Debate: Midterm Elections, January 2021

[glacieri]

Debate: Midterm Elections, January 2021

Debate closes on January 7th at 11:34PM EST.

Brief Overview

The Debate period is intended to be a time in which citizens can assess the competence of candidates running for office and make an informed decision in the voting period that follows. All citizens may ask questions to the candidates and while the candidates are not legally bound to answering these questions, it is highly encouraged. Candidates are however legally bound to answer all questions asked of them by the Founder or Speaker.

Candidates for House Representative
Pridnestrovskaia Moldavskaia (Force)
Kronisia (Force)
Sidervida (Force)
Tigslarlowducken (Force)
Xenomenadra (Force)
Mentago (Force)
Caduceo (Force)

Candidates for Justice
Tigslarlowducken (Force)
Pridnestrovskaia Moldavskaia (Force)
Yamatochi (Force)

Relevant Law

1. As a candidate, you are required to answer all questions asked to you by the Founder (Renegalle) and the Speaker of the House (Alemputo) during this Debate or you will be automatically disqualified (§B.4.1).

Required: Questions for all House of Representatives Candidates

1. Which House Bills do you plan to pass and/or repeal? Why?
It is always best to be informed on bills. During your term a house repeal of Bills 52 and 55 may be up for vote.

2. In what ways should the Constitution be amended, if at all? Explain how the changes would improve the current system of governance. It is always best to be informed, so please check the proposed laws and amendments in the House sections of the forums. Some of the amendments that may be put to vote during your term are the Stronger Justice Act, 2nd Revision, The Public Defense Establishment Act, the House Replacement Modification Act, the House Absences amendment, and the comprehensive High Commission and Union Reform Act. With your statements on any additions, provide your opinions on these.

3. What qualifies you to serve in the House? What makes this qualifying?

4. Do you believe that people who make the laws (the Legislative Branch) should also be enforcing the laws (the Judicial Branch)? Do you think that a Prime Minister or Deputy Prime Minister (the Executive Branch) should be able to run for the House of Representatives (the Legislative Branch)? In your ideal picture of Force, can the  Prime Minister be Chief Justice simultaneously, or a Chief Justice be the Speaker of the House simultaneously, or the Speaker of the House be Prime Minister simultaneously?

5. If elected, do you plan on running for Speaker? If so, what makes you a good candidate for this position and if not, who do you think would be a better candidate?

6. How, as a House Representative, would you facilitate activity for new and existing Citizens? What would you do to combat regional inactivity?

7. Do you plan to facilitate a better working relationship between the House and Cabinet? If not, why do you think the House and the Cabinet should be separate? If so, explain how you would do so, and how it would work.

Required: Questions for all Court Justice candidates

1. The Justices are responsible for deciding the punishment for a person found guilty, following a trial. You are required to do this with the advice of the Jury. Keeping that in mind, how would you balance your own thoughts on how harsh punishment should be with the Jury's recommendation?

2. The Justices are responsible for determining whether any laws contradict the Constitution. With this power in mind, what method(s) would you use to come to a decision as to the legality of a law? If a law was not necessarily illegal but went against the character of the Constitution, would you consider that fairgrounds for it to be overturned?

3. Do you believe it is more important to take your time when deciding the verdict for a case, even if it means the guilty party goes longer without punishment, or do you believe it is more important to quickly decide on a verdict, even if it means the punishment may not be as suitable as otherwise? What factors would tilt this more in favor of one or the other?

4. Similarly to question two, if a case was brought to the court against someone who had not necessarily done something that was illegal, but went against the character of the Constitution, would you consider that fairgrounds for the case to be considered?

5. How, as a Justice, would you facilitate activity for new and existing Citizens? What would you do to combat regional inactivity?

[West-Kronisia]

1. Which House Bills do you plan to pass and/or repeal? Why?
It is always best to be informed on bills. During your term a house repeal of Bills 52 and 55 may be up for vote.

