, cultural freedom (state should have no control over culture, merely fund it), respect for the inviolable and fundamental dignity of all people and separately of all other living things in harmony with the ecosystem which sustains life, and the destruction of all exploitation and unjust discrimination and violence; effective solidarity with all oppressed people; in short, revolution.
Dislikes: Exploitation, hate, unjust discriminaton, etc.
Any Questions from the Public to be answered?

Welsh Cowboy wrote:

(Image)

Powerbrokers
June 15 2013

*Theme Music and Title Sequence*

HENRY AIKEN: Good evening Aurentina, and welcome to Powerbrokers, where we talk to the decision makers in Aurentina. I'm Henry Aiken, and tonight, unfortunately we do not have the education panel promised on Tuesday, because of scheduling difficulties. However, we will have a discussion with Senator Saul Califas (FSC). He is here to discuss the various projects he's working on in the Senate as well as the policies and platform of the Communist Party. But first, I'm pleased to be joined by Senator James Fulflood. He's a member of the Liberal Democrats and he's here to discuss the LibDems' potential new coalition arrangement and some of the legislation currently being debated in the Senate. First, Senator, let me ask you how you feel about the new centrist or center-right coalition the Liberal Democrats appear to be joining. Is this preferable to the Progress Coalition?

SENATOR JAMES FULFLOOD: I'd like to start by thanking you for having me on your programme. And this new coalition is interesting and we'll see how it pans out. To be honest I think some of the mistakes which were evident in the Progress Coalition are still coming back to haunt us here - the invitation of too many parties with too many different ideals. And in terms of my personal politics I prefer the Progress Coalition, where I was fairly close to, probably a little right of, the centre, to the new coalition where I might be well on the left. But I've probably given you the wrong opinion. With an active government and cabinet, I'm sure this coalition can do a better job than the Progress Coalition did - it unfortunately suffered a few setbacks; the inactivity of Cornelius and FreeSoc and the difference of opinion evident in President Sallustro (and others of course) and some of the communists. If we can keep this new outfit broadly centrist or at least not marginalising any group, it should work.

AIKEN: Some of the negotiators working on the new coalition called it primarily "anti-communist." Do you believe that the main function of this coalition is to oppose the far left? Do you believe a coalition based on opposition to an ideology can stand?

FULFLOOD: Not at all. Personally, I'm not anti-communist, and I don't think most of the Lib Dems are, particularly. In fact I'm not completely against any political belief for the most part; most have at least something reasonable to say or do. I think, when we think about cooperation in politics, we have to think about what we could do more than what we could oppose. If you've got an 'everyone but the communists' coalition, which is what it is in danger of turning into, then it's going to break apart in days; we'll suddenly discover that perhaps it isn't a good idea to put anarchists and ultra-conservatives together in a coalition. And it'll also only serve to alienate the left further, which can't be good. Most people in the Communist Party and pretty much everyone in the Red-Greens, who aren't even nearly far left, but I've heard some people, are completely reasonable and willing to work with everyone else, and I don't want this to change. In fact, maybe the left is more mature than those opposing it; they're often willing to cooperate and put aside ideological differences. So if the main purpose of the coalition is to oppose the far left, then that's not something I want to be in.

AIKEN: Senator, do you then support the Liberal Democrats joining this coalition? And if not, are you considering leaving the party?

FULFLOOD: I support us having a constructive role in government, because that's the best way to get our voices heard. But there were a couple of talks of inviting a party I don't think would work well, um, okay, the NIFP, and if that happened and succeeded, so if they had influence on the policies, I said I might slightly consider leaving, reluctantly of course. But I said that in jest, and the great thing about the Lib Dems is that even if we're in a coalition with someone completely opposite to us, each of us can still vote how we want; our whip is pretty much non-existent. We're a great, consistently active party where I feel I'm among people I can relate to politically. So I'm definitely staying with the Lib Dems, unless something really drastic happens, and even then I definitely won't be the first out of the door.

