==============================================================================
WE THE PEOPLE PLATFORM — ALL DOCX FILES (82 DOCUMENTS)
==============================================================================

Download type:  File Type
Group ID:       DOCX
Generated:      May 12, 2026
Documents:      82

DESCRIPTION
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All Microsoft Word documents from the platform (narrative substantiation,
framing analyses, integrated arguments).

DOCUMENTS INCLUDED
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  1. We The People — Platform Manifesto
     02_Vision_and_Communication/02_We_The_People_Platform.docx
     Best for: First-time readers wanting the integrated vision. Anyone
     evaluating the platform's overall coherence. The integrated vision
     document that introduces the three primary pillars (Community
     Contribution Plan, Empirical Wage Floors, Sovereign Education Fund) and
     the architecture supporting them. Includes the platform's foundational
     principle (“when I do well, we all do well”), the operational design of
     the cost-based pricing framework with field-of-study granularity, the
     two-channel disbursement architecture, the age-30 reversion mechanism,
     and the integration of all primary pillars as a single coherent system.
     This is the document most readers should encounter first. When to read:
     Read first if you want to understand what the platform actually proposes.
     Read again after engaging with the technical documents to see how the
     pieces fit together.

  2. Adjacent Pillars Under Development
     02_Vision_and_Communication/02_Adjacent_Pillars_Under_Development.docx
     Best for: Readers who want to understand the platform's full scope
     including healthcare, childcare, and mental health. The companion
     document positioning healthcare, childcare, and mental health access as
     adjacent pillars to the three primary ones. Articulates the architectural
     intent for each adjacent pillar and the analytical work that has been
     completed at the concept level. Honest about which components are at full
     development versus which remain at concept level. When to read: Read
     after the manifesto if you want to understand the platform's full scope.
     Skip if you are primarily interested in the three primary pillars.

  3. Civic Infrastructure Pillar
     02_Vision_and_Communication/02_Civic_Infrastructure_Pillar.docx
     Best for: Readers interested in the platform's commitment to shared
     physical and digital infrastructure — broadband, transportation, water
     and sewer, public spaces, government digital services, and the electrical
     grid. The vision-level entry point for the Civic Infrastructure pillar as
     defined in v2.3 and substantiated in v2.4 and v2.8. Six components:
     Universal Broadband, Transportation Infrastructure, Water and Sewer
     Systems, Public Spaces, Civic Technology, and Energy Grid Modernization.
     Pillar total midpoint: $298B annually, approximately 1.0% of GDP. The
     document covers what Civic Infrastructure means in this platform, the
     distinguishing test for what belongs in the pillar, the six components at
     vision-level depth, the funding mechanism, cross-pillar interactions, and
     honest limits. Cross-references the architectural framing (entry 33) and
     component substantiations (entries 41, 49, 51) for analytical depth. When
     to read: Read first when you want to understand the platform's commitment
     to shared infrastructure as a foundation for the other pillars. Read
     after the Manifesto for context, before the substantiation documents for
     analytical depth. The document repositioned in v2.8.1 from the original
     v1.0 (which is now Informed Citizenship, entry 59).

  4. Built for What's Coming — AI Transition Infrastructure
     02_Vision_and_Communication/02_Built_For_Whats_Coming.docx
     Best for: Readers whose primary concern is economic stability rather than
     fairness. Conservatives and business leaders. The strategic reframing of
     the platform as AI workforce transition infrastructure. The argument
     proceeds from economic stability rather than fairness as its starting
     point. Demonstrates that the same architecture that solves shared
     prosperity problems also addresses the workforce displacement that AI is
     producing. Designed to broaden the platform's political coalition beyond
     audiences who endorse it on values grounds. When to read: Read if you
     find the fairness framing of the platform less persuasive than the
     economic stability framing. Share with conservative or business-focused
     audiences who would dismiss values-based arguments but might engage with
     stability-based arguments.

  5. The Founding Stake
     02_Vision_and_Communication/02_The_Founding_Stake.docx
     Best for: Readers interested in the platform's launch ceremony and
     political theory. Articulates the universal $2 contribution as
     constitutive participation — the mechanism by which every American
     becomes a founding stakeholder in the institutions the platform creates.
     The mathematical analysis is straightforward: $680M from 340M Americans
     contributing $2 each. The political theory underneath is more
     substantial: people defend institutions they helped build. The stake
     matters less for its dollar amount than for what it establishes about
     ownership and shared standing. When to read: Read if you want to
     understand the platform's launch mechanism and why universal contribution
     at enactment matters beyond the trivial dollar amount.

  6. Future Capacity Fund — Two Architectural Paths
     02_Vision_and_Communication/02_Future_Capacity_Fund.docx
     Best for: Readers interested in long-term institutional design and how to
     preserve capacity for unforeseen problems. The concept document
     presenting two architectural paths for preserving capacity for problems
     future generations will face that current generations cannot anticipate.
     Path A is the pure future capacity approach, accumulating indefinitely
     under supermajority deployment authorization. Path B is the hybrid
     approach with both future capacity and current demonstration components.
     Each path is described with its strengths, limitations, and tradeoffs
     explicitly. The document does not impose a recommendation but lets
     readers weigh the options. When to read: Read if you find the question of
     preserving capacity for unforeseen problems interesting and want to
     understand the architectural options. Optional for readers focused on
     current pillars.

  7. Wage Floor Concept Analysis v0.2
     02_Vision_and_Communication/02_Wage_Floor_Concept_Analysis_v02.docx
     Best for: Readers wanting the conceptual framing of the wage floor pillar
     before engaging with the empirical model. The concept document for the
     empirical wage floor pillar, complementing the mathematical model.
     Articulates why the current single federal minimum wage is structurally
     inadequate, why occupation-specific floors derived from Bureau of Labor
     Statistics (BLS) data are a defensible alternative, and how the system
     would interact with labor markets. The v0.2 designation reflects the
     document's iterative development. When to read: Read alongside the wage
     floor mathematical model if you want both the concept and the analytical
     evidence.

  8. Constituent Letter
     02_Vision_and_Communication/02_Constituent_Letter.docx
     Best for: Anyone wanting to deliver the platform to elected officials. A
     one-page letter for delivering the platform to senators, representatives,
     governors, or other elected officials. Designed to be customized with
     personal details and sent as a cover document accompanying the manifesto
     and other materials. Articulates the reader's standing as a constituent
     and asks specifically for the official's engagement with the platform.
     When to read: Use when sending platform materials to elected officials.
     Customize with personal details before sending.

  9. Community Contribution Plan — Retirement Reform White Paper
     03_Technical_White_Papers/03_Community_Contribution_Plan_WhitePaper.docx
     Best for: Policy professionals, economists, and serious readers wanting
     the full retirement reform proposal. The full technical analysis of the
     retirement reform proposal. Covers the diagnosis of Social Security's
     solvency problem, the architectural alternative (hybrid sunset of
     pay-as-you-go financing combined with construction of a Sovereign
     Investment Fund), the international precedents (Norway GPFG, Australia
     Superannuation, Singapore CPF), the governance architecture, the
     mathematical projections demonstrating that peak transition borrowing
     reduces from $63T to $82B, and the operational mechanics of how the
     system would actually function across the multi-decade transition period.
     When to read: Read if you want the analytical foundation for the
     platform's most foundational pillar. This is the document that
     establishes the platform's analytical credibility.

 10. Does This Raise Taxes? — An Honest Analysis
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Does_This_Raise_Taxes.docx
     Best for: Anyone asking the most important question about the platform —
     does this raise taxes? — and wanting an honest answer rather than a
     slogan. Updated in v2.11 with cross-reference to What This Means For You.
     The median household side-by-side shows $33,584 current vs $17,355
     platform, with net savings of $16,229 per year. The wage floor mechanism
     contributes $3,516 (federal income tax reduction from $5,016 to $1,500).
     Adjacent pillars (healthcare, childcare, mental health) contribute
     $11,580. Civic Infrastructure (broadband, tax prep, identity theft)
     contributes $1,133. New 'How This Example Relates to What This Means For
     You' subsection in the Methodology Note explains why this document's
     figures differ from WTM4Y's at the same income/filer combination (broader
     scope including state tax, out-of-pocket medical, and childcare costs;
     transition-state FICA (Federal Insurance Contributions Act) treatment).
     Cumulative Lifetime Effects: nominal ($649K), inflation-adjusted nominal
     ($1,094K), and present value at 2% real discount rate ($444K). When to
     read: Read first when you want to understand what the platform actually
     means for your household budget. The document is honest about both what
     it captures and what it doesn't — the dollar comparison is one part of
     the story, supplemented by the public-infrastructure note and the
     intangibles section.

 11. How This Was Built — Provenance Document
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_How_This_Was_Built.docx
     Best for: Anyone wanting honest disclosure about how the platform was
     developed. The provenance document acknowledging that the platform was
     developed through extended human-AI collaboration between Jason Robertson
     and Claude (Anthropic's AI assistant). Articulates Jason's contributions
     (architectural vision, design insights, values commitments, iterative
     refinement, strategic direction) and Claude's contributions (analytical
     scaffolding, document production, structural reasoning, limitations work,
     knowledge synthesis). Includes honest observations about the
     collaboration itself and a detailed specifications section documenting
     the specific AI used: Claude Opus 4.7 with knowledge cutoff at end of
     January 2026, accessed through Claude.ai with code execution and file
     system tools. The specifications section enables reproducibility, claim
     verification, and honest evaluation of the work's provenance. When to
     read: Read at the beginning if you want accurate expectations about what
     you're encountering. Read at the end if you've engaged with the substance
     and want to understand its provenance after forming your own view.

 12. What Changes — Future State Milestones at 5, 10, and 15 Years
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_What_Changes_Milestones.docx
     Best for: Readers wanting to see what success looks like, both for
     individuals and for the country. Describes the platform's effects through
     milestones at five, ten, and fifteen years after enactment, with both
     individual and country perspectives at each timepoint. The document is
     explicit that these are optimistic-but-defensible interpretations of what
     the analytical foundation supports, not predictions. Includes a section
     explicitly walking through the range of possible outcomes from optimistic
     to pessimistic, and a section identifying what the platform does NOT
     solve (long-term care, housing affordability, climate adaptation
     requirements beyond Future Capacity Fund disbursements, geographic
     inequality, educational quality variations). When to read: Read after the
     manifesto if you want to see what the future under the platform might
     look like concretely. Helpful for both supporters who want to articulate
     the case and skeptics who want to evaluate whether the trajectory is
     plausible.

