Jump to content
270soft Forum
vcczar

New Historical President RP

Recommended Posts

Congress is roughly these numbers @Reagan04

New Republican Senators 40%; US Reps 40%

Liberty Party Senators 20%: US Reps 25%

Conservative Senators 20%; US Reps 20%

American Progress Senators 20%; US Reps 15%

OOC: Liberty Party is trending downward, and so the Conservatives will likely be the #2 party at mid-terms. If you maintain a fiscal conservatism, but are somewhat morally progressive on social issues, otherwise, you could earn New England and the Midwest from the New Republicans. Basically, if you are more like a William H. Taft or Charles Evans Hughes (1916 Rep nominee) than a post-Goldwater conservative.  You could operate like Coolidge and win these regions, possibly. He's basically Reagan without catering to the Religious Right or to the Military-Industrial Complex. Typing out your events/decisions right now. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, vcczar said:

Congress is roughly these numbers @Reagan04

New Republican Senators 40%; US Reps 40%

Liberty Party Senators 20%: US Reps 25%

Conservative Senators 20%; US Reps 20%

American Progress Senators 20%; US Reps 15%

OOC: Liberty Party is trending downward, and so the Conservatives will likely be the #2 party at mid-terms. If you maintain a fiscal conservatism, but are somewhat morally progressive on social issues, otherwise, you could earn New England and the Midwest from the New Republicans. Basically, if you are more like a William H. Taft or Charles Evans Hughes (1916 Rep nominee) than a post-Goldwater conservative.  You could operate like Coolidge and win these regions, possibly. He's basically Reagan without catering to the Religious Right or to the Military-Industrial Complex. Typing out your events/decisions right now. 

 

Don't worry I'm deeply familiar with all of those men lol. My plan was to be much like Taft or Coolidge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Events and Decisions for March 1885-1889 @Reagan04  [OOC: Please don't respond to this until @Conservative Elector 2 can post the Elections maps]

1) Germany's request for an invasion of Canada

Pres. Brooke had not yet responded to Germany's request that we invade Canada as soon as Great Britain declared war. We are currently part of an alliance that is expected to be at war any day now. 

2) Nationalizing of industries; 8 hour workdays; regulation

Brooke has nationalized several industries. You may be able to earn support of denationalization if you accept business regulation bills as a compromise. The most pressing of these are child labor laws and support for an 8 hour workday. Although some have more demands. 

3) Tax protests

Taxation has been exceptionally high, but somewhat necessary to pay for all the modernization of the South, the West, and improvements throughout. Additionally, the military has increased in size, and we are gearing up for war. The tariff is not generating much money right now, and trade has been restricted with war on the horizon. We are still in the Depression, but the economy has been slowly improving or years. 

4) Silver protests

Business interests are now desirous for the elimination of all silver from our currency. Calling for a pure gold standard! However, Western farmers are protesting over even Brooke's mostly pro-gold administration and party. 

5) Battling Corruption

Corruption has been rampant under the Liberty Administration. People are desirous of how you plan on combating it. 

6) Crime in the cities 

Pres. Brooke came off as uninterested in aiding the cities, which are rapidly increasing in crime. Some hope that the federal government will get involved in decreasing crime. 

7) Naval superiority; Bases

War hawks in Congress are desirous of naval bases in the Carribean and pacific. The fear is that Mexico, France, UK, Germany, Russia, Japan, or others may take them if we don't. 

😎 Statehoods of MT, ND, SD and WA

These four states will enter the union. Your party notes that these 4 states are more of a benefit to the American Progress Party. Could they become a bigger threat to the Conservatives than the New Republicans or Liberty Party? 

9) White Southern Emigres (Constitutional)

The sons and daughters of former Confederate Veterans are calling for the president to do something about their fathers, grandfathers, uncles, and older friends that fought against our county during the Civil War. Some estimate that 60% of White Southern families that fought for the Confederacy have left for Mexico, Canada, the Caribbean or Europe. Many of those that have stayed, have migrated North or West, or to Texas, Florida or Louisiana. 

10) Misc

The new Conservative President can propose handling any other issue or issues in the country by responding to this 10th event/decision. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@vcczar @Reagan04 Here we go!

1123474821_Legend-1884Round1.thumb.png.ebd11cb4ee3648f9d5e1fa6732c834f4.png

591373559_Legend-1884Round2.thumb.png.5537cdf60464054ac3efbf287d93b95b.png

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Republicans will wait to see specific proposals to Congress, but we already can see working with the Conservatives on Foreign Policy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, vcczar said:

1) Germany's request for an invasion of Canada

Pres. Brooke had not yet responded to Germany's request that we invade Canada as soon as Great Britain declared war. We are currently part of an alliance that is expected to be at war any day now. 