AIKEN: To move to a policy discussion, how important is passing education legislation, in your mind? How do you feel about the proposals on the table?

FULFLOOD: It's really important. A big thing the Senate needs to do is spend its money on big things which will help Aurentina. While we've got police out of the way, healthcare, education, transport and even utilities, that most basic of things, are still just flopping about in a semi-anarchical, willy-nilly sort of way. The current bills? Well, they're OK. Unfortunately we seem to have personal bias creeping into the system, towards science or classics or against languages, and that's bad. Personally, I don't think enough Aurentine is in there; we've got probably a few million speakers, and it's being neglected by Leishaageners when many of us, including a substantial proportion of my hometown of Lüborg's folk, use it every day. And as an island surrounded by millions of speakers of many diverse languages, we want to ensure we can converse with our neighbours. I also want to ensure art is in there from early on, because creativity is so underestimated and is so useful in many occupations, even my own. I'm no good at art anyway, but that doesn't stop me! But overall, what we want is an education system that teaches our children, of which I have three, in a broad and rounded way, and helps them get the most out of their lives, intellectually and vocationally, as a worker and as an individual.

AIKEN: Do you believe in expansive vocational training? You mentioned the importance of arts, but do you support allowing children to take a more career-oriented path?

FULFLOOD: The thing is that people often mistake a lot of school subjects as things which aren't really relevant in the real world, and that's not my view. Like History, for example, is not just useful for being a historian, but develops analytical, critical and memory skills which can be used pretty much everywhere. Every subject improves your skill set, and art, at least when I studied it, is so different from a lot of other things so gives you stuff you otherwise wouldn't get. And it's a really good way to get children to express themselves, which is proper important. But yeah, vocational training is important too. However I wouldn't want to see that before 16, because very few people stick exactly to what they wanted to do before then. And we have to ensure we don't write off people who are doing vocational training. Before they go to an apprenticeship or polytechnic or whatever, we have to make sure they get an education at the standard that our more academic students are receiving.

AIKEN: Do you believe in very specific, nationalized standards for graduating students?

FULFLOOD: I think we need national standards, and someone living in, I don't know, an industrial part of Sant-Jülia, has to be getting the same grades as someone from a rich suburb of Leishaagen. But specific? Not so much. I think having maybe 10 grades by which we measure academic ability, with the top 5 to 10 percent getting the highest in any one subject. But I don't think we should put a lot of focus on exams; we need maybe one main qualification, like in President Sallustro's and my proposal for Abiturs, and a secondary one which doesn't contain years of material. Education happens best when we have good teachers who are allowed to be a little liberal with their teaching style, while sticking to a good sound national curriculum to make sure we're not failing any child.

AIKEN: Thank you, Senator Fulflood, for coming on. After this short break, we will be joined by Senator Saul Califas. We will be right back.

*Commercial Break*

AIKEN: Welcome back to Powerbrokers. Thanks for staying with us. Senator Saul Califas joins me now. He is a Communist, and it's my pleasure to have him here. Thanks for coming on the show, Senator.

SENATOR SAUL CALIFAS: Thanks for having me on. I appreciate the chance to share my perspective, Henry.

AIKEN: Senator, I'd to like discuss some of your more abstract political thinking. What ideology do you believe defines you most? How does this align with your Communist Party colleagues?