 13. An Unexpected Benefit — How the Platform Reduces Identity Theft
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Identity_Theft_Reduction.docx
     Best for: Readers concerned about identity theft, fraud, or data
     security. Anyone curious about the platform’s indirect benefits. Analyzes
     how the platform's architectural simplification reduces identity theft as
     an unexpected side effect of its other design choices. Universal
     healthcare effectively eliminates medical identity theft (~$30B
     annually). The Sovereign Education Fund eliminates student loan fraud
     (~$5B). Reduced financial desperation reduces credit fraud. Universal
     participation reduces benefits fraud. The estimated total reduction is
     $25-35 billion in annual direct fraud losses plus $25-35 billion in
     secondary costs. The document is explicit about what the platform doesn't
     address (tax refund fraud continues; new fraud surfaces emerge in the
     platform's own architecture) and includes a deeper observation about how
     good architecture produces benefits the designer didn't intend. When to
     read: Read if identity theft is a concern that affects how you evaluate
     the platform. Also valuable as evidence that the platform's architectural
     choices produce benefits across multiple unrelated domains — the kind of
     compound rightness that suggests the architecture is sound.

 14. Repairing the Past — Retroactive Debt Retirement
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Repairing_The_Past.docx
     Best for: Readers wondering whether the platform addresses harms
     accumulated under the previous system. Citizens carrying student loan
     debt or medical debt. Analyzes how the platform's surplus capacity can
     retire existing student loan and medical debt retroactively as the
     platform's pillars mature. The mathematics support retiring approximately
     $1.78 trillion in student loan debt across approximately 20 years using
     Sovereign Fund disbursement capacity, plus $220 billion in medical debt
     within 5 years using healthcare pillar surplus, all without requiring new
     contribution rates. Includes three timing scenarios for student loans
     (aggressive, moderate, conservative), three for medical debt, and a
     coordinated phasing strategy that addresses both. Honest about
     limitations: model assumptions, political windows required, operational
     capacity, equity considerations, and moral hazard concerns. When to read:
     Read if you're curious whether the platform addresses harms from the
     previous system or only prevents future ones. The answer is yes — the
     architecture has surplus capacity to repair past damage, not just to
     prevent future damage.

 15. Unlocking America's Potential — The Freedom to Become Exceptional
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Unlocking_Americas_Potential.docx
     Best for: Readers who want to understand what the platform is for at a
     level deeper than its specific policies. Audiences who care about
     American greatness, individual freedom, innovation, or historical
     continuity. The strategic framing document arguing that the platform is
     fundamentally an unleashing program rather than a redistribution program.
     Anchored in cognitive bandwidth research showing that chronic financial
     stress measurably reduces decision-making capacity (Mullainathan/Shafir
     scarcity findings, ~13 IQ point effect size), and in historical evidence
     about what Americans produced during the postwar era when their
     architecture supported rather than suppressed their capability (the GI
     Bill, the space program, the civil rights movement, computing, modern
     medicine, cultural achievements). Argues that information asymmetries in
     the current system prevent informed decision-making about education,
     healthcare, retirement, careers, and family planning, and that the
     platform's architectural transparency restores the conditions for
     informed citizenship. Makes the compound benefits pattern explicit:
     identity theft reduction, retroactive debt retirement, and cognitive
     bandwidth restoration are all benefits the platform produces that the
     original architecture didn't explicitly aim for, and the recurrence of
     this pattern is itself evidence of architectural soundness. When to read:
     Read if you want to understand what the platform is for, not just what it
     does. Especially valuable for engaging audiences the fairness framing and
     AI transition framing don't reach — conservatives, libertarians, business
     leaders, educators, and skeptics of universal programs. Addresses the
     dependency concern critics raise about universal infrastructure by
     arguing the opposite: the current architecture is what suppresses
     individual initiative.

 16. The Path to Reality — Implementation Timeline and Stakeholder Requirements
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Path_To_Reality.docx
     Best for: Readers who want to understand what implementation actually
     requires. Citizens evaluating their own potential contributions. Anyone
     moving from “does this work” to “how does this happen.” The
     implementation document describing what has to happen, when, and who has
     to do what. Organized in two parts. Part One is a phase-by-phase
     timeline: pre-enactment (Years -3 to 0, building political coalition and
     operational design), Year 1 enactment (legislative passage, Founding
     Stake collection, contribution system activation), build phase (Years
     2-5, workforce expansion and system integration), maturation phase (Years
     5-15, pillars reach full operation, compound benefits emerge, retroactive
     debt retirement begins), and steady state (Years 15+, the platform
     becomes the country's default architecture). Part Two is stakeholder
     requirements: citizens, companies, federal government, state governments,
     institutions (educational, healthcare, financial, childcare, mental
     health), civil society organizations, media, academic institutions,
     international coordination, and the political coalition. Includes
     critical dependencies, primary risks, and honest acknowledgment that the
     document is concept-level rather than operational specification. When to
     read: Read if you want to understand how the platform actually becomes
     operational reality and what your own potential contribution might be.
     Particularly valuable for citizens, organizers, and policy professionals
     thinking about implementation rather than design.

 17. Wage Floors as Tax Architecture — A Concept Analysis
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Wage_Floors_As_Tax_Architecture.docx
     Best for: Readers interested in tax policy, wage policy, or how the
     platform's components could be connected. Citizens curious whether wage
     floors could double as tax exemption thresholds. Examines whether each
     occupation's wage floor could also serve as the federal income tax
     exemption threshold for workers in that occupation. Walks through three
     possible interpretations, demonstrates why the simplest version cannot
     fund the federal government, and develops a modified version (wage floor
     as phased-out personal exemption combined with high-earner surcharges and
     supplementary revenue from corporate, capital gains, and estate tax
     reform) that preserves most of the political value while substantially
     solving the fiscal problem. Includes detailed comparison tables showing
     tax effects across income levels, analysis of the political coalition
     this proposal creates, and honest acknowledgment of the $380B annual
     revenue gap that remains even with all modifications. When to read: Read
     if you want to understand how the platform's wage floor architecture
     could connect to federal tax policy, or if you're curious about the
     trade-offs between politically appealing tax proposals and fiscal
     viability. Particularly valuable for tax policy professionals and
     citizens evaluating whether the proposal should be incorporated into the
     platform's tax architecture.

 18. What This Means For You — Side-by-Side Tax Comparisons by Filer Category
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_What_This_Means_For_You.docx
     Best for: Readers wanting the side-by-side tax comparison broken down by
     filer category (single filer, single parent, MFJ (Married Filing Jointly)
     no kids, MFJ with children, high earners) at multiple income levels.
     Updated in v2.11 with expanded Note on Scope section explaining what
     these tables include, what they exclude (state income tax, out-of-pocket
     medical, childcare costs - all excluded for variability reasons), and how
     they relate to the median household example in Does This Raise Taxes. The
     four detailed-breakdown 12-row tables and five income-scaling tables
     (covering ~70 data rows) all use consistent federal-channel scope and
     mature steady-state treatment. The savings figures here are conservative
     for households that experience savings in the excluded categories (state
     tax, OOP medical, childcare). Filer categories: Single Filer, Single
     Parent (Head of Household), MFJ no kids, MFJ with 2 kids, MFJ with 4
     kids, plus high-earner scenarios at $500K and above showing the surcharge
     architecture. When to read: Read after the Manifesto and Does This Raise
     Taxes when you want to see how the platform affects your specific filer
     category and income range. Most comprehensive of the citizen-facing
     tax-comparison documents.

 19. Narrative Example — Tax Comparison for a $100K Earner
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Narrative_Example_100K_Tax_Comparison.docx
     Best for: Readers who learn best from working through a single concrete
     example end-to-end. A Q&A narrative format that walks through the math
     for a specific $100K earner. Updated in v2.9 (Phase 1) to add a 'Total
     household impact' subsection showing $7,800 in total annual savings
     (versus the $6,538 federal-channel-only savings) when broadband, tax
     preparation, and identity theft benefits are included. The original
     federal-tax-wedge tables are preserved unchanged because they are scoped
     specifically to federal channels. Compact Public Infrastructure,
     Methodology, and Intangible Benefits subsections added. When to read:
     Read alongside Does This Raise Taxes if you want a more conversational
     walkthrough of the math for a specific earner rather than a side-by-side
     comparison framework.

 20. Sovereign Fund Governance Design
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Sovereign_Fund_Governance_Design.docx
     Best for: Readers concerned about how a fund managing tens of trillions
     of dollars can be politically protected from raids, capture, or
     weaponization across sixty years. Articulates a multi-layer governance
     architecture for the Sovereign Fund: structural protections (split fund
     into five generational funds, mandate passive index investing, distribute
     voting rights to participating workers, geographic diversification
     limits), statutory protections (75% supermajority change requirement,
     trust structure with beneficiary standing, disbursement restrictions,
     anti-crisis exception drafting, sunset and reauthorization),
     institutional protections (board composition with multi-source selection,
     staggered 12-year terms, supermajority CEO selection, independent audit,
     Worker Councils), and constitutional aspirations (treaty-level
     commitments and constitutional amendment as long-term goals). Includes
     failure mode analysis for crisis-driven raids, gradual capture,
     technological capture, and political polarization erosion. Built in
     response to Gemini's external review identifying governance as the
     platform's hardest political problem. When to read: Read this if you find
     the Community Contribution Plan's mathematical foundation compelling but
     worry that a $122T fund cannot be governed durably. The document is the
     platform's most direct response to that concern.

 21. Healthcare Transition Detailed Plan
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Healthcare_Transition_Detailed_Plan.docx
     Best for: Readers concerned about whether the $1.7T healthcare savings
     can actually be achieved given political opposition and economic shock to
     the healthcare sector. Articulates a five-component transition plan
     addressing Gemini's review concerns about the healthcare extraction.
     Component 1: phased savings extraction over 15 years (rather than 10)
     with explicit milestones. Component 2: rural hospital protection program
     ($20-30B annually) maintaining access in low-density areas. Component 3:
     administrative worker transition support for 400-480K displaced workers
     ($40-60B annually during peak years). Component 4: specialist practice
     transition with voluntary buyouts and geographic redistribution
     incentives. Component 5: pharmaceutical innovation continuity through
     reinvestment of savings into NIH/ARPA-H grants and value-based novel
     pricing. Total transition program cost: ~5-7% of healthcare savings,
     deliberately allocated as first priority. Includes honest analysis of who
     opposes and why, what political coalition the platform needs, and what
     sustained organizing the transition requires. When to read: Read this if
     you support universal healthcare in principle but worry about the human
     and economic costs of getting there. The document articulates how the
     transition can be designed to absorb those costs honestly while still
     delivering the promised savings.