Absolutely not, I want to reach out to France and Great Britain with the overtures of a new administration explaining that we absolutely want no war. We'd like to see what we can do as far as detangling ourselves from Europe and beginning the efforts of cultivating relationships with the UK, France, and Mexico. This alliance was a fool's errand to begin with. We are totally opposed to war and especially against Western European and New World nations that are more culturally similar to us than our haphazard allies. We'd like to build some economic ties as incentives for both sides in French and British cooperation. We are at a fulcrum for World Relations and I want to cultivate peace. It's important to me that we rebuild and put America First.

15 hours ago, vcczar said:

2) Nationalizing of industries; 8 hour workdays; regulation

Brooke has nationalized several industries. You may be able to earn support of denationalization if you accept business regulation bills as a compromise. The most pressing of these are child labor laws and support for an 8 hour workday. Although some have more demands. 

We need to work towards denationalization of all of these industries. These regulations would be preferred at the state level, however, I am interested in Child Labor Law compromise if I compromise must be met. I am also hoping Progress Congresspeople will take us up on our offer to follow our agenda (See issue 8). What I'd like to see done is a full scale denationalization of these industries in order to give our economy the charge it needs to pick back up into high gear. I am interested in gauging how the Congress would react to a Right to Business amendment to the Constitution which would make nationalization much much harder if even possible at all, we need to strengthen the Commerce Clause and not allow the Supreme Court to bloat the Federal Government as we have seen. I certainly hope that I have the opportunity to appoint some Small Government Justices, this is an issue I'd like to put at the forefront of my Pro-Growth administration.

15 hours ago, vcczar said:

3) Tax protests

Taxation has been exceptionally high, but somewhat necessary to pay for all the modernization of the South, the West, and improvements throughout. Additionally, the military has increased in size, and we are gearing up for war. The tariff is not generating much money right now, and trade has been restricted with war on the horizon. We are still in the Depression, but the economy has been slowly improving or years. 

This is exactly on what I was elected! This fear of high taxation and tyranny is what through the Liberty Party out of power and we'd be fools not to take into account the concerns of the common man. I am for slashing Federal spending by withdrawing many of the current federal projects and certainly by denationalizing many industries. We cannot go to war in a depression, that would be suicide and once peace is secured we can stop growth of the military and even begin to decrease its size. Hopefully this promise tax cut will come through as a large accomplishment, the protests will subside, the economy will rebound, and this administration policies are a factor in that. I am in favor of slashing Federal revenues and expenditures.

15 hours ago, vcczar said:

4) Silver protests

Business interests are now desirous for the elimination of all silver from our currency. Calling for a pure gold standard! However, Western farmers are protesting over even Brooke's mostly pro-gold administration and party. 

Business interests know I am the best guy they'll get for President, so I use some of my influence to try to make it clear to them that I am dealing with a Depression, near war, and a protesting and angry people, I am governing an entire nation, not just the Northeast. I am entirely sympathetic to the Gold Standard and I would institute it if I had my druthers but I don't and we must keep other Pro-Business measures like denationalization and tax cuts at the forefront, hopefully this will placate them. I am Pro-Gold, but this term is not the time to explore that route.

15 hours ago, vcczar said:

5) Battling Corruption

Corruption has been rampant under the Liberty Administration. People are desirous of how you plan on combating it. 

Another key issue on which I was elected and hopefully will be able to deliver results. My main plan here has to do with ending the Spoils system that the Liberty Party put in place. President Brooke of course famously asked for term limits, however I believe that the people should have the right to elect who it is that they believe best represents them. We need to turn to bureaucratic waste. For this, my administration has implemented a hard and fast rule of Meritocratic appointments to test for qualifications before a position is awarded to an individual. I will also push for an expanse in watchdog powers of the Justice Department on both Congress and the Executive Branch allowing it to function independently to investigate corruption and croneyism at all levels of government. Seeing how all of these measures have worked in my own administration, I ask Congress codify them nationally in the form of a Civil Service Exam and the Government Honesty and Accountability Agency (GAHA) under yet semi-independent of the Justice Department. Let's do the peoples work!

15 hours ago, vcczar said:

6) Crime in the cities 

Pres. Brooke came off as uninterested in aiding the cities, which are rapidly increasing in crime. Some hope that the federal government will get involved in decreasing crime. 