Considering those two repeals are my own creations, of course I would like to see those repealed, with the Bill 55 being little more than a drain on governmental resources, and 52 including aspects that are problematic. I also wish to see my Absences act passed to clarify how House absences should be conducted, as well the new revision of the Stronger Justice Act, particularly due to it's inclusion of Contempt of Court as a crime.

2. In what ways should the Constitution be amended, if at all? Explain how the changes would improve the current system of governance. It is always best to be informed, so please check the proposed laws and amendments in the House sections of the forums. Some of the amendments that may be put to vote during your term are the Stronger Justice Act, 2nd Revision, The Public Defense Establishment Act, the House Replacement Modification Act, the House Absences amendment, and the comprehensive High Commission and Union Reform Act. With your statements on any additions, provide your opinions on these.

The Stronger Justice Act, 2nd Revision is a good amendment to have passed, as it places contempt of court as a punishable crime, which can only be seen as a benefit. I disagree with the Public Defense Establishment Act, as it places far, far too much power in the hands of the court, allowing a justice to just remove any of the legal advisors to the defendant or prosecutor at will, which is a terrible idea.  The House Replacement Modification Act seems acceptable, as having the House be filled with active members is always a good thing, for the people who need representation. Of course I believe the House Absences Act is a good idea, being the author, as making clear what has to happen during such a situation is necessary. I also, finally, agree with the High Commission and Union Reform Act in general, particular with regards to the changes to statehood creation, etc.

3. What qualifies you to serve in the House? What makes this qualifying?

I was previously one of the most active members of the house, with activity being a necessity to working in the House. In that time, I also submitted 3 proposals, two of which were repeals, and one amendment. I believe that this would qualify me to retake a seat in the House.

4. Do you believe that people who make the laws (the Legislative Branch) should also be enforcing the laws (the Judicial Branch)? Do you think that a Prime Minister or Deputy Prime Minister (the Executive Branch) should be able to run for the House of Representatives (the Legislative Branch)? In your ideal picture of Force, can the  Prime Minister be Chief Justice simultaneously, or a Chief Justice be the Speaker of the House simultaneously, or the Speaker of the House be Prime Minister simultaneously?

Personally, I believe that all of these examples would place far, far too much power into the hands of one individual, which is always something to be avoided.

5. If elected, do you plan on running for Speaker? If so, what makes you a good candidate for this position and if not, who do you think would be a better candidate?

I absolutely do not plan on running for Speaker. I think that the current Speaker should remain so, as they have been active and conducted the role well.

6. How, as a House Representative, would you facilitate activity for new and existing Citizens? What would you do to combat regional inactivity?

I would say that combatting regional inactivity is more in the hands of the Ministry of Culture, who should be encouraged to provide events that bring activity - the house cannot legislate activity in the regular members of the Union, it should only legislate activity in the government itself. Trying to force activity via legislation that would punish people, for example, would simply drive people away from the region. And the only other way to encourage activity, is to provide Citizens with entertaining things to do, therefore, that is a Ministry of Culture issue, not a legislative one.

7. Do you plan to facilitate a better working relationship between the House and Cabinet? If not, why do you think the House and the Cabinet should be separate? If so, explain how you would do so, and how it would work.

Yes, as I am a member of the Cabinet, being an Advisor to the Prime Minister, I would definitely encourage a better relationship between the House and Cabinet.  I would encourage this by advocating an amendment that requires certain members of the cabinet to meet with either the speaker or house as a whole on a regular basis, or even maybe create a role of an intermediary between the two, so that both sides can get their opinions heard on any topics that concern both House and Cabinet.

[Tigslarlowducken]

Required: Questions for all House of Representatives Candidates

1. Which House Bills do you plan to pass and/or repeal? Why? It is always best to be informed on bills. During your term a house repeal of Bills 52 and 55 may be up for vote.
A. My future decisions regarding bills, repeals, and amendments will be largely based on the debates surrounding legislation. However, I support both repeals.

