How Would You Respond to this Prompt?

[vcczar]

One of my colleagues, Jack Santucci, created this prompt. How would you respond to it?

[vcczar]

@A man from Colorado @Alexander-Nicholas @Arkansas Progressive @Beetlejuice @Bloot911 @bradleyg223 @Brunell @Cenzonico @Cal @carbonmonoxide321 @ConservativeElector2 @DakotaHale @Dobs @DJBillyShakes @ebrk85 @Edouard @Entrecampos @Eugene @Fbarbarossa @Ghostie @Hestia @HiyarAgasi @Ich_bin_Tyler @Ishan @jnewt @Joe303300 @jvikings1 @Kitten @Largo833 @Lars @Murrman104 @Magnus Rex @Mark_W @mark2 @matthewyoung123 @MrPotatoTed @NYRepublican @OrangeP47 @Pringles @pilight @pman @Rezi @Rodja @SilentLiberty @ShortKing @Sean F Kennedy @The Blood @themiddlepolitical @Timur @TZMB @vcczar @Vols21 @vjw @WVProgressive @Willthescout7 @Zenobiyl

[OrangeP47]

In the interest of not being here all day, because this is my academic specialty, I'll limit myself to a singular topic for now:  The Wyoming Rule itself does not necessarily seem to necessarily help the left as common wisdom would suggest when I actually mapped it out myself using DRA (redistricting reform itself was far more important).  The nature of states and single-member districts might mean such reform is a dead end and any attempts at proportionality need to do something radical.

[Edouard]

Economical reforms

Introduction of a more global public generalized contribution of healthcare. Contrary to what people think the prices of healthcare are less high with an universal healthcare system. I know this would need to be progressive like it is being done in the US right now.

Unemployment is not a problem so I would not adress it. The next generation is gonna live its own roaring 60s because there are a lot of retirement but I would try to support the development of high qualified jobs. I do believe that there is no real unemployment problem because we arrive at a time where there are more jobs than unemployed so this is not an important concern.

For Climate change I would both boost the nuclear and renewable energies. I would try to support the modern technologies and both take fiscal measures to boost the private and public research to improve innovative productions like hydrogene.

Civic reforms

I would try to reform school studies to sensibilize a lot about the importance of democratic values. I would do the best to counter the growing lack of reality that newer generations have that democracy is not a concept which is granted forever. I would sensibilize citizens of this country that what happened in January 6th of 2021 happened in the 30s at the time of declining parliamentarism and rise of autocraties, I would particulary try to sensibilize people to examples they can rely to. So teachers would ask to students if they enjoy their western freedoms and the protection of their rights as well as the importance of the rule of law. For example hispanics particulary the ones of Venezuela would be showed how the country could turn into a Venezuela bis if we do not have a strong protection of institutions.

I would also try to develop participative democracy at local levels to involve a maximum of citizens to responsabilities which can only make them more understanding of how to manage a budget and how to take decisions. I would really try to maximize the number of situations in which citizens are at responsability even local ones to make them responsible and aware of how it is difficult to make choices.

Political reform

I would raise the number of seats in senate to elect a Supreme Court judge to 75 senators or at least 60.

I would devellop a bipartisan project to end gerrymandering in the whole country at once and replace government handling with independent commissions appointed at the unanimity or at least 75% of chambers of states.

Urban-Rural polarization

I would support local transportations and suburbs links between rural areas and towns. I would also be moderate on key issues for rural areas like agriculture.

 

Question 2

US parties are already strong big tent at a time where major parties tend to lose supports in a lot of countries. I don't see how their current functionning is not good. The current system allows to rebel to exist locally. The current parties are strong because they are big tent of various ideologies so there is no problem with them.

 

Question 3

Yes and no. In the current national scene it would benefit democrats but the major effect would more be to parliamentarize the current system by giving even more power to small groups of MPs. The current US system is most of the time blocked when a conflict happens between the president and Congress while there the Congress could have parliamentary issues the same way we saw with McCarthy election.

I am in favour of a proportionnal electoral college to push people to go to vote in every states but not in favour of a proportionnal parliamentary system or at least to a reduced proportionnal system because a whole proportionnal system would give total control to party lists over local specificities.

[vcczar]

21 hours ago, vcczar said:

One of my colleagues, Jack Santucci, created this prompt. How would you respond to it?

These are my short answers, as I haven't time for lengthy responses. 