Make no mistake, I may have many hot-button issues on which I campaigned and was elected, but I will treat none with any less fervor nor attention then I gave the last. This is a particularly trying issue as I am loathe to some Federal Police Force, however, I am certainly antithetical to such an attitude towards Federal Law enforcement in general. I would like to pioneer the Federal Law Enforcement Office (FLEO or LEO- OOC: basically our FBI but I didn't want to rip off the name) and hopefully pass this through Congress. The job of the FLEO will be to track down and bust organized crime syndicates and work in tandem with the GAHA to rout out their influence in government. FLEO will hopefully be given large authority as a national agency, I am hoping to be known as not only a Pro-Growth President, but a Law and Order President and this is the next step in the Justice Department overhaul that will hopefully accomplish. Apart from our new FLEO apparatus, I would like to use a bit of Federal power on this issue to provide Negative and Positive Incentives to states to inflict harsher sentencing laws. We also need to hire more prosecutors and I will give an Executive Order of zero tolerance on Federal Crimes. Our Hard Line Immigration stances should help with this. Mandatory Minimums are a possibility, but more of a last resort as I do want the majority of the heavy lifting to be done by the states as the Framers intended, but the Federal apathy we have seen for years is sure to come to an end now.

16 hours ago, vcczar said:

7) Naval superiority; Bases

War hawks in Congress are desirous of naval bases in the Carribean and pacific. The fear is that Mexico, France, UK, Germany, Russia, Japan, or others may take them if we don't. 

This is an understandable fear and as we edge on war, I must look to attain Peace through Strength. To take these bases and ensure out superiority in the Western hemisphere is desirable. It is here and now I issue this: My Capenter Doctrine. The United States is to refrain from any and all European conflicts and to remain entirely neutral in their courses, of course this does not reflect possible favored trading partners should a particular side align with our interests more. However it is entirely rigid in its effect on military involvement. Secondly, we urge Europe to withdraw from the Western Hemisphere and to keep their wars out of our backyards, as a precaution, we shall take these naval bases to extend and protect the establishment of this Carpenter Doctrine which I believe will ensure the safety, prosperity, growth, and independence of our great nation.

16 hours ago, vcczar said:

😎 Statehoods of MT, ND, SD and WA

These four states will enter the union. Your party notes that these 4 states are more of a benefit to the American Progress Party. Could they become a bigger threat to the Conservatives than the New Republicans or Liberty Party? 

Privately I am all for new states and always thought this to be a nonpartisan affair. That being said, I am being played a tough hand to try to accomplish all these goals before 1889, hopefully this first term goes well and I am re-elected, but there is no guarantee of that so I must be safe. We will be shrewd about this politically. We will use the entrance of these states as leverage in exchange for Progressive and Republican backing on the aforementioned Domestic policies, particularly more divisive economic ones. We know they most likely support our Foreign and Judicial policies so this should help win their votes to side with us economically, hopefully they have softened to the Conservatives because of this and not only this, but similar policies regarding Justice and Foreign Affairs. We also purposely set a pure Gold standard aside to not enrage the Silverites in the Progressives. If that is the case, that they will support us, admit these states with no prejudice nor reservation.

16 hours ago, vcczar said:

9) White Southern Emigres (Constitutional)

The sons and daughters of former Confederate Veterans are calling for the president to do something about their fathers, grandfathers, uncles, and older friends that fought against our county during the Civil War. Some estimate that 60% of White Southern families that fought for the Confederacy have left for Mexico, Canada, the Caribbean or Europe. Many of those that have stayed, have migrated North or West, or to Texas, Florida or Louisiana. 

While I entirely believe that the South was wrong and as a New Yorker I could never see a black man as anything less than an equal to myself, the 1st amendment guarantees the right to an opinion and I believe that it is wrong to disenfranchise people for their opinions, that is exactly what the Liberty Party has done. I will see what we can do in terms of re-enfranchisement, if anything. I'm not particularly interested in fighting that battle. If anything were worked out, it would only be for the Lower and Middle Class Southern whites that picked up a gun in defense of their home, not the generals or Upper Class Plantation owners that knew full well they were fighting for oppression. I believe this emigration is hurting our economy and agriculture is an important part of any industrialized nation. Again, this is not a hill upon which to die but should be examined for possible compromise. I am trying to govern from the Center regarding these issues and I am open to such a possible compromise.