2. In what ways should the Constitution be amended, if at all? Explain how the changes would improve the current system of governance. It is always best to be informed, so please check the proposed laws and amendments in the House sections of the forums. Some of the amendments that may be put to vote during your term are the Stronger Justice Act, 2nd Revision, The Public Defense Establishment Act, the House Replacement Modification Act, the House Absences amendment, and the comprehensive High Commission and Union Reform Act. With your statements on any additions, provide your opinions on these.
A. Renegalle's recent amendment is comprehensive and well-thought-out.

3. What qualifies you to serve in the House? What makes this qualifying?
A. My experience as Justice means that I also have much experience with the Constitution.

4. Do you believe that people who make the laws (the Legislative Branch) should also be enforcing the laws (the Judicial Branch)? Do you think that a Prime Minister or Deputy Prime Minister (the Executive Branch) should be able to run for the House of Representatives (the Legislative Branch)? In your ideal picture of Force, can the  Prime Minister be Chief Justice simultaneously, or a Chief Justice be the Speaker of the House simultaneously, or the Speaker of the House be Prime Minister simultaneously?
A. I think that it is possible for a person to hold multiple positions, within reason, I do not think a person should hold any combination of the following: Justice, Prime Minister, Speaker of the House, High Commissioner.

5. If elected, do you plan on running for Speaker? If so, what makes you a good candidate for this position and if not, who do you think would be a better candidate?
A. I do not. I am unsure who I will support. Most likely Alemputo.

6. How, as a House Representative, would you facilitate activity for new and existing Citizens? What would you do to combat regional inactivity?
A. By introducing legislation frequently.

7. Do you plan to facilitate a better working relationship between the House and Cabinet? If not, why do you think the House and the Cabinet should be separate? If so, explain how you would do so, and how it would work.
A. The House and Cabinet are very much intertwined already with how the Constitution is designed. It's fine the way it is, in my opinion.

Required: Questions for all Court Justice candidates

1. The Justices are responsible for deciding the punishment for a person found guilty, following a trial. You are required to do this with the advice of the Jury. Keeping that in mind, how would you balance your own thoughts on how harsh punishment should be with the Jury's recommendation?
A. The Jury generally doesn't generally make sentencing recommendations.

2. The Justices are responsible for determining whether any laws contradict the Constitution. With this power in mind, what method(s) would you use to come to a decision as to the legality of a law? If a law was not necessarily illegal but went against the character of the Constitution, would you consider that fairgrounds for it to be overturned?
A. Depends on the circumstance.

3. Do you believe it is more important to take your time when deciding the verdict for a case, even if it means the guilty party goes longer without punishment, or do you believe it is more important to quickly decide on a verdict, even if it means the punishment may not be as suitable as otherwise? What factors would tilt this more in favor of one or the other?
A. Take the Libertatis Incident. Once doxxing was found, it was imperative to remove his permissions as soon as possible. In this case, a ruling would need to be found fast. In all others, thoroughness is preferable.

4. Similarly to question two, if a case was brought to the court against someone who had not necessarily done something that was illegal, but went against the character of the Constitution, would you consider that fairgrounds for the case to be considered?
A. No

5. How, as a Justice, would you facilitate activity for new and existing Citizens? What would you do to combat regional inactivity?
A. Since when is increasing regional activity a Court issue?

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/472407264700006420/718562186418716742/melonland.mp4

[Caduceo]

1. Which House Bills do you plan to pass and/or repeal? Why? It is always best to be informed on bills. During your term a house repeal of Bills 52 and 55 may be up for vote.

At the moment, I have no plans to pass or repeal any Bills, yet as for the repeals for Bills 52 and 55, I support the repeal of HB55 as there's already a replacement available from the Prime Minister, though I am against repealing HB52 unless there is a proper revision planned in place.

