Tough I don’t support these candidates for governor/lt governor. They are certainly not proposing broad plans. There plans are probably one of the more detailed.
-UprisingAmerican
3 Likes
Great question! While foreign relations is something we want to keep in the back of our head, it’s definitely not at the forefront of our campaign. Though the details are scruffy at the moment, we intend to create an entirely new division under the DoS which will change their primary purpose and assist with citizenship.
Again, I don’t want to go into to much detail because there are kinks to work out, but I have spoken about this with Secretary Cenosity and he is on board.
2 Likes
Why should I vote for you over other candidates?
2 Likes
Very good question!
The other candidates have provided very vague ideas of what they want to do. Though I have been connected with Shark for quite a while, his campaign essentially consists of “The state is okay. We don’t want to change much.” While the state is, indeed, okay, Skye and I intend to push it in the direction it needs to thrive. I have never been one to settle for anything less than excellence.
Skye and I have outlined clear ideas and explained how we will do them. We are not pandering you with politics–we have a concise plan with outstanding goals. While many Governor’s administrations have promised you results (like Canine&Shark with the codification), Skye and I are prepared to fulfill our promises to the fullest extend possible.
If you have any other questions that I can help you with, please don’t hesitate to let me know!
4 Likes
TimothyConyers and I, before he was banned or something along those lines, proposed a bill called the No Citizen Left Behind Act. This bill became state law, however was never put into effect to my understanding, for reasons I don’t understand. I’ve tried to contact people about it however that went nowhere.
What do you think about this law, and would you try to incorporate it more as governor?
2 Likes
I think it was a fantastic idea with poor execution.
We definitely need to offer programs that ensure citizens can rehabilitate from a criminal lifestyle and become a state employee. However, this bill was not drafted in a way that is productive. I’d rather see it proposed similar to the American immigration process, in which someone declares their intent, it is green-lighted by a judge, they do a mix of community service, LE observation, and consequence/legal training under the DoJ.
In general, if this is re-implemented, I would like to overhaul expungements all together. Unfortunately, most of our current judges don’t even do hearings for citizens attempting to get an expungement. I find this quite unfair and perceive it as laziness. As a Representative, I proposed legislation that changed the guidelines for expungements (essentially made it so that speeding and murder were treated separately and added a requirement about having little likelyhood to re-offend). I had hoped this would encourage judges to conduct hearings, but as of right now, Uncircuit and I are the only judges actually doing so.
So my short answer to your above question? I think we should recreate the expungement process and include this program. Additionally, I believe it should be advertised more (as most don’t even know about this program).
4 Likes
Could you be more specific on your criminal reform goal? About the min-max for crimes. Also, how do you plan to execute your legislative rewrite plan?
2 Likes
So your version of “helping” a struggling Supreme Court is to accept the nomination, come onto the Supreme Court, and stay for a month. What’s your solution when you leave, assuming you get elected as Governor, and they’re left in a struggling state again? May you elaborate more on your plans for POST? Seeing as your ideas are going to take up most of your time, how will you properly manage and delegate time to each of these projects? Do you believe you’ll be able to complete them by the end of the term? What do you intend on doing with the Firestone Firearms Commission, which seems to be faltering? Do you have a pick for the next Attorney General? May you provide more details with the Military Court?
4 Likes
We plan to have every single crime have its own individual minimum and maximum sentence. That way, you’re punished per charge.
A big thing that this has been an issue with is the charge of contempt of court, so I’ll use that as an example. The way the system currently is, a judge can sentence you to the maximum of 72 hours for a single contempt charge if they so wish. Under our system, we would put a specific maximum on contempt of court (say, for instance, 2 hours). Then the judge could only issue up to that maximum for that charge.
This will also help stop people being convicted of crimes from having their sentences just be wildly different from another person convicted of the same crimes just because of which judge they got. Under the current system, one judge might give 20 hours for a case that another judge would give 40 hours for. Our goal would be to prevent that by specifying what range a judge must be within for each individual charge.