For Part 1: 

1. Guaranteed Minimum Income
2. Reverse Poll Tax (Tax credit for voting)
3. Profit Cap, in which anything beyond that cap is required to be distributed to employees as a bonus. 
4. A more vigorous and pro-active career services in both universities and in the cities subsidized by the government.
5. Tax breaks for converting to Alt Energy or already having it. 
6. Work with Big Oil to encourage them to convert from Big Oil to Alt Energy companies. Force the devil to do good. If you try to kill them, which won't happen anyway, they'll just be obstructionist. 
7. Require that all new vehicles be hybrid or electric or other alt energy mode of power.
8. Expand rail networks (which will be run by alt energy) into rural communities. 
9. Create a student-worker exchange program for Summer credit in all public universities. Students from the cities will exchange their lives with students from the country. Families will have to go through a background check. Families accepting to take part will recieve a tax break and half of their loan debt forgiven (so long as it is a loan that can be forgiven by the government, such as student loans). Students will also see half of their student loans forgiven automatically on graduation. 
10. Abolist Electoral College
11. Take large campaign donations out of the elecitons. Forbid companies or corporations from donating. Force grassroots campainging. 
12. Term limits for Senators, US Reps, and SC Justices. 
13. Ranked Choice Voting
14. Require federal candidates to appear at at least three debates to be on the general election ballot. Require that the top 4 polling candidates appear at this debate. Require that all candidates work together to determine the panelists. This will be done by every candidate providing a list of 20 desired panelists, and then taking turns removing one from the pool of panelists, until only 4 remain. 

For part 2:

1. I think fulfilling part 1 will assure part 2. Parties will be more pro-active, citizen-focused. More American people and less institutionalized elite.

For part 3:

1. I don't think this will benefit the left or the right. It will benefit the outsider, left, right, or center by allowing them a better chance of taking a seat, although not necessarily more power outside of visibility. They'll have to compromise. Compromise will be more common, I think. 

[jnewt]

1. Part One
   • Abolition of exclusionary zoning policies and greater funding directed towards (private) affordable housing development. Get rid of in-lieu fees for minimum affordable unit requirements (i.e. don't allow exceptions - paying fees to circumvent affordability requirements is not an obstacle for for-profit developers and in-lieu fees don't make significant differences for housing trust funds).
   • Greater development of public transit. Fare-free transit isn't a pipe dream and would do wonders for those who can't afford to commute to work. It would also allow a greater range of locations for people to potentially live and work, rather than restricting them to where they can currently commute. Further, this would lessen the reliance on fossil fuels, as public transit is far more efficient than cars.
   • Greater usage of hybrid work models (not government-instituted, but if we collectively agreed to adopt hybrid models across the country). This would have a similar effect as improving public transit.
   • Free in-state community college and free trade school education. Forgive all student loan debt beyond $20,000. Mandate that universities not require students to take out more than $20,000 in loans (grad school excluded). Increase funding for work-study (as well as the range of eligible students) and government grants for college students' education. Run awareness campaigns de-stigmatizing not going to college and encourage more potential students to go into the trades. Prosecute private predatory student loan servicers. Cut all federal funding to for-profit universities and require for-profit universities to provide disclaimers to potential students about the value of the education they provide vs. their costs in relation to non-profit universities. Additionally, require that any accreditation agencies the Department of Education recognizes strip any and all for-profit universities of their accreditations. (In other words, do everything possible to either put for-profit schools out of business, or convert them to non-profit institutions.)
   • Overturn Citizens United via legislation. Outlaw political parties. Set term limits for all elected offices. Set staggering term limits for Supreme Court justices and codify the number of Supreme Court justices after doing so. Institute ranked-choice voting nationwide. Create a mechanism for recall elections for Senators. 
2. Part Two
   • It would not be good to make political parties stronger; hence "outlaw political parties" in part one. Political parties should be made weaker, and short of outlawing them altogether, we could overturn Citizens United, set term limits, and institute ranked-choice voting. 
3. Part Three
   • I don't think a parliamentary system would necessarily benefit the "left". It would lead to the Democratic and Republican parties breaking down into smaller parties, but in the end, they would likely end up forming similar coalitions to what the two parties already represent. It would probably lead to slightly more compromise and more independent thinking as moderate parties that would otherwise be part of one party (Democrat or Republican), may be more willing to form a coalition with parties that would otherwise be "across the aisle". It would also open the door for a greater ideological range of representation. In all, a parliamentary system would be an improvement, but would not necessarily benefit the "left".