CALIFAS: I have done a lot of thinking on this throughout my life and I have moved significantly throughout time. I actually used to be a Progressive Conservative, then a Social Democrat. After experiencing more of the hardships of life firsthand, and witnessing a massive wildcat strike in Sevilla, I was moved to become an Anarchist. After some frustrating political experiences in Anarcho-Collectivist organizations, I first began to embrace Communism, in the Anarchist form proposed by scientists like Peter Kropotkin. Then I became a Social Ecologist, a type of Anarchist who, as it happens, can hold certain kinds of municipal elected office. To answer the first question, today I am a Libertarian Communist, a movement which is mostly indistinguishable from Anarchist Communism other than some differences in academic culture and a certain distance from Anarchism's historic departure from parliamentarism. I want to stress that I didn't 'grow out of' Anarchism, I'm just working on a different approach to the same goals. After all, most Anarchists are aiming for Libertarian Communism as an end goal in society. As to the second part, I'm pretty close to a number of people in the Party, politically speaking. I think the Prime Minister and I hold some similar ideas, and I hope it is not too much to say he is also similar to the Anarchists in many ways. Others come to mind, but I don't want to focus too much on who is in what camp, because I think what is really great about our Communist Party here in Aurentina is that we stress democracy and accept a wide range of views. The part of our platform that stands out most to me is how revolution can only happen step by step if the people's sovereignty is to be respected, and more importantly, each step can only happen if the people think it's necessary and appropriate. It's actually very similar to an Anarchist country like Chiapas in my mind, or at least allows that kind of thing to develop if the people want it, but fundamentally it is sort of a Democratic Communist party. So as a Libertarian I'm probably on the far bottom left end of the party along with a few others, if you think of a political compass.

AIKEN: Senator, many people associate Communism with the Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc and the oppression that went along with those nations. How do the Communists of Aurentina seek to change the perception of Communists? What do you want the citizens of Aurentina to know about you and your party?

CALIFAS: Great question. I think it makes some sense that that's the first thing that pops into a lot of people's minds. The party that ruled those areas created a lot of misery and was of course an enemy of freedom in any appreciable sense. Although I probably shouldn't take too much of your time going into the details, any student of history will appreciate a close examination of the political debate between the different kinds of Communists in the Revolutionary period of Russia, which I think began to end rapidly when Lenin repressed the Soviets in the late 1910s. Lenin agreed with some of our political opponents in this Senate, that civil war should be a time of obedience and respect for central command. I totally disagree - it is always time to be open to other political perspectives. Anarchists at the time, who called themselves libertarians and ran a paper called "The Voice of Labor", denounced the Bolshevik Party early on, and warned revolutionaries that they would soon be betrayed. Sadly, they were right. However, there were other Communist traditions active at that time, not just the Anarchist Communists as they would have called themselves, but also other non-authoritarian forms of Communism, and they have only grown stronger in the intervening time as the world has witnessed the failure of Authoritarian Communism. Basically, what I want citizens of Aurentina to know about the Communist Party is that we reject authoritarian control of life. We want people to be free to vote with their conscience, but also control the product of their work. People should be skeptical of all politicians, but I think the Communist Party is the best way for Aurentinians to express their support for a progressive, democratic society respecting workers, but with room for those who cannot work to live a full, enriching life and contribute in their own ways.

AIKEN: You often talk, Senator, about your personal struggles with autism and are a strong voice for autistic or otherwise socially shunned citizens. Do you see yourself as standing up for those who cannot or will not stand up for themselves?

CALIFAS: Thank you, Henry. Indeed, that has been a focus of my contributions to debate. Recently, Senator Fulflood won my sponsorship of the Time Zone Act after not only removing the requirement for Daylight Savings Time, but also stipulating positively that we will not implement DST, which I am thankful for on a personal level. Other Senators have expressed their solidarity with my argument on that front, even if they come to different conclusions. Another Senator, apologies to them but I've forgotten the name, showed great flexibility and solidarity in agreeing with my arguments for broadband internet access for the unemployed, which invoked audiovisual editors and similar occupations, but also hinged on the need for people to use the internet both as a workplace and to ameliorate interview concerns, who have that kind of social friction for any reason. So yes, I think I have a responsibility to point out how our decisions will affect autistics, people with social anxiety disorders like ASD and PTSD, which also affects me, and people with disabilities and major differences in general. While other Senators want to help these people out, they haven't had the kind of experiences that would put those considerations at the forefront. I think a lot of us in the Senate struggle to find a balance between policy that works for most people, and a firm respect for nondiscrimination policies. I try to help provide my perspective, although one Senator was also right to point out that most people are not autistic and policies have to work most of the time. Anti-discrimination is a key part of my platform, though.