 22. Refundable Transition Bridge Credit
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Refundable_Transition_Bridge_Credit.docx
     Best for: Readers asking whether the platform can offset higher costs
     during transition years when workers are paying for the new system in
     parallel with continuing FICA obligations. Articulates a refundable
     federal tax credit equal to a percentage of each worker's new-system
     contribution, declining linearly from 30% in Year 1 to 0% by Year 30.
     Produces approximately $2.29T in direct worker relief during transition
     years and keeps every worker's effective payroll burden below the
     original 12.4% FICA throughout the transition (range: 8.4% in Year 1 to
     11.9% in Year 30). Includes per-worker impact tables, system-level cost
     analysis, comparison with four alternative bridge mechanisms (FICA
     offset, payroll cap, Sovereign Fund bridge loan, income-tiered relief),
     implementation considerations (legislation, IRS (Internal Revenue
     Service) administration, funding mechanism), and honest acknowledgment of
     fiscal trade-offs (peak borrowing increases from $82B to $1.88T). The
     Combined Reform Model is updated to incorporate the bridge credit math;
     all stress-test scenarios continue to pass. When to read: Read this if
     you find the platform's long-run math compelling but worry about how
     working-age Americans experience the 30-year transition. The document
     articulates how the platform delivers immediate visible relief through a
     familiar mechanism (refundable tax credit) without breaking the long-run
     architecture.

 23. Universal Mental Health Access Substantiation
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Universal_Mental_Health_Access_Substantiation.docx
     Best for: Readers asking whether the platform can actually deliver
     Universal Mental Health access given the workforce constraint,
     particularly the severe psychiatrist shortage. Substantiates the
     Universal Mental Health Access pillar with depth comparable to what
     childcare and healthcare reached in v2.0. Covers service category
     differentiation (six categories with distinct workforce profiles),
     workforce expansion mathematics (the binding psychiatrist constraint that
     takes 67+ years to close through training alone), the three workforce
     mitigations (PMHNP expansion, redistribution from non-clinical roles,
     telehealth as force multiplier), telehealth integration with 1.5-2.5x
     capacity multipliers by service type, geographic distribution analysis
     (the hardest sub-problem; closes 60-80% of access gaps but cannot
     eliminate them), parity enforcement mechanisms (why MHPAEA isn't enough),
     collaborative care integration with primary care (where 70% of mental
     health treatment actually happens), stress tests, and honest
     acknowledgments. The Universal Mental Health Model is substantially
     expanded with five new sheets and 357 formulas (up from approximately
     30). When to read: Read this if you find Universal Mental Health access
     compelling in principle but worry about whether the workforce can
     actually deliver it. The document demonstrates that operational
     feasibility comes from combining workforce expansion, telehealth,
     redistribution, and collaborative care — no single mitigation is
     sufficient, but together they make universal access reachable by Year
     8-12.

 24. Civic Infrastructure: An Architectural Framing
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Civic_Infrastructure_Architectural_Framing.docx
     Best for: Readers asking how universal Civic Infrastructure (broadband,
     transportation, water, public spaces, Civic Technology, energy grid) can
     be delivered to all Americans, and how the platform integrates these into
     a coherent pillar. Establishes the Civic Infrastructure pillar's
     architectural framing with depth comparable to a concept-level pillar
     substantiation. Covers the definition of Civic Infrastructure in this
     platform (three-element test: physical/digital systems, must be
     accessible, enables modern American life), the six components (Universal
     Broadband, Transportation, Water and Sewer, Public Spaces, Civic
     Technology, Energy Grid Modernization), funding mechanism integrating
     Sovereign Fund disbursements (~55%) with consolidated existing federal
     infrastructure spending (~30%) and state/local cost share (~15%),
     governance architecture with federal Civic Infrastructure Authority plus
     state and local roles, universal service standards by component, 30-year
     phased buildout, cross-pillar dependency matrix, and honest
     acknowledgment of what architectural framing establishes vs what
     component substantiation must resolve. Updated in v2.4 to reflect the
     Path A commitment for Universal Broadband: free universal basic broadband
     at no cost to households, federal pays providers wholesale, premium tiers
     remain private, library backstop universal. Pillar total adjusted to
     $252-357B/yr (~0.8-1.2% GDP). When to read: Read this if you want to
     understand how the platform handles Civic Infrastructure as a coherent
     pillar. v2.4 reflects the Path A broadband commitment; substantive
     operational depth is in the Universal Broadband Access Substantiation.

 25. Free Universal Broadband Cost Analysis
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Free_Universal_Broadband_Cost_Analysis.docx
     Best for: Readers asking whether the platform can support free universal
     basic broadband as a commitment, and how the cost economics work compared
     to current paid retail. First-pass cost analysis demonstrating that free
     universal basic broadband (100/20 Mbps) at federal wholesale cost is
     approximately $33-50/month per connection, totaling $50-67B/year at full
     deployment. Breaks down the difference between retail prices and
     wholesale infrastructure cost (retail margin, customer acquisition, churn
     overhead, marketing), demonstrates that elimination of these
     retail-market costs produces net economic resource savings vs current
     paid-retail system, and identifies provider tier mix as the key
     cost-driver variable. This document established the cost feasibility of
     free universal broadband and led to the Two Paths Compared analysis and
     the eventual Path A commitment (substantiated in the Universal Broadband
     Access Substantiation document). When to read: Read this if you want to
     understand how the cost arithmetic works for free universal broadband.
     It's the foundational cost analysis that the v2.4 Path A commitment is
     built on.

 26. Universal Broadband: Two Paths Compared
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Two_Paths_Compared.docx
     Best for: Readers asking which broadband approach the platform should
     commit to: Path A (free universal basic broadband) or Path B (universal
     access plus affordability subsidy for low-income households). Structural
     decision document comparing Path A and Path B across federal cost, total
     economic resource cost, coverage outcome, administrative complexity,
     household impact, industry effects, cross-pillar enabling, and political
     defensibility. Key findings: Path A federal cost ~$50B vs Path B ~$23B,
     but Path A total resource cost ~$71B vs Path B ~$123B (Path A is cheaper
     in total). Path A 100% coverage vs Path B effective ~88% coverage (15.6M
     household structural enrollment gap). Path A administrative complexity
     dramatically lower (no eligibility verification, no enrollment friction).
     Path A cross-pillar enabling substantially stronger (mental health
     telehealth, education online learning, Civic Technology platform,
     healthcare delivery). Document does not commit to a path; it presents
     structural analysis supporting the decision. When to read: Read this if
     you want to understand the structural choice the platform faced for
     broadband architecture. The eventual commitment to Path A (substantiated
     in the Universal Broadband Access Substantiation) was informed by this
     analysis combined with the Modernize Civic Engagement integrated
     argument.

 27. Modernize American Civic Engagement: An Integrated Argument
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Modernize_Civic_Engagement_Integrated_Argument.docx
     Best for: Readers asking why Path A is the stronger broadband choice, and
     what additional civic engagement modernization the platform should commit
     to. Articulates the integrated argument that pairs free universal
     broadband with a federal civic communication platform, return-free tax
     filing, and library universal access. Key findings: combined federal cost
     expansion ~$42B/year (above v2.3 baseline), citizen savings ~$133B/year
     (broadband savings + tax compliance savings + civic engagement
     efficiency), net positive economic impact ~$91B/year, citizen savings
     3.16x federal cost. The integrated argument materially strengthens the
     case for Path A (because Path B's 12% effective coverage gap compromises
     civic platform and return-free filing universality). International
     precedent overwhelming: 36+ OECD countries have pre-filled tax filing; 8+
     countries have unified citizen-government digital platforms. Document
     scopes the eventual Civic Technology component substantiation work for
     v2.5 or later platform versions. When to read: Read this for the
     strongest argument the platform makes for Path A specifically, and for
     the broader civic engagement modernization commitment that Path A
     enables. This is the citizen-side argument; the operational
     substantiation is in the Universal Broadband Access Substantiation.

 28. Universal Broadband Access Substantiation
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Universal_Broadband_Access_Substantiation.docx
     Best for: Readers asking how Path A is operationally delivered: service
     architecture, technology mix, workforce expansion, federal contracting,
     regulatory reform, buildout timeline, stress tests. Substantive
     operational substantiation paralleling the Universal Mental Health Access
     Substantiation depth. Covers Service Architecture and Universal Service
     Standards (100/20 Mbps initially with evolution to 1 Gbps symmetric by
     2040), Technology Mix (60% urban fiber, 25% rural cooperative fiber, 9%
     FWA, 5% LEO satellite, 1% public WiFi), Workforce Expansion Mathematics
     (65K→165K peak fiber installers, training pipeline expansion across
     community colleges/apprenticeships/coal worker
     retraining/veterans/industry/cross-trade), Federal Contracting
     Architecture (per-connection wholesale payment, four-tier provider
     preference, quality monitoring), Regulatory Reform (Federal
     Communications Commission (FCC) mapping reform, pole attachment one-touch
     make-ready, Universal Service Fund (USF) integration, BEAD integration),
     Buildout Timeline (Year 1-7 to 100% coverage, $258B cumulative through
     Year 7, $48-50B steady state), Stress Tests (workforce, cost escalation,
     deployment slip, incumbent dominance, combined adverse — all within
     envelope), Cross-Pillar Effects, Industry Transition, and Honest
     Acknowledgments. The document substantiates the v2.4 Path A commitment
     with operational depth. When to read: Read this if you want to know how
     Path A is actually delivered, not just what it commits to. It's the
     substantive operational design that makes the commitment deliverable.

 29. Per-Citizen Benefits and Costs Across the Deployment Timeline
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Per_Citizen_Benefits_and_Costs.docx
     Best for: Citizens, advocates, journalists, and political organizers
     asking what the platform delivers to individual American households — and
     what it costs them — at each deployment milestone. Translates the
     platform's federal-program-scale numbers into per-household impact at six
     deployment milestones (Year 1 launch, Year 5 Path A expansion, Year 7
     universal Path A, Year 12 Sovereign Fund at scale, Year 20 pillars
     mature, Year 30 steady state) for seven distinct household types:
     low-income single ($35K), middle-income single ($75K), low-income family
     with kids ($55K), middle-income family with kids ($110K), upper-middle
     family with kids ($200K), retiree on fixed income ($45K), and wealthy
     household ($500K, $5M+ assets). Establishes that a substantial majority
     of American households experience net positive impact at every milestone,
     with benefits growing as more pillars come online and the Sovereign
     Fund's coverage scales from 5% (Year 1) to 65% (Year 30) of platform
     commitments. Documents the structurally-progressive funding architecture:
     bottom 80% of income distribution receives net positive impact at every
     milestone; wealthy households (top 1-2% by net worth) experience net
     negative impact through wealth tax exposure but receive the same
     universal services as everyone else. Includes detailed methodology,
     conservative estimation choices, geographic variance acknowledgments, and
     political coalition implications. When to read: Read this if you want to
     understand what the platform delivers to specific American households at
     specific years. It's the citizen-facing translation that turns aggregate
     federal numbers into political coalition arithmetic. Most directly useful
     for advocacy and accountability conversations.