2. In what ways should the Constitution be amended, if at all? Explain how the changes would improve the current system of governance. It is always best to be informed, so please check the proposed laws and amendments in the House sections of the forums. Some of the amendments that may be put to vote during your term are the Stronger Justice Act, 2nd Revision, The Public Defense Establishment Act, the House Replacement Modification Act, the House Absences amendment, and the comprehensive High Commission and Union Reform Act. With your statements on any additions, provide your opinions on these.

While I do not plan to pass any notable amendments, if elected, I might look more into adding more opportunities for our territories such as the much-needed access to FA. As fore aforementioned amendments, I remain neutral on the Stronger Justice Act Revision as I am yet to see what other changes will come up; I am against both the Defense Establishment Act and House Replacement Modification Act as I believe they are uneeded, I support the House Absences Act as it is a small yet more clear change, and while I've only scanned over the High Commission and Union Reform Act, it looks good so far and I will continue reading through it.

3. What qualifies you to serve in the House? What makes this qualifying?

I am an incumbent House Representative and has had a relatively knowledgeable grasp on how things work around the House. I've written the original AdN Bill, helped add minor changes to the Framework and Speaker Act as well as to the FoIA, and helped write up the original Stronger Justice Act. I've also had a number of prior positions in the Union besides the House.

4. Do you believe that people who make the laws (the Legislative Branch) should also be enforcing the laws (the Judicial Branch)?

While House Reps should play a role in maintaining these laws, I strongly believe that the main branch enforcing these laws should be the Judiciary.

Do you think that a Prime Minister or Deputy Prime Minister (the Executive Branch) should be able to run for the House of Representatives (the Legislative Branch)?

Personally, I don't think the Prime Minister should be eligible to run for the House, but I can agree to having them be able to speak in the House Chambers (but not vote, second, etc.) but I think that the Deputy PM should be able to run for House, since their position is appointed after all.

In your ideal picture of Force, can the Prime Minister be Chief Justice simultaneously, or a Chief Justice be the Speaker of the House simultaneously, or the Speaker of the House be Prime Minister simultaneously?

I don't think those situation are fair at all, there should be a distinct separation of powers and having one or a group of individuals control all branches of government is unfair to most.

5. If elected, do you plan on running for Speaker? If so, what makes you a good candidate for this position and if not, who do you think would be a better candidate?

No, I do not wish to run for Speaker. I believe the incumbent Speaker has done their job well so far, but besides them, I believe Kronisia would also be a formidable Speaker of the House.

6. How, as a House Representative, would you facilitate activity for new and existing Citizens? What would you do to combat regional inactivity?

I don't particularly think that's one of the main duties of being a House Rep, but since it's 'all hands on deck' in maintaining activity, I would love to continue interacting with the community especially in terms of writing law and listening to their ideas, either by the more common RMB conversations or through direct 'press releases' or interviews through independent and state news outlets.

7. Do you plan to facilitate a better working relationship between the House and Cabinet? If not, why do you think the House and the Cabinet should be separate? If so, explain how you would do so, and how it would work.

Of course, we should continue working towards building a harmonious working relationship with the Cabinet, mostly through ensuring that laws we pass will not be an inconvenience to them, and vice versa. Communication is always the key, so perhaps having joint meetings with the Cabinet should be a path we should look into in the foreseeable future.

[☕️ 𝓝𝓮𝓿𝓮𝓻𝓽𝓱𝓮𝓵𝓮𝓼𝓢]

House of Representative Questions:
1. Which House Bills do you plan to pass and/or repeal? Why? It is always best to be informed on bills. During your term a house repeal of Bills 52 and 55 may be up for vote.
a. I have no immediate legislative plan as of current, and no bills I would like to pass as of now. As for House Bills 52 and 55 I have not seen replacements for either yet so I'm against them being up for repeal until I've seen the alternative.