AIKEN: Before we get to some of the legislation you're working on, would you mind explaining your recent disagreements with President Sallustro?

CALIFAS: Sure, Henry. Things have calmed down between the President and I since I threatened to seek a restraining order. Frankly, I'm not sure if we have those yet, but I think we came to an understanding. President Sallustro is one of a few people in his party who apparently didn't like the coalition terms they agreed to: no shared economic platform; let the Communists, P-Cs and center-leftists propose what they may. We have lived up to the terms of the coalition, and not just in this way...Well, let me back up a notch, this is all still getting me a bit flustered. Basically, it all seems to hinge around the recent Worker Empowerment Act, which came up to vote and did not pass. Though a compromise proposal, it represented the desires of the Communist Party as stated in our platform: for more workers to have control over their work, for democratic means of restoring income equality step by step. The WEA also did some important things that we all share as goals, like recognize the right to organize at work. But it's been portrayed as some kind of "backstabbing", which we have actually perceived as a backstabbing itself. None of us are quite sure what the P-Cs were expecting, if not Communist proposals; are we supposed to be entirely silenced by the fact that about half of the Senate disagrees with us on economic issues? Anyway, it's become a cause for the President to try to weaken the coalition, and I'm sorry to say he's exploited it to the hilt, approaching each of the other coalition members and lying to them, i.e. telling both communist parties we were the one true communist party, etc. He abandoned his plans since the new elections are coming up so soon anyway, but not before making vague threats at the Communist HQ about involving the military against us - referencing the defense committee as if it were his military, then saying "when we start something, we finish it", as if suggesting a coup. Unfortunately, right-wingers have joked about this to me, as well. I made it clear to President Sallustro in multiple venues that such threats were inappropriate and finally threatened to seek a restraining order against him, although actually I was just worried for my physical safety. Senator Blumenthal tried to play a strong hand in favor of keeping the government together, and his actions have been worthy of applause, but with looming elections, the coalition seems to have finally fallen apart. Left-center parties are being courted by the left and right. I suppose this is what the President wanted. I just hope he lives up to his next agreement.

AIKEN: I do want to talk about some of the legislation Senator Califas is working on drafting, but we have to take a short commercial break. Stay with us. This is Powerbrokers.

*Commercial Break*

AIKEN: Welcome back to Powerbrokers. Senator Califas is still with me. Senator, I'd like to talk about the Economic Democratisation Act, which you're coauthoring. As far as I can tell, it gives workers the right to seize control of the business they work for from their employers. Why should one group of citizens be allowed to seize property from another group?

CALIFAS: Actually, we're only proposing for workers to assume full control of the business in cases of bankruptcy or foreclosure. Obviously in those cases the only alternative is to brace for a spike in unemployment as we wait to see if the workers and productive capital will be repurposed by the new ownership. I hope we can all agree to prevent that kind of economic insecurity. If nobody owns a factory anymore, workers should be able to form an association to keep it open and run it themselves. This is an area where I'm especially hoping for some buy-in from our usual economic opponents, who may be interested in this as a stabilizing measure. That being said, there is another part of the current draft of the EDA, which would allow only a partial transfer of assets or of responsibilities in a particular workplace, if an association of the workers proposes this, and over 70% of the employees agree. The state would compensate owners for any attendant loss in assets at the current market rate - we think the compensation is important, and of course we're open to ideas about how to make sure the state is paid back for this. I'm hoping the supermajority, plus the partial nature of the transfer, should protect employers from any worry that they are going to lose their capacity to make profits. That being said, we haven't really brought the bill outside of the Senate's left wing for debate yet, so it may end up looking different than it does now. Basically, other than the foreclosure and bankruptcy scenarios, we think that if there's some particular aspect of production where the workers already know how to do it themselves and think they can drive that section steadier than the management has, they should be allowed to do that. That's the short answer.

AIKEN: Do you believe you can pull in parties to support the EDA such as the Liberal Democrats or CSP, who believe in a mixed market? Does the bill push the balance too far towards workers?