 30. Coalition Mathematics: Threshold and Projection Analysis
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Coalition_Mathematics.docx
     Best for: Citizens, advocates, journalists, and political organizers
     asking whether the platform's natural coalition is large enough to
     actually pass and survive, and what the gap is between economic
     self-interest and likely political support. Three-layer analysis of
     platform political viability: threshold required for passage and
     durability (bare majority ~78M, durable mandate ~90M, filibuster-proof
     ~105M voters), raw beneficiary count from per-citizen analysis (~195-220M
     adults, 81-85% of adult population), and realistic supporter projection
     after applying voter turnout patterns and benefit-to-support conversion
     rates. Establishes that the platform's natural coalition is structurally
     large (83-to-1 beneficiary-to-cost-bearer ratio) but politically
     inactive: probability-weighted expected supporter count is ~88-89M
     voters, just at the durable mandate threshold. Walks through four
     scenarios (pessimistic ~73M, moderate ~87M, optimistic ~100M, maximum
     plausible ~112M) with explicit probability assessments. Documents the
     empirical research on why economic self-interest doesn't reliably predict
     voting (working-class voter shift toward Republicans 2008-2024, ~89M
     non-voters in 2024, identity-based voting, opposition mobilization,
     distrust). Identifies working-class beneficiary conversion rate as the
     highest-leverage variable. Includes critical path requirements and
     strategic implications for messaging, organization, and candidate
     selection. When to read: Read this if you want to understand the
     platform's political viability with sober realism rather than optimistic
     projection. It's the citizen-facing translation of ‘would benefit’ to
     ‘would actually vote’, accounting for the gap between economic
     self-interest and political behavior.

 31. Coalition Walkthrough: Four Scenarios in Depth
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Coalition_Walkthrough.docx
     Best for: Citizens, advocates, journalists, and political organizers who
     want to move beyond the Coalition Mathematics summary numbers and engage
     with the substantive picture behind them. Four interlocking walkthroughs
     that unpack the Coalition Mathematics analysis. Walkthrough 1 (Optimistic
     Scenario) specifies the six conditions that produce ~100M supporters and
     the proponent actions that move probability toward this outcome,
     including historical analogs (FDR 1932-1936, Obama 2008). Walkthrough 2
     (Working-Class Conversion) examines the highest-leverage variable in
     depth, including the empirical 2008-2024 Democratic erosion (60% to 49%),
     the six subsegments within “working class,” research-backed messaging
     that works versus doesn't, and realistic ceilings and floors. Walkthrough
     3 (Geographic Distribution) addresses the structural constraint that
     Coalition Mathematics summary numbers don't fully capture: Senate
     malapportionment means 60 senators can be elected by states totaling ~38%
     of the population, even optimistic national popular vote scenarios
     produce only ~50 senators, and the platform's path to passage requires
     either filibuster reform, reconciliation packaging, or sustained
     multi-cycle small-state coalition building. Walkthrough 4 (One Family's
     Path) makes the entire abstract analysis concrete through the Hendersons
     — a suburban Cleveland family of four with $130K combined income —
     walking through their actual Year 1, 5, 7, 12, and 30 experience, their
     political journey from beneficiary to active supporter, and the
     counterfactuals that could prevent that conversion. Concludes with
     synthesis showing how the four walkthroughs interlock. When to read: Read
     this if you want the substantive picture behind the Coalition Mathematics
     summary numbers. Each walkthrough illuminates a different angle; together
     they form the strategic picture that informs platform messaging,
     organization, and candidate selection. Most directly useful for advocates
     and organizers planning specific coalition-building activities.

 32. Civic Technology: Component Substantiation
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Civic_Technology_Substantiation.docx
     Best for: Readers wanting full operational detail on the Civic Technology
     component of the Civic Infrastructure pillar (Login.gov, USDS (United
     States Digital Service), Direct File, USA.gov, accessibility
     infrastructure). Updated in v2.9 (Phase 2) to add Citizen-Facing Value
     sections to three of the five subcomponents, then expanded in v2.9 (Phase
     3) with a new top-level Cross-Cutting Citizen Benefits section
     synthesizing all eight Civic Technology benefit threads. The
     Cross-Cutting section catalogs Direct File savings and identity theft
     reduction (already in citizen-facing tables), EITC capture, modernized
     digital services time recovery, accessibility access, plus three new
     threads: bureaucratic friction time savings (8-15 hours/yr), faster
     benefit determinations ($9K+ earlier SSDI receipt for affected
     households), and self-employed compliance time (8-15 hours/yr per
     affected entity). When to read: Read when you want the full
     substantiation of Civic Technology as Civic Infrastructure, with
     operational design, cost ranges, per-household value estimates with
     sourcing, and the synthesizing view of what the integrated Civic
     Technology investment delivers across all benefit dimensions.

 33. Physical Civic Infrastructure: Components Substantiation
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Physical_Civic_Infrastructure_Substantiation.docx
     Best for: Readers wanting full operational detail on the four physical
     components of the Civic Infrastructure pillar: Transportation, Water and
     Sewer, Public Spaces, and Energy Grid Modernization. Updated in v2.9
     (Phase 2) to add Citizen-Facing Value sections to all four components,
     with literature-backed per-household value estimates and explicit
     acknowledgment of distributional unevenness. Transportation: $200/yr
     vehicle damage reduction averaged, $5-10K/yr transit access where
     deployed. Water and Sewer: $50-150K lifetime per affected child for lead
     exposure reduction, $50-100/yr service disruption reduction averaged.
     Public Spaces: $2,500-3,000/yr library value per user. Energy Grid:
     $50-150/yr outage cost reduction averaged. Pillar total $192-292B
     annually. When to read: Read when you want the full substantiation of the
     four physical Civic Infrastructure components, with operational design,
     cost ranges, and per-household value estimates with sourcing.

 34. Response to Gemini Review
     07_External_Reviews/07_Response_To_Gemini_Review.docx
     Best for: Anyone wanting to see how the platform engages with substantive
     external critique. The platform's response to Gemini's review. Engages
     with each of the four identified vulnerabilities by distinguishing what's
     true, what could mitigate the vulnerability, and what remains unresolved.
     Identifies twenty specific actions the platform should take in subsequent
     versions, ranging from new analytical documents (Sovereign Fund
     Governance Design, Healthcare Transition Detailed Plan, Workforce
     Expansion Strategy) to model revisions (stress-test scenarios in Combined
     Reform Model, 18-year buildout in universal childcare Model). Also notes
     what the review didn't address (compound benefits pattern, wage floor tax
     architecture, Path to Reality implementation, personal tax comparison)
     for completeness. Establishes the response pattern that will continue for
     subsequent external reviews regardless of source. When to read: Read this
     after the Gemini review to see how the platform engages with substantive
     critique. Particularly valuable for understanding what the platform
     commits to deliver in subsequent versions in response to identified
     vulnerabilities.

 35. Platform Package — Reader's Guide and Table of Contents
     01_Start_Here/01_Platform_Package_TOC.docx
     Best for: Anyone navigating the platform package. The document you are
     currently reading. This document. Provides reading paths by audience,
     brief summaries of every document in the package, and recommendations for
     when each document is most useful. Designed to be read first by anyone
     unsure where to start, or kept as a reference while engaging with other
     documents. When to read: You are reading it now. Keep it accessible while
     you engage with other platform documents to easily find the next document
     that matches your interests.

 36. Platform Package — Package Version Document
     01_Start_Here/01_Platform_Package_Version.docx
     Best for: Anyone wanting to verify they have the current version of the
     package or any specific document. The authoritative source for what's
     current in the platform package. Tracks the package's overall version
     (currently v2.8), every document's individual version, creation dates,
     and last update dates. Includes a complete manifest of all package
     contents organized by category, a changelog explaining what changed at
     each release, and an explanation of how versioning will work for future
     releases. Each document in the package shows its version on the cover and
     in the page footer; this document is where readers can verify whether the
     version they have is current. When to read: Consult any time you want to
     verify your version of any document is current. Read the changelog when a
     new version is released to understand what changed.

 37. Informed Citizenship — Strategic Companion Document
     02_Vision_and_Communication/02_Informed_Citizenship_Pillar.docx
     Best for: Readers interested in the platform's stance on journalism,
     civic education, voter access, and public meeting transparency — concerns
     about democratic institutions distinct from the Civic Infrastructure
     pillar's physical and digital systems. A standalone strategic vision
     piece in the same category as Built For What's Coming. Not a formal
     pillar of the platform. Four components covered at vision-level depth:
     Journalism Infrastructure (collapsed local news, indirect support
     mechanisms), Civic Education (hollowed-out K-12 coverage, bipartisan
     content standards), Voter Access Infrastructure (federal floor, election
     infrastructure funding, audit standards), Public Meeting Transparency
     (recordings, accessible formats, decision tracking). Originally drafted
     as a v1.0 pillar concept document; repositioned in v2.8.1 when the Civic
     Infrastructure pillar was redefined in v2.3 to mean shared physical and
     digital systems. The four-component analysis is preserved; the framing is
     rewritten to position the document as Informed Citizenship from its
     opening with explicit acknowledgment of the document's origin and
     relationship to the formal pillars. When to read: Read if you want the
     platform's articulation of concerns about democratic institutional
     infrastructure that the formal pillars do not currently address. The
     document is honest about the substantiation work that has not been done
     (funding mechanisms, institutional design, political coalition) and about
     its status as a strategic vision piece rather than a pillar commitment.

 38. Federal Program Integration Plan
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Federal_Program_Integration_Plan.docx
     Best for: Readers asking how universal healthcare interacts with
     Medicare, Medicaid, ACA (Affordable Care Act) marketplaces, and the VA
     (Department of Veterans Affairs) system. Closes a critical gap identified
     in v2.10 audience verification testing. Articulates the architectural
     relationship between the platform's universal healthcare and the federal
     healthcare programs that already cover ~150 million Americans. Medicare
     continues for the 65+ population with absorption of Part B premiums and
     Hospital Insurance payroll tax. Medicaid's working-age coverage is
     replaced by universal healthcare; long-term care continues as
     restructured Medicaid. ACA marketplace subsidies are absorbed; exchanges
     continue as supplemental marketplaces. The VA system continues largely
     unchanged. Long-term care is honestly acknowledged as the largest
     remaining gap, with universal long-term care insurance positioned as a
     candidate for a future platform pillar requiring its own substantiation
     work. Net federal healthcare spending after integration: approximately
     $1.1 trillion in net new commitment, fundable through the universal
     healthcare contribution plus absorbed program funding. When to read: Read
     this immediately after the Healthcare Transition Detailed Plan. Together
     they answer the two most-asked questions about universal healthcare: how
     is the transition managed (Healthcare Transition Detailed Plan) and how
     does it interact with existing programs (this document).

