National Idea Leaderboard 2023 Week 7

Highlight: Death Penalty Reform

The most significant development on the scoreboard and leaderboard this week were two new puzzles being completed on the Death Penalty. Abolishing the Death Penalty only scored a weighted average of all the roles on the game board of :60%: with an above average error margin of ± 8%, with only 3/4 sides of the table, 5/8 walls of information, 9/16 cultural windows, and 5/8 columns of bias. Therefore, it did not make it onto the PolicyKeys™ National Idea Leaderboard which requires a majority of each of the four sides of the ideologically balanced political table.

However, the puzzle to Reform the Death Penalty did significantly better. While the burden of proof to find a defendant guilty is—beyond a reasonable doubt, the burden for this death penalty reform would be—only with incontrovertible evidence. It scores :71%: with a below average error margin of ± 3%, with 4/4 side of the table, 7/8 walls of information, 12/16 cultural windows, and 7/8 columns of bias. This reform would all but eliminate the possibility of putting an innocent to death. In other words, the sentencing guidelines are a fail-safe against killing innocents, and perhaps the demonstrably repentant and certain mentally ill individuals, however at some point we’ll analyze each of the latter two in separate puzzles.

#1 The Great Penny Meltdown :86%: ± 2% Box Score
Time to stop wasting useful metals on useless coins
with a perfect 4/4 Sides, 8/8 Walls, 16/16 Windows, and 8/8 Columns

#2 Over the Counter Birth Control :84%: ± 2% Box Score
The progestin pill should be sold over the counter
with 4/4 Sides, 8/8 Walls, 14/16 Windows, 8/8 Columns

#3 SMR Nuclear Reactors :84%: ± 2%
We need to scale new smaller safer nuclear reactors ASAP
with a perfect 4/4 Sides, 8/8 Walls, 16/16 Windows, and 8/8 Columns

#4 Voting on Veterans Day :82%: ± 2%
Move Veteran’s Day to Election Day to make it a holiday
with 4/4 Sides, 8/8 Walls, 15/16 Windows, 8/8 Columns

#5 A Fraud-Free Counted Vote :82%: ± 3%
Frictionless IDs, guaranteed voting access, all votes counted
with 4/4 Sides, 8/8 Walls, 13/16 Windows, 8/8 Columns

#6 Parking Lots of Shade :80%: ± 2% Box Score
Solar canopies over most larger parking lots
with a perfect 4/4 Sides, 8/8 Walls, 16/16 Windows, and 8/8 Columns

#7 Social Security Force Buys on Dips :80%: ± 2%
The Social Security Fund should invest up to 25% into US stock index funds
with 4/4 Sides, 8/8 Walls, 13/16 Windows, 8/8 Columns

#8 OTC Abortion Pills :79%: ± 2%
Let pharmacists dispense abortion pills in the first 10 weeks
with 4/4 Sides, 8/8 Walls, 14/16 Windows, 7/8 Columns

#9 WELCOME Living Wage Employer Tax Credit :78%: ± 3%
Pay a living wage before corporate tax, crime reduction will more than pay for it
with 4/4 Sides, 8/8 Walls, 14/16 Windows, 7/8 Columns

#10 Two-Lane Healthcare :77%: ± 4% Box Score
Medicare for All with a fast lane for premium services for premium cost
with 4/4 Sides, 8/8 Walls, 15/16 Windows, 8/8 Columns

…

#14 Local TAP Legal Immigration :75%: ± 4% Box Score
Let the States decide their own immigration needs
with 4/4 Sides, 7/8 Walls, 12/16 Windows, 8/8 Columns

…

#21 Death Penalty Reform :71%: ± 3% Box Score
Death Penalty only with incontrovertible evidence to avoid killing innocents
with 4/4 Sides, 7/8 Walls, 12/16 Windows, 7/8 Columns

The rest of the leaderboard can be seen here.