CALIFAS: That's a good question, Henry. We're hoping that the Senate thinks the balance is acceptable, yet, we are of course always open to some compromise in good faith. We all want society to be better for more people, and I think a lot of mixed-market parties can agree with us on that. Of course as Communists we have our own ideals, but we are certainly hoping that Lib Dems, Common Sense, New Social, Totally Rad and other centrist groups will be willing to work with us on this. I can tell you that there's no disagreement between us and the bulk of Red-Green on the EDA right now, but I can't honestly predict how the other parties react to the way this affects the balance for them.

AIKEN: Now we're going to move on to other bills you're working on. Under the Collective Benefit Option Act, workers could receive government assistance collectively in order to start a business. Is this a fair assessment of this legislation? Do you think this legislation might be slightly more palatable to the majority of Senators than the EDA, for example?

CALIFAS: That's a fair summary, Henry, I'd only add that these businesses would have to be controlled democratically by the recipients or by all the company's workers together, so we are asking these benefit recipients to be fair to each other. It's modeled on something they've done in Italy, where if you are already receiving some kind of welfare payment, you can get together with other recipients and get your benefits as one lump sum, or as collateral on a loan. It's contingent on having submitted a feasible business plan, and we're also going to put some kind of ceiling on it, which is probably the detail that is most likely to change. It actually started out as one big bill with FEISMA and PWCA in it, which also support self-managed work like the two bills we are discussing. EDA essentially brings democracy to some existing businesses, while CBOA starts new democratic businesses. They're two sides of the same coin for me, but it's safe to say that the right wing sees them differently. I've been happy to receive some help drafting it not just from the far left but also from Senator Nihl, who agrees with me that the Collective Benefit Option can help with unemployment. That being said, our next push is for the EDA and we obviously want to put one forward which is acceptable to over 50 active senators or so, judging from the last round of voting. If nothing else, I think the transfer of foreclosed capital to democratic associations of the workers would do a lot for economic stability.

AIKEN: So you believe that not only could this bill help workers, but help businesses and the economy in general? Could you explain the more general economic benefits from a bill like this?

CALIFAS: Yes, Henry, I do. The EDA would do a lot to keep fixed capital in operation if it is still working and a private business plan falls through. I think in the event of bankruptcy or foreclosure, it is tragic for workers to lose their jobs over what might even be a forgiveable error in management decisions, when they are capable of sustaining the work. I think in that sense it goes well with our other proposals about collectives, like the free education program for self-management, individual and collectively in equal share. What's really exciting about the EDA is it generates this opportunity for existing business operations to continue, and I do think it could help stabilize the business cycle as long as we give everyone a fair chance to run their business. That's in the case of full transfer after a business shuts down. In the case of a partial transfer, after more than 70% of the workers in a business decide they are ready to manage some of the responsibilities or assets themselves, the owners don't lose any transfered value because they are compensated by the state, while the workers have this great opportunity to grow their skills in management from a perspective that is inclusive of their colleagues. Not only can they learn management skills, but they can have more power over their tasks and their own skill development in other areas, making workers more versatile and productive, which could have benefits for employers in this age of rapidly advancing technology. This all will help more people have a better idea of what is at stake and what is being proposed in the political debates, too, particularly in technical fields, which could boost political engagement and is valuable for its own sake in a democracy regardless. So to sum it up, to me the highlights from the perspective of the whole marketplace are an increase in accuracy and spread of information, a new tool to fight unemployment, and a more skilled and more stable labor market. To focus on certain businesses, I think high-tech sectors will gain a lot from the new versatility of labor this could help support, and I also think that existing cooperative businesses are going to feel more stable and have more freedom to make long-term investments, which can only help the economy as well as the citizenry.

AIKEN: Do you believe that the Free Education for Innovative Self-Management Act, or FEISMA, is necessary, or do you feel that the same functions could be transferred to adult education centers or technical schools?