2. In what ways should the Constitution be amended, if at all? Explain how the changes would improve the current system of governance. It is always best to be informed, so please check the proposed laws and amendments in the House sections of the forums. Some of the amendments that may be put to vote during your term are the Stronger Justice Act, 2nd Revision, The Public Defense Establishment Act, the House Replacement Modification Act, the House Absences amendment, and the comprehensive High Commission and Union Reform Act. With your statements on any additions, provide your opinions on these.
a. Besides some minor things on the majority of the amendments I really have nothing wrong with them.

3. What qualifies you to serve in the House? What makes this qualifying?
a. I've served in numerous executive and legislative offices among my time in Nationstates as well as I am fairly well known in the Force community as a whole.

4. Do you believe that people who make the laws (the Legislative Branch) should also be enforcing the laws (the Judicial Branch)? Do you think that a Prime Minister or Deputy Prime Minister (the Executive Branch) should be able to run for the House of Representatives (the Legislative Branch)? In your ideal picture of Force, can the  Prime Minister be Chief Justice simultaneously, or a Chief Justice be the Speaker of the House simultaneously, or the Speaker of the House be Prime Minister simultaneously?
a. Ideally, my idea of Force is that no member should hold an office in any other branch of government, however with the limited amount of people we have we do have to make some sacrifices. However, no matter how desperate we are, the Prime Minister should never hold any of the other three major political positions, i.e. Speaker of the House, High Commissioner, and Chief Justice, and vise versa.

5. If elected, do you plan on running for Speaker? If so, what makes you a good candidate for this position, and if not, who do you think would be a better candidate?
a. I have absolutely no interest in Speakership.

6. How, as a House Representative, would you facilitate activity for new and existing Citizens? What would you do to combat regional inactivity?
a. Right now what we need most desperately is getting on people's asses that are inactive in government. Having idle hands in elected positions not only looks bad but the attitude spreads to other members.

7. Do you plan to facilitate a better working relationship between the House and Cabinet? If not, why do you think the House and the Cabinet should be separate? If so, explain how you would do so, and how it would work.
a. As it is the House and Cabinet work together but are still separate entities. I don't see anything wrong with the current relationship the two share so I don't see any reason to try to fix it.

Justice Questions:
1. The Justices are responsible for deciding the punishment for a person found guilty, following a trial. You are required to do this with the advice of the Jury. Keeping that in mind, how would you balance your own thoughts on how harsh punishment should be with the Jury's recommendation?
a. The way I see it the Jury's recommendation should be the Court's ruling. The Jury familiarizes themselves with the evidence moreso than anyone effected or involved by the trial and that should be recognized. A Justice's opinion should not be involved at all with a court ruling if a Jury was present and made a concensus, I believe it takes away the purpose of the Jury otherwise.

2. The Justices are responsible for determining whether any laws contradict the Constitution. With this power in mind, what method(s) would you use to come to a decision as to the legality of a law? If a law was not necessarily illegal but went against the character of the Constitution, would you consider that fairgrounds for it to be overturned?
a. The character of the constitution is a integral part of the constitution. Anything passed by the House that violates the character and purpose of the constitution will, without hesitation, be overturned.

3. Do you believe it is more important to take your time when deciding the verdict for a case, even if it means the guilty party goes longer without punishment, or do you believe it is more important to quickly decide on a verdict, even if it means the punishment may not be as suitable as otherwise? What factors would tilt this more in favor of one or the other?
a. Depends entirely on the context. If it was a crime that was deserving of an incredibly severe verdict, at the area where completely banishment of a person or a group of people, where exact times becomes arguing semantics speed is priority. However, with many crimes relating to Nationstates not requiring that speed or severity the importance of the precision and accuracy of a Court's decision becames tenfold.

4. Similarly to question two, if a case was brought to the court against someone who had not necessarily done something that was illegal, but went against the character of the Constitution, would you consider that fairgrounds for the case to be considered?
a. Same approach as two question two the character of the Constitution is apart of the Constitution. The Constitution over time has been developed and molded to fit and match the beliefs and systems that the citizentry of Force exercise. Similarily, any actions by a citizen that violates the character and purpose of the constitution will, without hesitation, be punished.