16 hours ago, vcczar said:

10) Misc

The new Conservative President can propose handling any other issue or issues in the country by responding to this 10th event/decision. 

I am interested in passing a more Conservative Immigration law to allow Americans to reap the benefits of any economic growth we receive, but like Issue 9, my primary focusses are above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Republicans can find areas of compromise, but we will use our power in Congress to oppose certain measures. For example, the bullying of states to inflict harsher sentencing. There is a need for Federal jurisdiction on this issue, but to force the states to do what we want isn't the answer. Republicans will need to look at what the Conservatives wish to cut in the government, but warn they won't agree to cut a majority of what the government is paying right now. Child labor laws need to be enacted, and we would be willing to compromise on denationalization if strict child labor laws would be passed. We consider Conservatives to be the best thing for a foreign policy match to the Republicans and have no real complaint there

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Hestia11 said:

Republicans can find areas of compromise, but we will use our power in Congress to oppose certain measures. For example, the bullying of states to inflict harsher sentencing. There is a need for Federal jurisdiction on this issue, but to force the states to do what we want isn't the answer. Republicans will need to look at what the Conservatives wish to cut in the government, but warn they won't agree to cut a majority of what the government is paying right now. Child labor laws need to be enacted, and we would be willing to compromise on denationalization if strict child labor laws would be passed. We consider Conservatives to be the best thing for a foreign policy match to the Republicans and have no real complaint there

President Carpenter thanks Senator Atkinson for his support on a litany of issues and asks what he believes we should do. Do you believe we should just tell states what to do in a possible violation of the 10th amendment? My plan is to offer incentives to follow federal wishes and recommendations of the newly minted (F)LEO. And this administration does point out the creation of a Federal Law Enforcement body to help address the Senators' concerns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Reagan04 said:

President Carpenter thanks Senator Atkinson for his support on a litany of issues and asks what he believes we should do. Do you believe we should just tell states what to do in a possible violation of the 10th amendment? My plan is to offer incentives to follow federal wishes and recommendations of the newly minted (F)LEO. And this administration does point out the creation of a Federal Law Enforcement body to help address the Senators' concerns.

We take issue with the fact that incentives are just a way to punish states that disagree with what the Federal government is saying. We should trust our state legislatures to know their people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Hestia11 said:

We take issue with the fact that incentives are just a way to punish states that disagree with what the Federal government is saying. We should trust our state legislatures to know their people.

The President points out that this is the failed policy that we have been doing. We then offer a compromise: remove negative incentives in lieu of only offering positive incentives to those that comply. I am a Constitution guy, but we must take action on this crime wave and this is the only constitutionally permissible way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Reagan04 said:

The President points out that this is the failed policy that we have been doing. We then offer a compromise: remove negative incentives in lieu of only offering positive incentives to those that comply. I am a Constitution guy, but we must take action on this crime wave and this is the only constitutionally permissible way.

Some Republicans would be willing to get behind that, enough for it to pass probably.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OOC: Obviously someone is no big fan of our project on my own Wiki-pages, which are not visible to others and do not hurt or spam anyone...

 

hued.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Reagan04 said:

Absolutely not, I want to reach out to France and Great Britain with the overtures of a new administration explaining that we absolutely want no war. We'd like to see what we can do as far as detangling ourselves from Europe and beginning the efforts of cultivating relationships with the UK, France, and Mexico. This alliance was a fool's errand to begin with. We are totally opposed to war and especially against Western European and New World nations that are more culturally similar to us than our haphazard allies. We'd like to build some economic ties as incentives for both sides in French and British cooperation. We are at a fulcrum for World Relations and I want to cultivate peace. It's important to me that we rebuild and put America First.

You send your diplomats to Great Britain and France as Great Britain declares war on the German Alliance, which technically includes the US. Troops in Canada march to the border, as do troops in Mexico. While Canadians only prepare in invasion, Mexico led by former Confederate generals begin firing shells into Texas; although, they seem to have orders not to hit civilians. Your advisors ask what we are to do about our German alliance. If we stay in the alliance, then we will likely be invaded. If we leave it, the German Alliance will likely declare war on us. 

3 hours ago, Reagan04 said:

We need to work towards denationalization of all of these industries. These regulations would be preferred at the state level, however, I am interested in Child Labor Law compromise if I compromise must be met. I am also hoping Progress Congresspeople will take us up on our offer to follow our agenda (See issue 8). What I'd like to see done is a full scale denationalization of these industries in order to give our economy the charge it needs to pick back up into high gear. I am interested in gauging how the Congress would react to a Right to Business amendment to the Constitution which would make nationalization much much harder if even possible at all, we need to strengthen the Commerce Clause and not allow the Supreme Court to bloat the Federal Government as we have seen. I certainly hope that I have the opportunity to appoint some Small Government Justices, this is an issue I'd like to put at the forefront of my Pro-Growth administration.