The first step in the legislative re-write plan is what we call The Nullification Act. This act would be written at the start of our term, but it would not actually take effect until the end of our term. The goal of this act is to set a “deadline” for the entire law to be rewritten – it will specify a certain date which all existing laws will be nullified, and we (alongside Congress) will have until that date to write new laws to replace the existing ones. Each of these laws will be competently written and in compliance with several different standards; such as the Supreme Court’s standards for criminal laws, our own plan to set those minimum and maximum sentences per crime which I talked about earlier, and they will be codified. This means that they will all follow a code which we create to organize our new set of laws to make it easier for citizens to view them and for law enforcement to search them as needed.
To make sure that we cover everything and we don’t leave out any important laws that just end up getting nullified, we will be sure to go down the list of existing laws while we’re writing the new ones.
If you have any further questions or specific things you’d like clarified, feel free to continue responding here or to contact either of us on Discord.
Campaign Discord: SFg3d5B
Jefrafra’s Discord: Jefrafra#2222
Skye_Jones’ Discord: princess skye!!#9640
4 Likes
I don’t think the next Governor should make changes to POST themselves unless they absolutely know what they’re doing and need to.
That should be up to B_ear. Governor only oversees it.
(msg intended for jef/skye, but adding onto what canine said)
2 Likes
Support and fully endorsed.
3 Likes
Support.
3 Likes
As I previously stated, I wish to be in a position where I can do the most good for the state. As Governor, with the legislative rewrite, I can continue to help the Supreme Court while also helping numerous other entities (most notably, the regular citizen). Additionally, once we implement the Law Institution discussed in my campaign speech, I believe we will have more judicially competent individuals. I will then have the ability to nominate them to the Supreme Court.
I’d love to! As Maximus has said, I’d like to work with POST employees (both past and present, especially from when POST was in its prime) to determine what has worked and miserably failed. Additionally, Skye and I will provide our thorough legal knowledge to provide POST cadets the necessary information to avoid basic legal mistakes. In my observation, POST has never had a satisfactory legal tier, so that is definitely something that we want to prioritize. This is to protect the officers and citizens from rights violations.
This is a quite simple question. Skye and I will identify, prioritize, and act.
- Identify problems that the state is facing (though I have already done this to some extent, there is obviously a lot to learn once you are in the position).
- Prioritize which problems are most severe and can be handled quickly (e.g. If I can fix a problem by sending a DM, I’d do that first. A major problem, like the FSP Colonel going rogue, would take priority over writing a bill).
- Act on the problem in the appropriate way
Yes. I don’t think that needs further explanation.
I believe that there was previously a firearm regulatory law that required the Firestone Firearms Commission to act efficiently. I am not opposed to reincluding that clause. I would also not be opposed to introduce some sort of “Motion to Remove” for the Congressperson, Court Justice, and DoJ Employees, in which the appropriate person would be required replace them with another person. This would ensure we only maintain active individuals on the FFC. Given that you have been on the Firestone Firearms Commission for seven months and to my recollection, this if the first time you have brought any concerns up, actually worries me quite a bit.
Skye and I have tossed a few names around, but we have not picked any specific candidate, no. We’d rather wait until we are in office before releasing any specific name as to avoid burning an unnecessary bridge (i.e. Skye and I both have to work with the people who are in the running for it).
I thought I had already addressed it pretty specifically in my initial campaign and subsequent replies about it. If you have a specific question about it, I will be able to answer that. 
Thank you for your many questions and concerns! It has been a pleasure to address these, and I look forward to our future correspondence!
3 Likes
Complete support. Jef and Skye are some of the most qualified people in Firestone right now.
3 Likes
support
3 Likes
o7 yes
2 Likes
Support,
3 Likes
excuse me sir I did hearings
2 Likes
Child support where?
2 Likes