 39. Federal Fiscal Impact Analysis
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Federal_Fiscal_Impact_Analysis.docx
     Best for: Policy professionals asking the question every serious reviewer
     asks within minutes: what does this do to the federal deficit? Closes the
     consolidated fiscal-picture gap identified in v2.10 audience verification
     testing. Provides the consolidated picture of federal fiscal impact
     across all platform commitments and revenue sources. Headline numbers at
     mature steady state (Year 30): $4.2 trillion in new federal commitments,
     $1.5 trillion in absorbed existing programs (Medicare, Medicaid
     working-age, ACA subsidies), $3.6 trillion in new federal revenue
     (payroll contributions, modified income tax, Sovereign Fund disbursements
     covering ~65% at maturity), net impact of approximately $900 billion per
     year deficit reduction relative to current state. Sensitivity analysis to
     Sovereign Fund returns: 4% real (Norway-equivalent) yields ~$400B
     reduction; 2% real approximately neutral. Transition years addressed
     honestly: cumulative $8-12 trillion in additional federal borrowing over
     25 years before mature steady state. Comparison to Congressional Budget
     Office (CBO) projected current-law trajectory ($3.5-4 trillion deficit by
     2055) shows mature platform is fiscally favorable. When to read: Read
     this when forming a view on whether the platform is fiscally viable. The
     document does not promise certainty (most figures depend on the Sovereign
     Fund's 6% real return assumption) but provides the consolidated framework
     that policy reviewers need to evaluate the platform's fiscal claims.

 40. Behavioral Economics and Uptake Friction
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Behavioral_Economics_And_Uptake_Friction.docx
     Best for: Policy reviewers, implementation planners, and skeptics who
     want to understand whether the platform's mathematical models are
     realistic about how real households will engage with universal programs.
     Anyone who suspects 'this looks great on paper but real people won't use
     it as designed.' Examines the platform from a behavioral economics
     perspective. Identifies three architectural protections built into the
     platform's design (default-in coverage for universal programs, Direct
     File reducing tax filing friction, refundability of the Bridge Credit and
     mandatory distribution of the Founding Stake) and five exposure points
     where the platform remains vulnerable (occupation reporting for wage
     floor, state-administered program interactions, methodology choice in tax
     filing, loss aversion in political transition, information asymmetry with
     adversaries during a contested political environment). Provides
     sensitivity analysis showing what happens to the platform's central
     claims at 90, 80, and 70 percent uptake rates. Closes with implementation
     implications: pilot studies before national rollout; federal
     infrastructure as a critical-path precondition for default-in to work;
     loss-aversion-aware communication strategy; dedicated administrative
     capacity for ambiguous cases. Includes explicit Open Questions section
     documenting what the analysis raises but does not resolve. When to read:
     Read after the Manifesto and the federal fiscal impact analysis when you
     want to stress-test the platform against real-world implementation
     challenges. Especially valuable for organizations evaluating whether to
     support the platform politically — the document does not pull punches
     about the implementation work that remains to be done.

 41. State-Level Cooperation Requirements
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_State_Level_Cooperation_Requirements.docx
     Best for: Constitutional law analysts, federalism scholars, state policy
     professionals, and anyone evaluating the platform's deliverability
     through the federal-state structure of American government. Skeptics
     asking 'how does this work if Texas refuses?' Maps the platform's
     commitments into three federal-state categories. Pure federal commitments
     (federal income tax architecture, Sovereign Fund, Founding Stake, federal
     universal healthcare contributions, Direct File) deliver to all citizens
     regardless of state position. Federal-state cooperative commitments
     (universal healthcare delivery, universal childcare, mental health, Civic
     Infrastructure) work best with state cooperation but have federal-direct
     fallback options. Federal-funded state-administered commitments
     (restructured Medicaid, childcare provider networks, mental health
     delivery infrastructure) effectively require state cooperation. Examines
     constitutional constraints (anti-commandeering doctrine, conditional
     federal spending, NFIB v. Sebelius coercion test) and uses Medicaid
     expansion as the most relevant federal-state cooperation precedent.
     Recommends federal-direct delivery designs for state non-cooperation
     cases, partial-credit refund mechanisms for residents of non-cooperating
     states, and public tracking of state cooperation status as accountability
     infrastructure. Includes explicit Open Questions section. When to read:
     Read alongside the Federal Program Integration Plan and Federal Fiscal
     Impact Analysis when you want to understand the platform's federalism
     layer. Critical reading for legal analysts evaluating constitutional
     viability and for policy reviewers in non-cooperating states evaluating
     how the platform would actually affect their state's residents.

 42. Non-Citizens And Platform Eligibility
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Non_Citizens_And_Platform_Eligibility.docx
     Best for: Policy analysts, immigration policy professionals, mixed-status
     families, and reviewers asking how the platform treats the approximately
     47 million non-citizens living in the United States. Anyone who notices
     that 'universal' has not been precisely defined for this population. Maps
     the platform's commitments against five non-citizen categories: legal
     permanent residents (12.5 million green card holders), long-term work
     visa holders (1-2 million), student visa holders, temporary protected
     status / asylum pending / refugee status (several million), and
     unauthorized immigrants (10-12 million). Works through each platform
     commitment by category, identifies the major design choices the platform
     must make, and analyzes the failure modes (pay-but-don't-receive,
     documentation friction, fear-based non-engagement under chilling-effect
     immigration rules, state-level variability). Mixed-status families are
     addressed with the principle of individual-by-individual eligibility
     rather than monolithic family treatment. Three approaches for
     unauthorized workers are outlined explicitly with their trade-offs. The
     federal income tax architecture (wage floor exemption) likely applies to
     all filers regardless of citizenship status. The Founding Stake is
     reasonably citizenship-restricted. The most consequential unresolved
     choice is healthcare access for unauthorized workers, which would
     otherwise produce ~$24 billion per year in pay-but-don't-receive
     contributions. Eight explicit Open Questions document remaining work.
     When to read: Read after the Manifesto and Federal Program Integration
     Plan when you need to understand whether the platform's universal claims
     actually apply universally. Critical reading for immigration-focused
     organizations evaluating whether to support the platform politically and
     for mixed-status families concerned about how the platform would affect
     them.

 43. Cohabiting Unmarried Couples
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Cohabiting_Unmarried_Couples.docx
     Best for: Cohabiting couples (~17 million Americans) wondering how the
     platform treats them, family-policy professionals, and reviewers who
     notice that the calculator and comparison tables only support Single,
     MFJ, and HoH categories without explicitly addressing cohabiting
     partners. Works through the platform's treatment of cohabiting unmarried
     couples across each commitment. The federal tax system already treats
     cohabiting partners as separate filers; the platform inherits this
     framework cleanly. Per-individual benefits architecture (universal
     healthcare, childcare, mental health, Founding Stake) handles cohabiting
     couples consistently with married couples. Edge cases warranting
     attention include: dependent allocation rules for couples with shared
     children, the small differential in wage floor exemption between
     cohabiting and married couples (cohabiting often slightly higher due to
     per-occupation floors), Bridge Credit evaluation for couples whose
     household economy differs from individual filer status, mid-year
     composition changes, common-law marriage states (approximately ten), and
     domestic partnership registries. Mixed-status cohabiting couples
     intersect with the Non-Citizens And Platform Eligibility document. The
     platform's design is largely consistent with current law; this document
     makes the specific choices explicit rather than leaving them implicit.
     Seven Open Questions document remaining work, including coordination of
     Direct File for cohabiting couples' tax planning. When to read: Read with
     What This Means For You when your household is a cohabiting couple
     wanting to understand which scenarios in the comparison tables most
     closely match your situation. Read with Non-Citizens And Platform
     Eligibility if your household is a mixed-status cohabiting couple.

 44. Public-Sector Worker Transitions
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Public_Sector_Worker_Transitions.docx
     Best for: Federal civilian employees, military service members and
     veterans, postal workers, state and local government employees, and the
     unions and associations that represent them. Anyone asking how the
     platform interacts with Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB),
     TRICARE, FERS (Federal Employees Retirement System), military retirement,
     or state employee benefits. Maps the platform against approximately 22
     million public-sector workers across federal civilian (2.3M with FEHB and
     FERS), military (1.3M active plus 800K reserves with TRICARE and military
     retirement), Postal Service (640K), and state and local government (19.5M
     with varied state-administered programs) categories. The recommended
     design treats existing public-sector benefits as enhanced coverage
     layered atop universal foundation: federal employees pay the universal
     healthcare contribution and receive universal coverage with FEHB as
     supplemental; the federal employer continues to fund FEHB premium
     subsidies; military members receive universal coverage plus TRICARE as
     enhanced; state employees similarly. This preserves existing benefits
     unchanged, respects vested rights doctrine for accrued pensions,
     minimizes political opposition from organized public-sector unions, and
     integrates with universal architecture. The most significant unresolved
     issue is treatment of Section 218 non-covered workers (~5 million state
     and local government employees who do not pay FICA and would be excluded
     by default from a FICA-equivalent universal healthcare contribution).
     Specific design choices about FERS / CSRS integration with the Community
     Contribution Plan, TRICARE for Life integration with universal
     healthcare, and state pension system interactions all require detailed
     actuarial analysis that this document does not provide. Nine Open
     Questions document remaining work. When to read: Read with the Federal
     Program Integration Plan and State-Level Cooperation Requirements when
     you need to understand how the platform integrates with public-sector
     employment. Critical reading for public-sector union leadership and for
     federal employees, military members, and state and local government
     workers evaluating the platform's effect on their specific benefits.

 45. Existing Pensioners and the Platform
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Existing_Pensioners.docx
     Best for: Approximately 75 million Americans receiving retirement income
     from at least one defined benefit source. AARP (American Association of
     Retired Persons) members, retired federal/state/military employees,
     Social Security recipients, and private DB plan recipients. Anyone over
     60 evaluating the platform's effect on existing retirement income. Maps
     the platform against pensioners across Social Security retirees (52M),
     state and local government pensioners (11M), federal civilian retirees
     (2.6M), military retirees (2.1M), and private DB plan recipients (10M).
     The platform's treatment is largely preservation: existing benefits
     continue unchanged as vested rights; existing healthcare (Medicare, FEHB,
     TRICARE, state retiree benefits) continues with universal healthcare
     integration; existing tax treatment continues with wage floor exemption
     available as alternative methodology. The Community Contribution Plan
     replaces FICA at a revenue-neutral rate in mature steady state, producing
     no benefit changes for existing Social Security recipients. The
     platform's most valuable specific contributions to pensioners are
     universal healthcare's coverage of the early-retiree gap (eliminating
     financial planning challenge of pre-Medicare years for
     federal/military/state early retirees, approximately 10 million people)
     and broader insulation from healthcare cost inflation that universal
     coverage provides. Younger spouses of Medicare-eligible pensioners (a
     non-Medicare-eligible spouse of a 65-year-old retiree, for example)
     receive universal healthcare automatically rather than needing to
     maintain private insurance until their own Medicare eligibility. The most
     significant unresolved issues are the long-term care gap (acknowledged
     but not solved by the platform), the Social Security taxation threshold
     question (set in 1983/1993 statute, unindexed for inflation), and the
     wage floor exemption mechanics for retirement income. Eight Open
     Questions document remaining work. When to read: Read after the Manifesto
     when you are a current pensioner or will be one within the next decade.
     Read with the Federal Program Integration Plan for the Medicare
     integration mechanics, and with the Public-Sector Worker Transitions
     document if you receive a federal civilian, military, or state pension.