Congress gets in a big scuffle over nationalization and labor reform. A compromise bill is made and is sent to the president after narrowly passing Congress. These are the parts of the bill, which must be accepted or vetoes as a whole.:

1. All nationalized industries, except for the railroads will be denationalized. 

2. Child labor will be banned in the mining industries and in factories only. 

3. A part-time US federal position will be established in each city to enforce child labor laws. 

4. The right of Labor Unions to exist will not be interfered with by the Federal or State governments. 

5. Businesses that hire union workers must abide by union laws.

3 hours ago, Reagan04 said:

This is exactly on what I was elected! This fear of high taxation and tyranny is what through the Liberty Party out of power and we'd be fools not to take into account the concerns of the common man. I am for slashing Federal spending by withdrawing many of the current federal projects and certainly by denationalizing many industries. We cannot go to war in a depression, that would be suicide and once peace is secured we can stop growth of the military and even begin to decrease its size. Hopefully this promise tax cut will come through as a large accomplishment, the protests will subside, the economy will rebound, and this administration policies are a factor in that. I am in favor of slashing Federal revenues and expenditures.

Which federal programs are you slashing? Infrastructure improvement and upkeep. Military budget, military pensions, and military socialized healthcare. Building of Western Universities. General upkeep for the federal government. The military programs make up 60% of the money from taxes. Infrastructure is 20%. General upkeep is 15%. Public funded universities is 5%

3 hours ago, Reagan04 said:

Business interests know I am the best guy they'll get for President, so I use some of my influence to try to make it clear to them that I am dealing with a Depression, near war, and a protesting and angry people, I am governing an entire nation, not just the Northeast. I am entirely sympathetic to the Gold Standard and I would institute it if I had my druthers but I don't and we must keep other Pro-Business measures like denationalization and tax cuts at the forefront, hopefully this will placate them. I am Pro-Gold, but this term is not the time to explore that route.

Silver protesters calm down slightly upon hearing that the president will ignore the gold issue. However, the leaders petition the White House for a statement on the silver standard. 

3 hours ago, Reagan04 said:

Another key issue on which I was elected and hopefully will be able to deliver results. My main plan here has to do with ending the Spoils system that the Liberty Party put in place. President Brooke of course famously asked for term limits, however I believe that the people should have the right to elect who it is that they believe best represents them. We need to turn to bureaucratic waste. For this, my administration has implemented a hard and fast rule of Meritocratic appointments to test for qualifications before a position is awarded to an individual. I will also push for an expanse in watchdog powers of the Justice Department on both Congress and the Executive Branch allowing it to function independently to investigate corruption and croneyism at all levels of government. Seeing how all of these measures have worked in my own administration, I ask Congress codify them nationally in the form of a Civil Service Exam and the Government Honesty and Accountability Agency (GAHA) under yet semi-independent of the Justice Department. Let's do the peoples work!

Congress passes a Civil Service Exam and the Government Honesty and Accountability Agency Act, which is placed on the president's desk. 

3 hours ago, Reagan04 said:

Make no mistake, I may have many hot-button issues on which I campaigned and was elected, but I will treat none with any less fervor nor attention then I gave the last. This is a particularly trying issue as I am loathe to some Federal Police Force, however, I am certainly antithetical to such an attitude towards Federal Law enforcement in general. I would like to pioneer the Federal Law Enforcement Office (FLEO or LEO- OOC: basically our FBI but I didn't want to rip off the name) and hopefully pass this through Congress. The job of the FLEO will be to track down and bust organized crime syndicates and work in tandem with the GAHA to rout out their influence in government. FLEO will hopefully be given large authority as a national agency, I am hoping to be known as not only a Pro-Growth President, but a Law and Order President and this is the next step in the Justice Department overhaul that will hopefully accomplish. Apart from our new FLEO apparatus, I would like to use a bit of Federal power on this issue to provide Negative and Positive Incentives to states to inflict harsher sentencing laws. We also need to hire more prosecutors and I will give an Executive Order of zero tolerance on Federal Crimes. Our Hard Line Immigration stances should help with this. Mandatory Minimums are a possibility, but more of a last resort as I do want the majority of the heavy lifting to be done by the states as the Framers intended, but the Federal apathy we have seen for years is sure to come to an end now.