CALIFAS: I would definitely be inclined to support that kind of legislation whether or not my bill passes. The great thing about FEISMA in that sense is that it would essentially add resources for more students at existing education facilities if possible. On the other hand, if someone lives far away from physical campuses, the bill would give them access to educational resources online, or even a new campus location. It's all about giving people more skills to empower themselves. Workers specifically, which is not defined in a Communist sense as a class, but people who apply valuable skills for profit or social motives. Basically, in short, FEISMA does two things. The first is it adds a set of free basic classes for people who need business skills and, if a queue is ever necessary, only for those who can state a feasible goal. In this first part, the bill also allows the government to create new institutions to teach these classes if necessary, which would help lay the framework for a future expansion of adult education and technical schools. The second is it allows for public vouchers to cover necessary classes according to a specific business plan or existing business, again self-managed either individually or collectively. Vouchers would be managed by a new organisation tasked with delivering the most necessary, empowering and socially useful classes to the people who are most ready and willing to empower themselves in this way.

AIKEN: Could you explain the vouchers a bit more, Senator? Would those who don't receive vouchers have to pay to go to the classes?

CALIFAS: Actually, the vouchers are only for existing classes which are considered helpful to a specific democratic business, or business plan involving a democratic workplace. Sorry if I was unclear. Essentially, this refers to classes which everyone has to pay for now, such as they exist; if FEISMA passes, people with a plan that's good for the economy or society can use the voucher program to develop specific skills. The new organization, DEEVO, will analyze these plans and help those individuals take those classes for free. For example, a photographer might need to learn how to use new image editing software. An animal handler might need a criminal justice class to become a more effective contractor for the police. The other part of FEISMA, the basic core classes, that's free for everyone who needs them in this context. If the facilities don't exist yet, it would build them, which could include a lot of online facilities for more economic efficiency as well as disability access.

AIKEN: Now we come to the final bill you're working on: the Public Work Center Act. Could you give us a brief summary of why providing work for those who need it is necessary and beneficial?

CALIFAS: Sure, Henry, great question. You know, I think about this problem every time I see a pothole, or hear about understaffed services, or problems in engineering that need innovative solutions, or elders or children who need care, not to mention the often underpaid people who help them. The idea with PWCA is that there's work in our communities that really needs to get done, but isn't profitable for a business to do, and doesn't quite fit in the relevant authority's budget. If someone wants to pick up the slack, they can go to a new Public Work Center for basic training and equipment, then go do it. Not only does this help accomplish work that needs to get done for society to function at its best, it is focused on things that can help the community right away and sustain growth, like planting and harvesting publicly-owned or community-accessible crops, repairing city trucks, and all kinds of things. Alongside people just picking up the slack, PWCA helps people contribute to society and maintain their dignity during unemployment. It can help people with certain kinds of disabilities to manage their exposure to situations that exacerbate their pain and drain their emotional resources. Too, those with social skills deficits can do important work without going through the process of an employment interview, where social skills are too often equated with interest and competence in the job. Finally, my last goal with PWCA is to enable a productive lifestyle for people who don't want a boss, but feel they have something to offer to society at large. Of course, a reasonable percentage of these work hours would be supervised to make sure people were doing their duties.

AIKEN: That brings us to the end of our show, tonight. I want to thank you, Senator Califas, for joining us tonight. Powerbrokers will be back on the air Tuesday night at 7PM. We'll be joined by the Red-Greens Chairman Polvia, Senator Peter Meitner, and representatives from both the Reform Party and USLP. And with that, I'll sign off. Remember, it's your nation, and these are your leaders. Always make them live up to your standards.