5. How, as a Justice, would you facilitate activity for new and existing Citizens? What would you do to combat regional inactivity?
a. I don't understand how the Court would "facilitate activity" besides doing its job in a timely manner.

[Sidervida]

House of Representative Questions:
1. Which House Bills do you plan to pass and/or repeal? Why? It is always best to be informed on bills. During your term a house repeal of Bills 52 and 55 may be up for vote.

A: For House Bills 52 and 55 Im against them being up for repeal   

2. In what ways should the Constitution be amended, if at all? Explain how the changes would improve the current system of governance. It is always best to be informed, so please check the proposed laws and amendments in the House sections of the forums. Some of the amendments that may be put to vote during your term are the Stronger Justice Act, 2nd Revision, The Public Defense Establishment Act, the House Replacement Modification Act, the House Absences amendment, and the comprehensive High Commission and Union Reform Act. With your statements on any additions, provide your opinions on these.

A: I agree with most house bills, as of right now I do not see anything wrong with the majority. However, some may need to be repealed.

3. What qualifies you to serve in the House? What makes this qualifying?

A: I’m genuinely very active in force, and in nationstates. I believe that activity, where we are in force currently is extremely important for the house.

4. Do you believe that people who make the laws (the Legislative Branch) should also be enforcing the laws (the Judicial Branch)? Do you think that
a Prime Minister or Deputy Prime Minister (the Executive Branch) should be able to run for the House of Representatives (the Legislative Branch)? In your ideal picture of Force, can the  Prime Minister be Chief Justice simultaneously, or a Chief Justice be the Speaker of the House simultaneously, or the Speaker of the House be Prime Minister simultaneously?

A: No member of force should have a current office in any other branch of government, the Prime Minister should never have any of the other biggest political positions ;Speaker of the House, High Commissioner, and Chief Justice.

5. If elected, do you plan on running for Speaker? If so, what makes you a good candidate for this position, and if not, who do you think would be a better candidate?

A: No, as of currently I do not think i’d run for speaker.

6. How, as a House Representative, would you facilitate activity for new and existing Citizens? What would you do to combat regional inactivity?

A: I think something should be passed to increase goverment activity, if someone is inactive for a set amount of time they may have to leave their current position.

7. Do you plan to facilitate a better working relationship between the House and Cabinet? If not, why do you think the House and the Cabinet should be separate? If so, explain how you would do so, and how it would work.

A: Of course I agree with facilitating a better working relationship. As both work together, even though they are in separate areas (government wise.)

[Marci]

Q1. The Justices are responsible for deciding the punishment for a person found guilty, following a trial. You are required to do this with the advice of the Jury. Keeping that in mind, how would you balance your own thoughts on how harsh punishment should be with the Jury's recommendation?

A1.I believe that the jury is a good way of looking for just and fair punishments, and should be a decent influence towards the decisions being made. Although that doesn't necessarily mean that the jury is always correct, outside opinion should always matter otherwise punishments will vary from good to bad depending on the justices elected.

Q2. The Justices are responsible for determining whether any laws contradict the Constitution. With this power in mind, what method(s) would you use to come to a decision as to the legality of a law? If a law was not necessarily illegal but went against the character of the Constitution, would you consider that fairgrounds for it to be overturned?

A2. The best method to decide whether or not a law contradicts the constitution is through reviewing it and the area of the constitution it's related to. As for if a law were to be legal yet go against the character constitution, I believe that the law should be decided on by how useful the law will be when it comes to helping the union.

Q3. Do you believe it is more important to take your time when deciding the verdict for a case, even if it means the guilty party goes longer without punishment, or do you believe it is more important to quickly decide on a verdict, even if it means the punishment may not be as suitable as otherwise? What factors would tilt this more in favor of one or the other?