A Federal Law Enforcement Office Act has been created and passed by Congress. The postal tax will be increased to afford the creation of this position in the cities. It is placed on the President's desk. 

To go with this bill, a new restrictive immigration bill, which passed by only one vote in both houses, has been placed on the president's desk. It will ban all immigration to the US until the depression is over, at which point the current immigration law will return, until a new immigration bill is made. 

4 hours ago, Reagan04 said:

This is an understandable fear and as we edge on war, I must look to attain Peace through Strength. To take these bases and ensure out superiority in the Western hemisphere is desirable. It is here and now I issue this: My Capenter Doctrine. The United States is to refrain from any and all European conflicts and to remain entirely neutral in their courses, of course this does not reflect possible favored trading partners should a particular side align with our interests more. However it is entirely rigid in its effect on military involvement. Secondly, we urge Europe to withdraw from the Western Hemisphere and to keep their wars out of our backyards, as a precaution, we shall take these naval bases to extend and protect the establishment of this Carpenter Doctrine which I believe will ensure the safety, prosperity, growth, and independence of our great nation.

Your ambassadors question whether this can be enforced. 1) We are still technically in an alliance with Germany and her allies. 2) Canada is part of the UK (hasn't achieved independence in our history).  Your Military advisers are happy with your desire to expand our naval bases. Your economists wonder how you plan on doing this while cutting federal funding, taxes, etc. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, vcczar said:

You send your diplomats to Great Britain and France as Great Britain declares war on the German Alliance, which technically includes the US. Troops in Canada march to the border, as do troops in Mexico. While Canadians only prepare in invasion, Mexico led by former Confederate generals begin firing shells into Texas; although, they seem to have orders not to hit civilians. Your advisors ask what we are to do about our German alliance. If we stay in the alliance, then we will likely be invaded. If we leave it, the German Alliance will likely declare war on us. 

This could possibly make or break this administration, this will be considered very carefully. I want to consider everything before I make my decision. In this spirit, I want the assurances of the British alliance that they will back off. What have my ambassadors said that the UK and France are offering to us?

7 hours ago, vcczar said:

Congress gets in a big scuffle over nationalization and labor reform. A compromise bill is made and is sent to the president after narrowly passing Congress. These are the parts of the bill, which must be accepted or vetoes as a whole.:

1. All nationalized industries, except for the railroads will be denationalized. 

2. Child labor will be banned in the mining industries and in factories only. 

3. A part-time US federal position will be established in each city to enforce child labor laws. 

4. The right of Labor Unions to exist will not be interfered with by the Federal or State governments. 

5. Businesses that hire union workers must abide by union laws.

Damnit, we need a line-item veto. Tell my assistants to keep that on the back burner for later. As for this bill, Clause 4 and 5 greatly trouble me. I did not think the Right to Business act would be accepted and it appears Congress has entirely ignored it. But 4 and 5 seem to be purely antithetical to that goal. I am entirely fine with the first 3 clauses but I want to see private business protected more and I cannot accept a nationalized railroad, so for those reasons I must veto this bill for Congress to come up with a more pallatable, and frankly less lopsided proposal.

7 hours ago, vcczar said:

Which federal programs are you slashing? Infrastructure improvement and upkeep. Military budget, military pensions, and military socialized healthcare. Building of Western Universities. General upkeep for the federal government. The military programs make up 60% of the money from taxes. Infrastructure is 20%. General upkeep is 15%. Public funded universities is 5%

We will be majorly slashing Infrastructure the most however we will also cut into a military which we hopefully will not need depending the message we get from the British and French on our pulling out of the German alliance. After this I'd like a budget report. And of course I am looking for a tax cut go along with these measures, we have to cut both.

8 hours ago, vcczar said:

Silver protesters calm down slightly upon hearing that the president will ignore the gold issue. However, the leaders petition the White House for a statement on the silver standard. 

We will oblige them as I am a President of Small Government rule and Light touch governance for the people. The White House officially opposes such a measure at this time as we are a Pro-Business Administration and we believe that would harm a strong recovery which we hope to cultivate at this time. It is not a wise route at the current interval.

8 hours ago, vcczar said:

Congress passes a Civil Service Exam and the Government Honesty and Accountability Agency Act, which is placed on the president's desk. 

A Federal Law Enforcement Office Act has been created and passed by Congress. The postal tax will be increased to afford the creation of this position in the cities. It is placed on the President's desk. 