Good night, Aurentina

Vincent Deloria - Common Sense Party

Account Name: Greater New York
Occupation: Senator, History Professor
Party Position(s):

-Senator

Positions in Government:

N/A

Constituency: Ästerplaas (Constituency 197)
Political Ideology: National Republicanism
Family: Wife Anne Deloria (b. 1986), Daughters Aquene Deloria (b. 2008) and Eva Deloria (b. 2011), Son Christoper Deloria (b. 2013)
Background: Born in 1984, Vincent Deloria was born to a middle class family in Engelo (Constituency 221). While his family is from Ästerplaas, he wouldn't move back to the region until 1989. Growing up in a politically conservative family, Deloria was earlier in life more Conservative politically, getting involved in local government as a conservative in 2002. After a radical political transformation during the 2000s, Deloria moved from the right to the center, and eventually settled on becoming center-left by the late 2000s, getting involved in growing moderate movements and supporting science and technology. Prior to becoming a member of the Senate in 2013, Deloria worked as a history professor at Ästerplaas Community College from 2010 to 2013 and as a High School history teacher from 2005 to 2010. He initially entered the Senate as an Independent, but joined the Common Sense Party which seemed to align closely with his beliefs. In the Ästerplaas city government, he advocated for more funding for public education and a promotion of science and technology, and will do so in the Senate.
Faith: Deism
Likes: Democracy, Welfare, Free Rights, Liberalism
Dislikes: Fascism, Authoritarianism, Reactionaries, Conservatism
Any Questions from the Public to be answered?

• What is your main goal as the Senator from Ästerplaas? - My goal is to represent the interests of the people of my constituency, and the wider national interests for this country. I was elected to represent the people of Ästerplaas and to voice their moderate views in the Senate.

Geoffrey Angleter - Reform Party

Account Name: Angleter
Occupation: Farmer, Senator, Minister
Party Position(s):

Founder
Leader

Positions in Government: Minister for Health

N/A

Constituency: Sant-Anna (78)
Political Ideology: Libertarian conservative
Family: Married to Deb, with three adult children (Steve, Carol, and Rob)
Background: Angleter was born on 22nd November, 1945, and comes from a long line of farmers in the hills to the east of Sant-Anna. Ultimately, however, he is the distant descendant of English colonists, as evidenced by his surname. After attending school he gained a degree in Economics, and then worked in Leishaagen as a corporate financial analyst. However, aged 40 and believing he'd reached the peak of his career, Geoff returned to the family farm to take over the reins from his father, and invested the wealth he'd earned in Leishaagen into expanding the farm. This turned the Angleter family farm from a medium-sized holding to one of the largest and most advanced independent farms in the area, thus making him a prominent figure among the rural communities near Sant-Anna. Thanks to his new-found prominence Geoff became de facto spokesman for the independent farmers in Sant-Anna's municipal politics, a role which helped propel him recently to the Senate as a right-wing populist, advocating for the mainstream conservatives whom he perceived as largely unrepresented by the established Senate parties - to this end, he has founded the Reform Party.
Faith: Roman Catholic
Likes: Libertarian conservatism, fiscal conservatism, ordoliberalism, populism, direct democracy, Parliamentarianism, simple and transparent government, religious freedom, tea, wine, reading, hill-walking
Dislikes: Tax-and-spend policies, budget deficits, vested interests, political correctness, technocracy, Presidentialism, bureaucracy, laïcité, eggs, garish clothes, call centres
Any Questions from the Public to be answered?

• If you could pass three laws, unopposed, what would you pass? - Well, of course, I'd never want that to happen. But if it did, I'd enact a negative income tax to replace most of whatever welfare system we'd have established by then, a law mandating that there be only one form of income taxation and that it may have no more than two bands, and a law restricting abortion to the first trimester of pregnancy pending impartial advice and approval by two doctors.
• Senator, are you a devout Catholic or more lapsed? [Maklohi Vai] - I wouldn't call myself devout, but I am a practising Catholic - I go to Mass, go to Confession, and suchlike.
• So no self-flagellation? [Nihilistic View] - Afraid not, no.

Angleter wrote:Senator Angleter is now taking questions.