A3. Yes taking your time should be necessary most of the time, punishments should be well thought out before being carried through with and as long as a punishment is brought upon the guilty party it should be fine. However if the person being accused is an immediate threat to security and other people's safety then a decision should be made almost immediately otherwise people may be negatively affected by that.

Q4. Similarly to question two, if a case was brought to the court against someone who had not necessarily done something that was illegal, but went against the character of the Constitution, would you consider that fairgrounds for the case to be considered?

A4. The whole point of a case is to combat someone over legal issues, I don't believe it should really be considered if no law is exactly broken. That however does not mean it won't be considered by me.

Q5. How, as a Justice, would you facilitate activity for new and existing Citizens? What would you do to combat regional inactivity?

A5. As a Justice I wouldn't hold much outside of my own personality to combat regional inactivity, I don't think we hold much of a responsibility to do so either, as it can at times mess with the job of being a Justice when it comes to being unbiased towards people.

[Xenomenadra]

1. Which House Bills do you plan to pass and/or repeal? Why?
It is always best to be informed on bills. During your term a house repeal of Bills 52 and 55 may be up for vote.
First of all, I plan on Passing both of them. Why? Because I support them.

2. In what ways should the Constitution be amended, if at all? Explain how the changes would improve the current system of governance. It is always best to be informed, so please check the proposed laws and amendments in the House sections of the forums. Some of the amendments that may be put to vote during your term are the Stronger Justice Act, 2nd Revision, The Public Defense Establishment Act, the House Replacement Modification Act, the House Absences amendment, and the comprehensive High Commission and Union Reform Act. With your statements on any additions, provide your opinions on these.
Citizen Rights should never be House bills. All democratic systems of government should always have civil rights as Constitutional Laws. Constitutionality helps prevent the government from denying people there rights. In fact, I plan to propose Constitutional Amendments to make such rights constitutional. Also, Article F, Section 1 is stupid. Either you have 3 Justices, or you have 5. Its dumb for anyone to say there should be both 3 and 5 Justices, thus I will push to repeal it to have only 3 Justices. I also feel that electoral changes are needed. I feel through Constitutional changes if needed, we should change our House elections to use MMP (Mixed-Member Proportional Voting) where citizens get two vote (Ranking candidates, then one vote for a party).

3. What qualifies you to serve in the House? What makes this qualifying?
Where do I even begin, is the question. For so many regions I've served as a public servant. I've served as Head of government, State, as well as representatives for Lisseum and the OU. I've also served as an Associated Elections Commissioner.

4. Do you believe that people who make the laws (the Legislative Branch) should also be enforcing the laws (the Judicial Branch)? Do you think that a Prime Minister or Deputy Prime Minister (the Executive Branch) should be able to run for the House of Representatives (the Legislative Branch)? In your ideal picture of Force, can the  Prime Minister be Chief Justice simultaneously, or a Chief Justice be the Speaker of the House simultaneously, or the Speaker of the House be Prime Minister simultaneously?
The lack of proper separation of powers is appalling. A Legislature should only create laws, and executive executing and enforceing laws, and a judiciary interpreting the law. I don't know why it isn't that way right now, but this needs to change, and I will do everything I can to change it.

5. If elected, do you plan on running for Speaker? If so, what makes you a good candidate for this position and if not, who do you think would be a better candidate?
Nope. I'd rather wait to gain experience before I even make that kind of choice.

6. How, as a House Representative, would you facilitate activity for new and existing Citizens? What would you do to combat regional inactivity?
I feel that giving a larger portion of opportunities will help citizens and our region to gain more activity. As long as we are in demand for working people, we will always have a demand for jobs.

7. Do you plan to facilitate a better working relationship between the House and Cabinet? If not, why do you think the House and the Cabinet should be separate? If so, explain how you would do so, and how it would work.
Of course. Cake and Ice Cream will be part of the process, but I also think bipartisanship will play an important role between the relationship of SDU and Federalists.

[Renegalle]

Mentago has been disqualified for failing to answer any debate questions.