To go with this bill, a new restrictive immigration bill, which passed by only one vote in both houses, has been placed on the president's desk. It will ban all immigration to the US until the depression is over, at which point the current immigration law will return, until a new immigration bill is made. 

1

We will happily sign and claim all of these bills that the Administration passed as giant legislative victories and hopefully lasting parts of our legacy as a Presidency that aims to help people and stay true to American Small Government traditions!

 

8 hours ago, vcczar said:

Your ambassadors question whether this can be enforced. 1) We are still technically in an alliance with Germany and her allies. 2) Canada is part of the UK (hasn't achieved independence in our history).  Your Military advisers are happy with your desire to expand our naval bases. Your economists wonder how you plan on doing this while cutting federal funding, taxes, etc. 

As for the first point, it is highly unlikely we will no longer be in this alliance, again that is currently dependent on the French and British response. I will do this by taking some of the extra money made by cutting out other military expenditures as well as infrastructural costs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New Republicans slam cuts to the military that might still be necessary. Many in the party think that we should wait on cutting the military until after the immediate threat of war is over. They are downright furious over the immigration bill as well. Republicans say that we’re losing people from the south that are leaving and we currently don’t have immigrants? It’s very likely our population could go down, which is not something we want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Reagan04 said:

This could possibly make or break this administration, this will be considered very carefully. I want to consider everything before I make my decision. In this spirit, I want the assurances of the British alliance that they will back off. What have my ambassadors said that the UK and France are offering to us?

UK and France, sensing that the US won’t aid Germany in Europe whether they stay in the alliance or not, opt not to make any offers to the US. Troops in Canada and Mexico will stay at the borders for a potential invasion should the British-French alliance wish for such an invasion to take place. Germany, already in the midst of pushing an offensive against France, calls once again for the US to join the war effort. 

11 hours ago, Reagan04 said:

Damnit, we need a line-item veto. Tell my assistants to keep that on the back burner for later. As for this bill, Clause 4 and 5 greatly trouble me. I did not think the Right to Business act would be accepted and it appears Congress has entirely ignored it. But 4 and 5 seem to be purely antithetical to that goal. I am entirely fine with the first 3 clauses but I want to see private business protected more and I cannot accept a nationalized railroad, so for those reasons I must veto this bill for Congress to come up with a more pallatable, and frankly less lopsided proposal.

Some Conservatives are disappointed that their president did not accept this act, as it would have at least denationalized all but one industry. Congress makes another stab at a compromise bill. They remove any mention to unions in the bill and off a regulatory officer, resulting the following compromise:

1. Child labor is banned in mining only. 

2. All industries are denationalized, except for the railroads and shipping industries. 

11 hours ago, Reagan04 said:

We will be majorly slashing Infrastructure the most however we will also cut into a military which we hopefully will not need depending the message we get from the British and French on our pulling out of the German alliance. After this I'd like a budget report. And of course I am looking for a tax cut go along with these measures, we have to cut both.

The budget is partitioned along the same % as the allocation of taxes. Can’t provide any more information until you adjust your tax proposal following the report of your diplomats. 

11 hours ago, Reagan04 said:

As for the first point, it is highly unlikely we will no longer be in this alliance, again that is currently dependent on the French and British response. I will do this by taking some of the extra money made by cutting out other military expenditures as well as infrastructural costs.

Do you still plan to use money from cuts to infrastructure and military budgets to pay for these new naval bases?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/9/2018 at 2:43 PM, Conservative Elector 2 said:

OOC: Obviously someone is no big fan of our project on my own Wiki-pages, which are not visible to others and do not hurt or spam anyone...

 

hued.png

This is sad to see. We may have to make our own webpage or wiki somehow. I think part of the fun will be analyzing our alternate history when we are done with it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, vcczar said:

This is sad to see. We may have to make our own webpage or wiki somehow. I think part of the fun will be analyzing our alternate history when we are done with it. 

You can make fan pages of stuff. I can look into it and get back to you. A friend did that for a story they wrote a while ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Hestia11 said:

New Republicans slam cuts to the military that might still be necessary. Many in the party think that we should wait on cutting the military until after the immediate threat of war is over. They are downright furious over the immigration bill as well. Republicans say that we’re losing people from the south that are leaving and we currently don’t have immigrants? It’s very likely our population could go down, which is not something we want.