 46. Section 8 Housing and Federal Housing Assistance
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Section_8_Housing_And_Federal_Housing_Assistance.docx
     Best for: Housing policy professionals, Section 8 households (~5M),
     Section 8 waitlist households (~13M), and reviewers asking how the
     platform interacts with HUD (Department of Housing and Urban
     Development)'s voucher program. Anyone noticing that the platform
     addresses healthcare, childcare, education, and infrastructure but not
     housing. Maps the platform's interaction with the federal Housing Choice
     Voucher Program. Identifies the mechanical interactions where universal
     childcare and universal healthcare reduce Section 8's deduction values,
     producing apparent rent increases that are offset by direct household
     savings on the underlying costs (a $22,000 reduction in childcare costs
     partially offset by ~$6,000 increase in Section 8 rent contribution, net
     household savings ~$16,000). Examines the waitlist problem: only ~25
     percent of eligible households actually receive vouchers. Outlines three
     approaches: Approach A leaves Section 8 unchanged (status quo); Approach
     B uses Sovereign Fund capacity to fund universal eligibility-based access
     (~$40-50 billion annual federal expenditure); Approach C restructures
     federal housing policy more fundamentally. The platform's current silence
     on housing affordability is identified as a real scope limitation that
     future versions should consider closing. Seven Open Questions document
     remaining work, including HUD regulatory adjustment, source-of-income
     discrimination preemption, and broader housing supply policy. When to
     read: Read after the Manifesto when you receive Section 8 assistance or
     are on a Section 8 waitlist. Read with State-Level Cooperation
     Requirements for the analogous PHA administrative variation issues.

 47. Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) and Cash Assistance
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_TANF_And_Cash_Assistance.docx
     Best for: Anti-poverty policy professionals, TANF recipients and
     applicants, state TANF administrators, and reviewers asking how the
     platform interacts with cash welfare programs. Anyone evaluating whether
     the platform addresses poverty substantively or only at the margins. Maps
     the platform's interaction with the federal TANF block grant program.
     Identifies how universal childcare and universal healthcare fundamentally
     change TANF's economic logic: the work requirement structure assumed
     labor market dynamics that no longer apply when childcare is essentially
     free under the platform. The TANF block grant has been frozen at $16.5
     billion since 1996 (losing ~50 percent of real value to inflation).
     Outlines three restructuring approaches: Approach A leaves TANF
     substantially unchanged (path of least resistance, produces drift toward
     irrelevance); Approach B substantially restructures TANF as focused
     last-resort cash assistance for families whose situations require cash
     beyond what universal services and labor market provide; Approach C
     replaces TANF with a refundable family assistance credit administered
     through the federal tax system. The platform's broader anti-poverty
     architecture (wage floor exemption, Bridge Credit, Founding Stake,
     universal services) reduces a low-income family's costs by $20,000-25,000
     per year regardless of TANF choice. Seven Open Questions, including
     whether the platform should commit to ending poverty (vs reducing it) as
     an explicit goal. When to read: Read with the Refundable Transition
     Bridge Credit document and the Federal Program Integration Plan for the
     platform's broader anti-poverty architecture. Critical reading for
     anti-poverty advocacy organizations evaluating the platform.

 48. Multigenerational Households
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Multigenerational_Households.docx
     Best for: Members of multigenerational households (~24 million households
     containing ~62 million people), family policy professionals, and
     reviewers asking how the platform handles household structures beyond the
     nuclear family default. Particularly relevant for Hispanic, Asian
     American, Native American, and immigrant communities where
     multigenerational living is more common. Maps the platform's treatment of
     multigenerational households across four primary patterns: adult children
     living with parents (~16 million Americans aged 18-34); grandparents
     raising grandchildren (~3 million children in ~2 million households);
     three-generation households (~6-7 million households); and
     cultural-pattern multigenerational living. The platform's per-individual
     benefits architecture and per-filer tax architecture handle these
     households cleanly without special-case design. The wage floor
     architecture is generally favorable for multigenerational households
     because multiple filers each claim appropriate occupational wage floors.
     Identifies four design choices warranting attention: Bridge Credit
     evaluation methodology (per-filer vs household-aware), informal caregiver
     support (currently unaddressed in the platform), long-term care policy
     (largest unaddressed gap, particularly relevant for households providing
     eldercare), and calculator workflow support for multi-filer households.
     The platform's most direct effect on multigenerational households is the
     same as for other households: $30,000-40,000 in annual cost reduction
     across the various platform commitments for a typical three-generation
     working household. Seven Open Questions document remaining work. When to
     read: Read after the Manifesto if you live in a multigenerational
     household. Read with What This Means For You when comparing your
     multigenerational situation to the standard scenarios in the comparison
     tables.

 49. Aging-in-Place Implications
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Aging_In_Place_Implications.docx
     Best for: Older Americans (and their families) planning retirement,
     residents and families considering CCRCs and assisted living, family
     caregivers (~53 million), and reviewers asking what the platform does
     about long-term care. Critical reading for AARP, retirement community
     resident councils, and aging-focused advocacy organizations. Identifies
     long-term care as the platform's largest single coverage gap. The Federal
     Program Integration Plan acknowledges this; this document develops the
     analysis. Maps the platform's interaction with CCRC residents (~750K in
     ~1,900 communities under three contract types), assisted living (~1M
     residents at average ~$60K/year), nursing homes (~1.3M residents at
     average ~$94-108K/year), HCBS (Home and Community-Based Services)
     programs (state-administered, varies enormously), PACE (~70K
     participants), and informal caregivers (~53M Americans providing
     $400-500B annually in unpaid care). The Medicaid spend-down dynamic
     continues under the platform. Outlines three design directions for future
     platform versions: Direction A (Long-Term Care (LTC) pillar with
     dedicated payroll contribution); Direction B (Medicaid HCBS expansion);
     Direction C (hybrid universal/means-tested). The platform's architecture
     leaves room for substantial LTC expansion in future versions. Eight Open
     Questions document remaining work. When to read: Read with the Federal
     Program Integration Plan and Existing Pensioners and the Platform when
     you are planning for or providing eldercare. Critical reading for
     households where adults are caring for aging parents.

 50. US Territories and the Platform
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_US_Territories.docx
     Best for: Residents of Puerto Rico, Guam, USVI (United States Virgin
     Islands), American Samoa, and the Northern Mariana Islands (~3.5-3.7
     million people total). Territorial advocacy organizations,
     federal-territorial relations professionals, and reviewers asking how the
     platform's universal commitments apply to territorial residents. Maps the
     platform against the five inhabited US territories. Examines the
     constitutional framework (the Insular Cases of 1901-1905, criticized by
     Justice Sotomayor among others but operative). Walks through distinctive
     federal tax structures: Puerto Rico (federal payroll tax but not federal
     income tax on PR-source income), Guam/USVI/NMI (mirror code systems),
     American Samoa (separate tax code; residents are US nationals rather than
     US citizens). The Section 1108 Medicaid funding cap has been the largest
     federal program disparity for territorial residents. Recommends explicit
     equal extension of all platform universal commitments to territories.
     Identifies three positions on broader territorial federal program
     treatment from Position A (status quo) through Position C (territorial
     status reform). Nine Open Questions document specific implementation
     requirements, communication infrastructure needs (Spanish-language
     materials for Puerto Rico, territory-specific contexts), and the
     Sovereign Fund's interaction with territorial federal tax differentials.
     When to read: Essential reading for any territorial resident evaluating
     the platform. Read with State-Level Cooperation Requirements for the
     analogous federal-territorial cooperation considerations and with
     Non-Citizens And Platform Eligibility for the related question of how
     nationality and citizenship affect platform access.

 51. Climate Policy Beyond Grid Modernization
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Climate_Policy_Beyond_Grid_Modernization.docx
     Best for: Climate-engaged constituencies, environmental advocacy
     organizations, climate policy professionals, and reviewers asking why the
     platform addresses healthcare, childcare, education, and infrastructure
     but not comprehensive climate policy. Honest acknowledgment of the
     platform's largest scope omission. Maps what the platform addresses in
     climate policy (Energy Grid Modernization commitment, Civic
     Infrastructure with climate adaptation overlap, Sovereign Fund climate
     transition exposure considerations) versus what it omits (carbon pricing,
     fossil fuel subsidies, environmental justice, climate adaptation as
     explicit policy, agricultural emissions, building efficiency). Examines
     the platform's interaction with the existing federal climate framework:
     the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law,
     EPA regulatory authority, state-level climate policies. None of these are
     incompatible with the platform's existing commitments. Outlines five
     design directions for future climate integration: carbon pricing as
     Sovereign Fund revenue source (Direction A, ~$200B/year initially);
     environmental justice integration with Civic Infrastructure (Direction
     B); climate adaptation as Civic Infrastructure component (Direction C);
     building code and efficiency integration (Direction D); agricultural
     climate policy (Direction E). The platform's architecture leaves room for
     substantial climate expansion without fundamental redesign. Ten Open
     Questions document unresolved choices including Sovereign Fund investment
     policy and international climate framework interactions. When to read:
     Essential reading for climate-engaged audiences. The document is honest
     about platform scope limits and outlines specific paths future versions
     could take. Read with the Energy Grid Modernization document for the
     platform's existing climate-relevant commitments.

 52. Gender Pay Gap and Indirect Mechanisms
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Gender_Pay_Gap_And_Indirect_Mechanisms.docx
     Best for: Audiences asking how the platform's architecture affects
     earnings disparities between men and women, advocates for women's
     economic equality, and policy professionals wanting to understand the
     indirect effects of architecture choices not designed primarily for
     pay-gap reduction. Examines the platform's three indirect mechanisms that
     reduce the gender pay gap: universal childcare addressing the motherhood
     penalty (estimated 9-20% reduction of raw gap), empirical wage floors
     raising pay in female-dominated occupations (estimated 10-17% reduction),
     and universal healthcare reducing job-lock that disproportionately
     affects women (estimated 1-3% reduction). Combined estimated effect:
     30-40% reduction of the raw 16% pay gap, narrowing it to approximately
     10-11%. Honestly acknowledges what the platform does NOT do (paid family
     leave, pay transparency, salary history bans, strengthened Equal Pay Act
     enforcement, comparable-worth frameworks, anti-segregation
     interventions). Outlines five design directions for future versions:
     federal paid family leave (Direction A, ~$40-60B/year), pay transparency
     requirements (Direction B), strengthened Equal Pay Act enforcement
     (Direction C), comparable-worth wage floor adjustments (Direction D), and
     Sovereign Education Fund recruitment incentives (Direction E). Three
     failure modes documented and seven Open Questions identified. When to
     read: Essential reading for advocates of women's economic equality and
     for any reviewer asking whether the platform's architecture meaningfully
     affects gender disparities. Read with the Wage Floor Empirical Analysis
     and the Universal Childcare Model for the underlying mechanisms, and with
     the Behavioral Economics and Uptake Friction document for the
     uptake-dependence of the effect.