:: :: :: :: 

You can play this week’s game at PolicyKeys.com

Congress’s approval rating is 21%, the Supreme Court’s is 40%, the media 27%, the average score of the policies on the PolicyKeys™ National Idea Leaderboard is 73%—Politics 4.0 is already a 2x to 3x better model of US political sentiment and direction than Politics (as usual) 3.0.

A new PolicyKeys™ Where Can We Agree? Puzzle every Monday at 6am Eastern at PolicyKeys.com. You can read more about PolicyKeys™ Where Can We Agree? in Politics 4.0 How Gamification, AI, and National Idea Leaderboards Can Help You Depolarize the World. The Observatory of Public Sector Innovation (OPSI) at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has recognized PolicyKeys™ for its innovative approach to consensus building.

Finding out Where We Can Agree? takes Guts ::

:: :: :: ::

PolicyKeys™ has invented a nonpartisan rating system using the four sides of the political table, eight walls of information, sixteen subcultural windows, and eight columns of bias—change to status quo. It’s all based on this ground truth, There’s a time to save and a time to spend, a time for freedom and a time for laws—where can we agree? We call it our Political DNA, A for Abundance, C for Commerce, G for Governance, and T for Thrift, expressed as ACGT just like human DNA.

We are all way more conflicted in our views on public policy solutions than the powers that be want us to believe because it’s in their best interest not ours. You may identify with a dozen or more roles on the PolicyKeys™ Game Board, and each of them may be for or against a solution for a key reason. You can note your own personal score and see why you may or may not agree. Those key reasons are noted in the Weekly Game and Weekly Key for each puzzle. Keep a close eye on the roles and key reasons you most closely identify.

For more on our Mission, Vision, and Values, and the Four Laws of Public Policy Formation click here.

Should the US End Sugar Subsidies?

BOX SCORE: Sugar Subsidies

Puzzle Summary:

Originally from the great depression, did you know that the US still subsidizes sugar production? The US exports $1.3B of sugar each year and imports $185M. Subsidies inhibit the free market, but neither party wants to lose the votes of the sugar industry.

ONE PARROT sweetly adds that the US sugar industry needs subsidies to compete in the world market, it protects sugar producers' & processors' profits and wages. THE OTHER PARROT sours that view with the US promoting sugar gluttony which increases healthcare costs, and ironically raises the price of sugar to consumers and food manufacturers.

Both Parrots make their good points over and over and over again. What did our nonpartisan scoring system say?                       

 

BOX SCORE for Ending Sugar Subsidies
Weighted-Average Forecast

:75%: ± 3% Nonpartisan Score
Sides of the Table 4/4
Walls of Information 7/8
Cultural Windows 14/16
Columns of Bias 7/8

Conclusion: LEADERBOARD WORTHY

 

Top Four Key Reasons in Favor of Ending Sugar Subsidies

Sugar subsidies cost billions
Regenerative farming needs those subsides
US pays more for sugar than the free market
Sugar production is carbon intensive

Top Four Key Reasons Against Ending Sugar Subsidies

Sugar subsides are a bargaining chip in foreign trade
Helps sugar growers and processors
Family farms depend on the subsidies
US Sugar industry employs 370,000

 

Where Can We Agree?®: Four Odd Couples In-Favor

Caregivers & Gun Owners
USA Made & International NGOs
Giver States & Taker States
Underrepresented & Landlords

 

Where Can We Agree?®: Four Odd Couples Against

Federal Payroll & Materials
Social Media & Rank and File Democrats
Free Press & Border and Order Republicans
Core Republicans & Democratic Leadership

 

Four A-hah Moments

(Yes) Regenerative farming needs those subsidies
(Yes) Lost US jobs because of sugar trade policy

(No) Might perversely increase sugar consumption
(No) 11K family farms grow sugar

 

Politics 4.0 DNA (ACGT) Conclusion

We predict a 75% vast super-majority of roles in this country to support Ending Sugar Subsidies with a low error margin of  ± 3%.  Thrift (T) types point out that it will lower the cost of sugar and all the products sugar is in. Abundance (A) types see more productivity and growth for other more useful industries. Commerce (C) types see less government interference in free markets. Governance (G) types see sending an important message about national priorities.