The President reminds the Republican Party that he sent a re-enfranchisement plan to Congress in an effort to stop the emigration, It could pass with full Conservative, Republican, and some Progressive support.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Reagan04 said:

The President reminds the Republican Party that he sent a re-enfranchisement plan to Congress in an effort to stop the emigration, It could pass with full Conservative, Republican, and some Progressive support.

You have 5 hours to respond to the follow ups on your event/decisions (24 hours to respond for presidents and 19 hours have passed.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, vcczar said:

UK and France, sensing that the US won’t aid Germany in Europe whether they stay in the alliance or not, opt not to make any offers to the US. Troops in Canada and Mexico will stay at the borders for a potential invasion should the British-French alliance wish for such an invasion to take place. Germany, already in the midst of pushing an offensive against France, calls once again for the US to join the war effort. 

We will do no such thing and refuse to declare war. Our troops must then stay stationed at the border if Canada and Mexico continue hostilities. I will extend the first olive branch offering trading ties and support for the war effort against the Germans to the British, I hope to reverse the global damage to our standing inflicted by the Brooke administration. Our tariffs will reflect this. We, of course, expect the Mexicans to halt shelling us.

8 hours ago, vcczar said:

Some Conservatives are disappointed that their president did not accept this act, as it would have at least denationalized all but one industry. Congress makes another stab at a compromise bill. They remove any mention to unions in the bill and off a regulatory officer, resulting the following compromise:

1. Child labor is banned in mining only. 

2. All industries are denationalized, except for the railroads and shipping industries. 

I am more than pleased to sign this first step piece of legislation, the Fair Economy Act of 1887 we'll call it, and hope that not only are we re-elected, but that we continue to make strides towards total denationalization, and if the American people support my agenda and appreciate what I have done in other spheres, perhaps my dream of a Right to Business amendment could be realized, but for now, we have real work to be done and an election to win.

8 hours ago, vcczar said:

Do you still plan to use money from cuts to infrastructure and military budgets to pay for these new naval bases?

I do, once those major cuts are taken, and the naval bases paid for, slash the rest in taxes to provide a modest, budget neutral, tax cut.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Reagan04 said:

The President reminds the Republican Party that he sent a re-enfranchisement plan to Congress in an effort to stop the emigration, It could pass with full Conservative, Republican, and some Progressive support.

There was no real plan that was submitted to Congress. Republicans support a stop to the emigration as well, but to simply close off both ends doesn't work either. A shrinking population is the last thing we need in a world like this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Hestia11 said:

There was no real plan that was submitted to Congress. Republicans support a stop to the emigration as well, but to simply close off both ends doesn't work either. A shrinking population is the last thing we need in a world like this.

What we said was to re-enfranchise Middle and Lower Class former Confederates and to stop them from feeling like aliens in their own nation when they had been taken advantage of by Southern politicians and plantation elites. Are you willing to consider this or will you just ignore like last time and demand we do something? This is the administration's plan that has stalled in Congress and we'd love to work on it with the Republican Party.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Reagan04 said:

We will do no such thing and refuse to declare war. Our troops must then stay stationed at the border if Canada and Mexico continue hostilities. I will extend the first olive branch offering trading ties and support for the war effort against the Germans to the British, I hope to reverse the global damage to our standing inflicted by the Brooke administration. Our tariffs will reflect this. We, of course, expect the Mexicans to halt shelling us.

Should we formally leave the German alliance?

15 minutes ago, Reagan04 said:

I do, once those major cuts are taken, and the naval bases paid for, slash the rest in taxes to provide a modest, budget neutral, tax cut.

Your military advisers protest your military tax cuts, and Congress refuses to sign an act allowing tax cuts to the military while a threat of invasion is possible. The Infrastructure Tax cuts are halted by both Republicans and Liberty Party members in Congress, as well as by some Progress members in Congress. Military Imperialists suggest the bases must be taken or bought and built, even if we have to raise taxes to do it. Alternatively, the president could offer liberals (Liberty and Republicans) or moderates (Progress( something they want in exchange for a tax cut to infrastructure. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Reagan04 said:

What we said was to re-enfranchise Middle and Lower Class former Confederates and to stop them from feeling like aliens in their own nation when they had been taken advantage of by Southern politicians and plantation elites. Are you willing to consider this or will you just ignore like last time and demand we do something? This is the administration's plan that has stalled in Congress and we'd love to work on it with the Republican Party.

I point you to your earlier statement that it wasn’t a hill to die on. There wasn’t anything official presented to Congress on that front. We ignored nothing because nothing was submitted as a concrete proposal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×