 53. Open Issues Registry
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Open_Issues_Registry.docx
     What it does: Consolidates everything the platform is aware of but has
     not fully resolved. Includes (a) issues mitigated in v2.24 (Manifesto
     cover tagline; healthcare per-capita timeline; TOC rate language); (b)
     open issues awaiting resolution (healthcare contribution rate has four
     different values across the package; wealth surcharge architecture has
     three versions; FFIA shows zero net new revenue from "modified income tax
     architecture"; Adjacent Pillars Under Development uses outdated framing);
     (c) topics aware of but needing more research (Federal Reserve / monetary
     policy interaction; housing market interaction; wage floor disemployment
     quantification; healthcare cost reduction decomposition; Sovereign Fund 4
     percent return scenario; intersectional pay gap analysis;
     climate-omission strategic reasoning); (d) acknowledged scope omissions
     (long-term care, hearing aids, comprehensive climate policy, housing
     supply, immigration); (e) acknowledged process limitations (lead author
     not credentialed economist; External Reviews folder contains only AI
     reviews; mathematical models not independently audited). When to read:
     Read after the Manifesto if you want to know what the platform's authors
     know about the platform's limitations. The registry is offered in the
     same spirit as the Provenance document — transparency over polish.

 54. Emergency Services Communications Modernization
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Emergency_Services_Communications.docx
     What it does: Documents the current state of US emergency services
     communications (active POTS (Plain Old Telephone Service) retirement
     crisis; fragmented state-by-state NG911 deployment; tribal nation 911
     inadequacies; FirstNet operational structure) and the platform's
     commitments at the federal infrastructure layer. Five mechanisms link
     universal broadband to emergency services modernization: (a) NG911 IP
     transport substrate replacing fragmented state ESInet procurements; (b)
     POTS retirement solved via federal broadband as carrier for fire alarms,
     elevator phones, school panic buttons, and PSAP (Public Safety Answering
     Point) backup paths; (c) federal cellular site co-deployment alongside
     fiber, at marginal cost, addressing rural and tribal wireless coverage
     gaps for 911; (d) full NG911 transition funding via Sovereign Fund
     disbursements, closing the $5.8 to $9.27 billion gap that the NTIA
     (National Telecommunications and Information Administration)'s 2026 cost
     study identified; (e) FirstNet contract renegotiation following the March
     2026 Lutnick/AT&T precedent, delivering open interconnection, expanded
     coverage commitments, reduced sustainability payments to PSAPs, and 2042
     transition planning. Tribal nation sovereignty is treated as a
     first-class concern: free service commitment, sovereign choice over
     implementation, three operating models for tribal 911 (operate own PSAP,
     route to neighboring county under federal-supported service agreement,
     hybrid). Federal cybersecurity standards adopted from existing CISA,
     NIST, NENA, and CJIS frameworks rather than reinvented. National
     standardization benefits identified explicitly: cross-jurisdictional call
     routing, common protocols, mutual aid coordination, common training.
     Includes implementation sequence (Years 1-3 foundation; Years 4-7
     buildout; Years 8-10 completion), cost analysis with explicit uncertainty
     bands, what is not addressed (LMR replacement, PSAP operations, 911 fee
     reform, international coordination), and open questions (federal cellular
     co-deployment cost estimation, reliability SLA specification, FirstNet
     reauthorization, tribal consultation requirements, spectrum allocation,
     cost recovery model). When to read: Read after the Universal Broadband
     Access Substantiation and the Civic Infrastructure Architectural Framing
     for the platform's emergency services position. Particularly relevant for
     state 911 administrators, PSAP operators, public safety advocates, tribal
     infrastructure officials, and any reviewer asking how the platform
     interacts with the existing federal emergency services framework.

 55. Federal Infrastructure Fee
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Federal_Infrastructure_Fee.docx
     What it does: Establishes the Federal Infrastructure Fee as the
     platform's commitment for cost recovery on the federally-owned broadband
     and cellular infrastructure (per items 51 and 77). Documents (a) the
     architectural shift from Path A (federal subsidy of private ISPs at
     $48B/year) to Path B (federal ownership of fiber and cellular gap sites),
     with thirty-year cost projection showing approximately $1.5-1.7T in
     savings under Path B; (b) federal capital deployment cost analysis
     (~$270B at full deployment: last-mile fiber, backbone, cellular gap
     sites); (c) annual O&M analysis (~$13.5B/year); (d) future capacity
     reserve (~$6.75B/year); (e) annual revenue requirement of approximately
     $34B/year. Analyzes four fee allocation structures (per-employee, tiered,
     revenue-based, hybrid) with worked examples for various company profiles,
     recommending Structure D (hybrid: $600/year per location +
     $175/employee/year exempting first 25 + 0.035% of revenue above $50M).
     Inflation indexing via BLS-blended formula (50% wired telecom PPI + 30%
     telecom technician ECI + 20% telecom equipment PPI). Demand adaptation
     via capacity utilization triggers and volumetric component for very large
     users. Replaces USF and consolidates state telecom taxes (revenue-neutral
     overall, ~$3B/year in operational efficiency gains). Pass-through
     prevention via transparency, FTC oversight, market structure, and
     regulated industries. Industry exemptions for public-purpose entities
     (public hospitals, schools, libraries, public safety, tribal nations,
     government agencies) with for-profit equivalents paying. Fraud surface
     area and identity theft reduction (eliminates household-level subsidy
     verification PII collection; reduces documented USF/ACP fraud by
     ~$200-500M/year). Turnpike-toll model and other regulatory analogies
     (airport landing fees, marine port fees, spectrum auctions, water utility
     connection fees). Transparency commitments (annual cost reports,
     Government Accountability Office (GAO) and external audit, three-year
     forward projections, public comment periods, FCC dispute authority). Open
     questions identified honestly: privately-owned fiber acquisition
     mechanism, pass-through incidence empirical estimation, forward
     projection accuracy validation, exemption boundary definitions, Sovereign
     Fund capital treatment, federal infrastructure operator governance. When
     to read: Read after the Universal Broadband Access Substantiation and
     Emergency Services Communications Modernization. Particularly relevant
     for telecommunications policy professionals, fiscal policy reviewers,
     business owners modeling potential platform impact, state telecom
     regulators, and anyone evaluating the platform's
     federal-ownership-vs-subsidy architectural decision.

 56. Federal Infrastructure Fee Transition Mechanics
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Federal_Infrastructure_Fee_Transition_Mechanics.docx
     Best for: Policy professionals, telecom industry stakeholders,
     congressional staff drafting legislation. Substantiates the three
     transition questions deferred from the Federal Infrastructure Fee
     document (cellular site lease rate setting under federal cost-recovery;
     voluntary negotiated buyout with eminent domain backstop for fiber
     acquisition; pass-through prevention through three overlapping
     mechanisms). Specifies cellular site lease rate-setting methodology (cost
     basis: amortized acquisition cost plus maintenance plus
     Treasury-plus-150-basis-points return); fiber acquisition mechanism
     (voluntary buyout with declining transition premium over 10 years,
     eminent domain backstop after year 10); and pass-through prevention (FCC
     line-item prohibition, comparative rate transparency, antitrust
     enforcement against coordinated price increases). Documents the 10-year
     transition timeline, FCC/NTIA/Treasury/DOJ allocation of authority,
     stakeholder engagement requirements, and three open questions plus three
     identified risks (regulatory capture, technology obsolescence,
     international trade implications). Length permits use as a legislative
     drafting reference.

 57. Iterative Hardening Process Documentation
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Iterative_Hardening_Process_Documentation.docx
     Best for: Auditors evaluating the platform's process rigor; future
     iterations of platform hardening work; other AI-collaboration projects
     looking for a documented quality-assurance pattern. Compiles the
     methodology, audit angles, programmatic checks, persona simulations,
     standing rules, finding categories, lessons learned, and meta-issues
     encountered across multiple iterations of the hardening cycle (May 6,
     2026). Documents the four-step cycle (audit, mitigate, verify, repeat),
     the six personas used in reading-path simulations (skeptic, policy
     professional, telecom industry professional, tribal infrastructure
     officer, small business owner, concerned citizen), and the
     iteration-by-iteration summary of findings and resolutions. Documents the
     recursive meta-trigger issue and other audit-script limitations
     encountered during the work.

 58. Federal Income Tax Revenue Under the Platform's Modified Architecture
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Federal_Income_Tax_Revenue_Modified_Architecture.docx
     Best for: Policy professionals evaluating the platform's fiscal claims;
     FFIA reviewers; readers who want to understand the income tax
     architecture's revenue implications quantitatively. Substantiates OPEN-3
     (the FFIA's apparent zero net revenue from modified income tax
     architecture) by quantifying the three components: wage floor exemption
     replacing standard deduction (~-$15B/year net), high-earner graduated
     income surcharge (~+$634B/year gross before behavioral adjustment), and
     existing brackets preserved. Total net at gross projection: ~+$619B/year
     mature steady-state. Reconciliation with FFIA: recommends FFIA separate
     income tax architecture (~$130B behavioral-adjusted) from wealth tax
     architecture (~$70B for $10M and $50M mechanisms). Documents the
     microsimulation modeling that would be required for definitive numbers
     (Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT), Tax Policy Center, or Penn Wharton
     tools) and the behavioral elasticity assumptions that would refine the
     estimates. Includes phase-in revenue projections (year 1: ~$200B; year 2:
     ~$440B; year 3+: ~$620B mature steady-state). v2.30 enhancements (added
     in iteration 13 of the hardening cycle): Behavioral Elasticity
     Sensitivity Analysis section computing revenue retention across ETI
     (Elasticity of Taxable Income) 0.2 through 0.8 (median ETI 0.4 produces
     ~$240B from $260B static gross); Distributional Impact Analysis section
     showing progressive effects across three segments (bottom 90M filers tax
     reduction; middle 40M filers modest increase; top 6.5M filers graduated
     increases); FFIA Reconciliation section updated with explicit
     three-component breakdown ($130B income tax architecture + $35B small
     wealth surcharge + $60B wealth tax = $225B combined); filer-count
     correction note acknowledging the original $634B gross estimate used
     filer counts above IRS Statistics of Income 2021 baseline.