:: :: :: ::

You can play this week’s game at PolicyKeys.com

Congress’s approval rating is 21%, the Supreme Court’s is 40%, the media 27%, the average score of the policies on the PolicyKeys™ National Idea Leaderboard is 73%—Politics 4.0 is already a 2x to 3x better model of US political sentiment and direction than Politics (as usual) 3.0.

A new PolicyKeys™ Where Can We Agree? Puzzle every Monday at 6am Eastern at PolicyKeys.com. You can read more about PolicyKeys™ Where Can We Agree? in Politics 4.0 How Gamification, AI, and National Idea Leaderboards Can Help You Depolarize the World. The Observatory of Public Sector Innovation (OPSI) at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has recognized PolicyKeys™ for its innovative approach to consensus building.

Finding out where we can agree takes guts ::

Should We End the Penny to Harvest the Zinc?

BOX SCORE: End the Penny? #Pendy

Puzzle Summary:

More pennies are minted every year, and there are already six hundred billion pennies in circulation which amounts to 1.5M metric tons of zinc at $3300/ton or $5B worth of metal but the penny costs 1.8¢ to mint. Minerals for coins are in high demand to make goods that people want but we need a way to give people change in increments of less than a nickel.

ONE PARROT mints we need pennies to pay sales tax, and to keep an economy with sufficient pocket money. THE OTHER PARROT melts most pennies just live in jars anyway, and we're a net importer of zinc so we'll be more zinc secure by discontinuing pennies.

There is a secondary issue of whether ending the penny might bring us closer to a digital-only currency. Both Parrots make their good points over and over and over again. What did our nonpartisan scoring system say?

 

BOX SCORE for Ending the Penny
Weighted-Average Forecast

:86%: ± 2% Nonpartisan Score
Sides of the Table 4/4
Wall of Information 8/8
Cultural Windows 16/16
Columns of Bias 8/8

Conclusion: LEADERBOARD WORTHY

 

Top Four Key Reasons in Favor of Ending the Penny

Mining zinc to put in penny jars is useless
The mint loses money on every penny
Canada ended the penny in 2012
Zinc soil supplements could save 200,000 lives

 

Top Four Key Reasons Against Ending the Penny

May lead to a digital currency
Some nonprofits need the change
Alaskan zinc miners could be harmed
Businesses will need rounding software

 

Where Can We Agree?®

Four Odd Couples In-Favor: Gun Owners & Caregivers
Hawk Republicans & Urban Full-Time
Renewables & Utilities
Family Farms & Big Tech

 

Where Can We Agree?®: Four Odd Couples Against

Materials & Under-represented
Urban PT & Republican Leadership
Moralist Republicans & Democratic Doves
Billionaires & Seniors

 

Four A-hah Moments

(Yes) A zinc glut would lower product costs
(Yes) Rounding up to the nickel helps workers

(No) Zinc mining and lithium mining are linked
(No) Rounding up to the nickel hurts consumers

 

Politics 4.0 DNA (ACGT) Conclusion

Other than companies and employees that directly benefit from the continued minting of the penny there is almost no support for keeping the penny. Thrift (T) types point out that the penny cost double its face value to make. Abundance (A) types want to use the zinc for useful purposes not useless purposes. Commerce (C) types want less dumb government solutions. Governance (G) types want to stop the waste to fund more important programs.

At the time of this printing Ending the Penny is the #1 Idea on the PolicyKeys™ USA National Idea Leaderboard.

:: :: :: :: 

You can play this week’s game at PolicyKeys.com

Congress’ approval rating is 21%, the Supreme Court’s is 40%, the media 27%, the average score of the policies on the PolicyKeys™ National Idea Leaderboard is 73%—Politics 4.0 is already a 2x to 3x better model of US political sentiment and direction than Politics (as usual) 3.0.