Zane Potenco - Socialist Action Party

Account Name: Potenco
Occupation:Senator, Unitarian Universalist Priest
Positions in Government: Senator

Constituency:Distric 63/Harstelvoor
Political Ideology: Trotskyism, Eco Socialism, Pacifism, Social Liberalism, Christian Socialism, Market Socialism
Family: None/Single
Background:A major community leader in Harvelstoor, Potenco is a priest at Harstelvoor Unitarian Church in Harstelvoor and is known for leading several groups in Aurentinia such as Aurentines for the eradication of AIDS, Aurentine National Ministries in addition to a large number of workers rights movements and a few charities he's aided in setting up. Zane decided that it would be best to continue his works by pursuing a place in the Senate. He has since worked tirelessly for workers rights and has been continuously trying to build a Monument to Tolerance and pass a total non discrimination act. He has also busied himself with less political work, such as directing the sci fi drama, Moon and watching American Football with his dog.
Faith:Unitarian Universalist/Zen Buddhist
Likes: Corn Dogs, Men, Women, Musicals, Jesus, Fairness, Equality
Dislikes: Bigotry, intolerance, , Maoist Third worldists
Questions from the public:"As a pacifist do you see a need for armed intervention against someone making aggressive move towards us?"[/quote]

That question is a tricky one. In the case of invasion, I would advocate retaliation in the form of armed intervention. However, if the country pursues a policy of neutrality, it is highly unlikely that we will ever face invasion if we remain a truly pacifistic nation. A kinder, gentler Aurentinia!

Q:"What is your opinion on birth control? Should it be legal and, providing it is legal, should the government provide it to people in some fashion?"

A:"I personally believe that abortion is a personal question that is so morally relative to each individuals situation that the government should not try to interfere with an individuals choice in the matter. I feel that there should be abortion services provided for free only to those who demonstate financial need."

Free South Califas wrote:Encountering "HerpaDerp" in the example is shocking and offensive, as it slurs people with developmental disabilities and speech disorders and is thus discriminatory and possibly illegal. Such an important government office ought to be welcoming to us as to any other citizen.

New Zepuha wrote:

Free South Califas wrote:Encountering "HerpaDerp" in the example is shocking and offensive, as it slurs people with developmental disabilities and speech disorders and is thus discriminatory and possibly illegal. Such an important government office ought to be welcoming to us as to any other citizen.

Are you serious? HerpaDerp is an offensive term to people with speech disorders? I cannot and do not see reason behind that claim.

New Zepuha wrote:

Free South Califas wrote:Encountering "HerpaDerp" in the example is shocking and offensive, as it slurs people with developmental disabilities and speech disorders and is thus discriminatory and possibly illegal. Such an important government office ought to be welcoming to us as to any other citizen.

Are you serious? HerpaDerp is an offensive term to people with speech disorders? I cannot and do not see reason behind that claim.

Potenco wrote:I am open for questions from the public, including that guy who clips his fingernails on the subway, as if thats somehow acceptable

New Zepuha wrote:

Potenco wrote:I am open for questions from the public, including that guy who clips his fingernails on the subway, as if thats somehow acceptable

"As a pacifist do you see a need for armed intervention against someone making aggressive move towards us?"

Potenco wrote:

New Zepuha wrote:"As a pacifist do you see a need for armed intervention against someone making aggressive move towards us?"

That question is a tricky one. In the case of invasion, I would advocate retaliation in the form of armed intervention. However, if the country pursues a policy of neutrality, it is highly unlikely that we will ever face invasion if we remain a truly pacifistic nation. A kinder, gentler Aurentinia!

Castille de Italia wrote:Attention all Senators; What is your current opinion on the recent Senate Bombing?

Potenco wrote:I am open for questions from the public, including that guy who clips his fingernails on the subway, as if thats somehow acceptable

Castille de Italia wrote:Attention all Senators; What is your current opinion on the recent Senate Bombing?

New Zepuha wrote:

The Nihilistic view wrote:
What is he even going on about?

Apparently a movement to make us be more PC.

Slazliyka wrote:

New Zepuha wrote:Are you serious? HerpaDerp is an offensive term to people with speech disorders? I cannot and do not see reason behind that claim.

Yeah, I don't think "HerpaDerp" is a slur for anybody but the idiotic.