The statement and accompanying image engage in public discourse by discussing the impact of deregulation in Idaho, as evidenced by the reduction in pages of regulation. The statement implies that deregulation has led to positive outcomes, though it does not specify what those outcomes are.
- The statement does not directly cause harm but lacks detailed evidence to support the claim of 'good results.'Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement could promote understanding if it provided more context or examples of the positive outcomes of deregulation. [-1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement does not engage in personal attacks but could benefit from more constructive dialogue by elaborating on the results. [-1]Principle 4:I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.