A new PolicyKeys™ Where Can We Agree? Puzzle every Monday at 6am Eastern at PolicyKeys.com. You can read more about PolicyKeys™ Where Can We Agree? in Politics 4.0 How Gamification, AI, and National Idea Leaderboards Can Help You Depolarize the World. The Observatory of Public Sector Innovation (OPSI) at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has recognized PolicyKeys™ for its innovative approach to consensus building.

Finding out where we can agree takes guts ::

Should Governments Support Low Till Farming?

BOX SCORE: UN-Till Then Farming

Puzzle Summary:

Until the climate emergency is over, a United Nations (UN) pact to speed the adoption of low-tillage farming with industrialized member nations agreeing to assist farmers with any out-of-pocket conversion cost for equipment, crop rotation, crop diversity, and cover crops.

ONE PARROT plows that to feed the world we can't risk changing current practices for yield or monetary reasons. THE OTHER PARROT sows that caring for the soil increases carbon sequestration, yields richer soil, healthier foods, requires less water, less chemicals, less weeds, less pesticides, less labor, and produces higher yields.

The overall benefits of low-till are well known but farming is a grueling profession with thin profit margins, and all change is difficult. Both Parrots make their good points over and over and over again. What did our nonpartisan scoring system say?                       

 

BOX SCORE for Nuclear Waste?
Weighted-Average Forecast

:61%: ± 9% Nonpartisan Score
Sides of the Table 4/4
Wall of Information 7/8
Cultural Windows 11/16
Columns of Bias 6/8

Conclusion: LEADERBOARD WORTHY

 

Top Four Key Reasons in Favor of Supporting Low-Till Farming

An easy quick win for the planet
May mitigate climate related losses
Regenerative food means lower healthcare costs
Less nitrogen runoff into rivers and streams

 

Top Four Key Reasons Against Supporting Low-Till Farming

Vertical Hydroponics is a better solution
Food’s already abundant
Food prices could go up even more
Loss of equipment manufacturing jobs & profits

 

Where Can We Agree?®: Four Odd Couples In-Favor

Gun Owners & Caregivers
Unions & Founders
Seniors & Students
Civil Servants & Big Tech

 

Where Can We Agree?®: Four Odd Couples Against

Under-Represented & Big Ag
Democratic Leadership & Republican Leadership
Urban PT & Billionaires
Utilities & Renewables

 

Four A-hah Moments

(Yes) Agriculture is a quarter of greenhouse gases
(Yes) Climate change will damage infrastructure

(No) CAFO livestock may be easier to protect from heat
(No) Big money to be made from rebuilding infrastructure

 

Politics 4.0 DNA (ACGT) Conclusion

We predict a 60% super-majority of roles in this country to support governments supporting the conversion to Low Till Farming, however this has a fairly large margin for error of  ± 9%.  Thrift (T) types point out that food prices might initially go up. Abundance (A) types see a relatively fast payback from any government investments or loans. Commerce (C) types see less interruptions from climate catastrophes. Governance (G) types want to cooperate with other governments world-wide to prevent catastrophic climate change.

:: :: :: :: 

You can play this week’s game at PolicyKeys.com

Congress’ approval rating is 21%, the Supreme Court’s is 40%, the media 27%, the average score of the policies on the PolicyKeys™ National Idea Leaderboard is 73%—Politics 4.0 is already a 2x to 3x better model of US political sentiment and direction than Politics (as usual) 3.0.

A new PolicyKeys™ Where Can We Agree? Puzzle every Monday at 6am Eastern at PolicyKeys.com. You can read more about PolicyKeys™ Where Can We Agree? in Politics 4.0 How Gamification, AI, and National Idea Leaderboards Can Help You Depolarize the World. The Observatory of Public Sector Innovation (OPSI) at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has recognized PolicyKeys™ for its innovative approach to consensus building.

Finding out where we can agree takes guts ::