 59. Self-Employed and Gig Worker Implementation
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Self_Employed_and_Gig_Worker_Implementation.docx
     Best for: Self-employed workers, independent contractors, gig-economy
     workers (rideshare, food delivery, freelance), and tax preparers serving
     these segments. Addresses contribution mechanism specifics
     (FICA-convention split applied to self-employment), gig worker
     multi-employer treatment (worker-side self-administration default),
     quarterly payment integration (consolidated quarterly payments),
     healthcare for non-W-2 workers, and Sovereign Fund accumulation without
     employer structure. Includes worked examples for independent contractor
     and multi-platform gig worker. Companion to Federal Income Tax Revenue
     Modified Architecture and What This Means For You documents.

 60. External Engagement Plan
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_External_Engagement_Plan.docx
     Best for: The platform's lead author preparing outreach to external
     reviewers; external reviewers evaluating engagement scope before
     commitment; third parties (funders, institutional partners) understanding
     the platform's external-engagement discipline. Specifies structured
     framework for the eleven OPEN Section 47 items requiring external domain
     expertise: target reviewer profiles, specific questions, scope and time
     commitment, output formats, reviewer onboarding reading paths, and
     outreach templates. Organizes engagements into four kinds (validation of
     existing response frameworks; depth-development for persona-surfaced
     items; independent mathematical audit; tribal government-to-government
     consultation).

 61. Pillar Eight: Universal Paid Family Time
     02_Vision_and_Communication/02_Universal_Paid_Family_Time_Pillar.docx
     Best for: All workers; parents anticipating leave for
     childbirth/adoption; informal caregivers (spouses, adult children,
     others) supporting seriously ill family members; workers facing personal
     medical episodes; tax preparers and HR professionals operating against
     the new payroll contribution stream. Specifies Pillar Eight: federal paid
     leave for parental, caregiver, and personal medical circumstances; up to
     twelve weeks per qualifying event; sliding-scale wage replacement; funded
     through 0.4% combined payroll contribution; federal-as-floor interaction
     with existing state programs. Companion to the master We The People
     Platform document Pillar Eight section.

 62. Architectural Intent Mitigations: PERSONA-MIN-14 Through 24
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Architectural_Intent_Mitigations.docx
     Best for: Policy reviewers wanting to understand how the platform
     addresses persona-driven findings without claiming credentialed
     expertise. Mitigates eleven PERSONA-MIN items at architectural-intent
     level: healthcare operations (EHR integration, specialty referrals,
     malpractice), constitutional review (commerce clause for FIF, takings
     clause for stranded assets, federalism preemption), state-level
     implementation (state fiscal impact, state implementation timeline,
     federal-state data sharing), and Sovereign Fund investment operations
     (market impact at scale, pension fund interaction). Companion to v3.1.10
     Self-Employed and Gig Worker Implementation; together they close the
     entire twenty-seven-item PERSONA-MIN backlog.

 63. Academic Outreach Letter Templates
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Academic_Outreach_Letter_Templates.docx
     Best for: Anyone preparing actual outreach to academic reviewers about
     platform validation needs. Provides ready-to-adapt templates: cold-email
     templates with item-specific variants for the highest-priority RESEARCH
     and PERSONA-SIG items, departmental-pitch templates for academic policy
     centers (Brookings Hutchins, Penn Wharton, Hamilton Project, Roosevelt
     Institute, university policy schools), working-paper-venue submission
     framings (SSRN, NBER, RFF), and follow-up correspondence templates.
     Operational extension of the External Engagement Plan v3.1.11.

 64. Tribal Consultation Framework
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Tribal_Consultation_Framework.docx
     Best for: Anyone preparing actual government-to-government consultation
     regarding ITEM79-Q3 (tribal nation lands and federal infrastructure).
     Provides framework for responsible consultation: legal-framework
     background (EO 13175, NHPA, NEPA, ISDA, ICWA), consultation principles,
     suggested approach (national tribal organization introduction, then
     direct tribal-government outreach), suggested initial consultation
     partners across geographic regions, materials package specification,
     sample initial outreach letter to NCAI. Operational extension of
     ITEM79-Q3.

 65. Combined Reform Model Audit Scope
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Combined_Reform_Model_Audit_Scope.docx
     Best for: Auditors evaluating engagement on PROCESS-3, or anyone needing
     to understand what the platform's audit needs look like. RFP/SOW for
     independent audit of the Combined Reform Model and Federal Fiscal Impact
     Analysis: scope of work organized by SR 11-7 Model Risk Management
     framework (input data quality, model architecture, calibration,
     sensitivity analysis, output validation), audit standards reference,
     deliverables specification, auditor qualifications, timeline, budget
     range ($20-50K), evaluation criteria, response requirements. Operational
     extension of PROCESS-3.

 66. Briefing for Tribal Government Consultation
     02_Vision_and_Communication/02_Tribal_Consultation_Briefing_Document.docx
     Best for: Tribal-government recipients evaluating whether to engage in
     consultation regarding the platform's federal infrastructure deployment
     commitments. Standalone document not requiring engagement with full
     platform materials. Sections: about the document, about the platform,
     federal infrastructure deployment architecture (brief), tribal-lands
     handling current platform position, six specific consultation questions,
     process commitments, about the lead author, how to respond, available
     materials. Companion to 05_Tribal_Consultation_Framework.docx (which
     specifies the consultation process); this document is the actual material
     sent to tribal governments and national tribal organizations as stage two
     of that process.

 67. Universal Long-Term Care Substantiation (Pillar Nine)
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Universal_Long_Term_Care_Substantiation.docx
     Best for: Anyone wanting the substantiation behind Pillar Nine, the
     platform's ninth pillar (Universal Long-Term Care) added in v3.3.0.
     Documents the case, architecture (1.0% combined payroll = 0.6% employer +
     0.4% worker), six components (functional-need eligibility, home and
     community-based services, family caregiver support, workforce,
     federal-state coordination, transition mechanics), 15-year transition,
     federal-state coordination including tribal consultation, comparison with
     German and Japanese systems, and open issues for credentialed external
     review.

 68. Federal Housing Investment Substantiation (Pillar Ten)
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Federal_Housing_Investment_Substantiation.docx
     Best for: Anyone wanting the substantiation behind Pillar Ten, the
     platform's tenth pillar (Federal Housing Investment) added in v3.4.0.
     Documents the case, architecture (~$145B aggregate funded by general
     revenue from high-earner architecture + existing federal program
     substitution; ~$75B incremental commitment), six components (universal
     rental assistance, federal-state conditional grants, supportive housing
     for vulnerable populations, public-housing reinvestment, manufactured
     housing, regulatory framework), 15-year transition, comparison with
     international approaches, and open issues including housing economics
     review.

 69. Climate Architecture Substantiation (Pillar Eleven)
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Climate_Architecture_Substantiation.docx
     Best for: Anyone wanting the substantiation behind Pillar Eleven, the
     platform's eleventh pillar (Climate Architecture) added in v3.5.0.
     Documents the case, architecture (upstream carbon price $50/ton rising to
     $100/ton; 50/50 dividend/investment recycling; fiscally independent), six
     components (carbon price design, dividend distribution, clean-energy
     investment, just transition, complementary regulation, federal-state
     coordination), 10-year transition, comparison with British Columbia, EU
     ETS, and Sweden empirical experience, and open issues including climate
     economics review.

 70. Immigration Architecture Substantiation (Pillar Twelve)
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Immigration_Architecture_Substantiation.docx
     Best for: Anyone wanting the substantiation behind Pillar Twelve, the
     platform's twelfth pillar (Immigration Architecture) added in v3.6.0.
     Documents the case, architecture (federal general revenue + user fees;
     ~$30-50B/yr gross commitment; positive net fiscal impact ~$1T over 20
     years per CBO scoring of comparable proposals), six components (pathway
     to legal status, legal immigration modernization, asylum and refugee
     processing, workforce visa reform, integration support, border management
     modernization), 15-year transition, comparison with prior comprehensive
     reform proposals (S.744 of 2013; U.S. Citizenship Act of 2021),
     comparison with international approaches, explicit acknowledgment of
     political and substantive tensions, and open issues for credentialed
     external review. v3.6.0 completes the v4.0.0 four-pillar architecture
     proposal sequence.

 71. Citizen Accountability Architecture: Research Note (Future Direction)
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Citizen_Accountability_Architecture_Research_Note.docx
     Best for: Anyone interested in the architectural thinking about whether
     and how the platform's transparency and information infrastructure could
     be extended to enable citizen-initiated accountability mechanisms
     (citizen votes triggering impeachment proceedings, recall, or other
     binding institutional action). Documents the two-track architecture
     (Track A transparency infrastructure achievable without constitutional
     amendment; Track B citizen-initiated action mechanisms requiring
     amendment), constitutional landscape, threshold calibration, the
     non-partisan information question, First Amendment constraints,
     sequencing strategy across four phases over 20-30 years, international
     precedents, reducing corruption surface area, open issues. Explicitly
     framed as research direction, NOT a candidate Pillar Thirteen.

 72. Pillars: How To Borrow Independently
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Pillars_Borrow_Independently.docx
     Best for: Advocacy organizations considering whether to adopt one or two
     pillars from this platform without committing to the whole architecture.
     Per-pillar adoption guide for all twelve pillars. For each pillar: what
     it requires, what it explicitly does NOT require (so the pillar can stand
     alone), and which advocacy ecosystems align naturally with that pillar's
     substantive policy goals. Identifies the minimum coherent unit of policy
     for each pillar.

 73. What Done Looks Like
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_What_Done_Looks_Like.docx
     Best for: Anyone asking what readiness criteria the platform uses for
     external engagement. Documents what 'done' means in the platform's own
     terms: ready for academic review; ready for advocacy adoption; ready for
     legislative engagement; ready for general public communication. For each
     readiness category, identifies specific deliverable artifacts that exist
     and the responsibility boundary between what the lead author can offer
     and what requires external expertise.

 74. Sources and Derivation Convention
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Sources_And_Derivation_Convention.docx
     Best for: Academic readers and methodology-focused reviewers evaluating
     the platform's analytical discipline. Documents the conventions used
     throughout the platform for sourcing data, deriving estimates, and
     documenting assumptions. Covers: how to cite primary sources
     (Congressional Budget Office, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services,
     Internal Revenue Service, Bureau of Labor Statistics); how derived
     numbers are documented; how assumption ranges are presented; conventions
     for distinguishing canonical numbers from approximations.

 75. Comprehensive Verification Report
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Comprehensive_Verification_Report.docx
     Best for: Reviewers and external auditors validating that the platform's
     documentation has been internally cross-checked. Verification snapshot at
     v3.2.7 walking the Section 47 dependency tracker and confirming each item
     has description, status, and (for OPEN items) external-engagement
     coverage. Documents the verification methodology used and the result.

 76. Milestone B1 Execution Checklist
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Milestone_B1_Execution_Checklist.docx
     Best for: The lead author or anyone helping with publication execution.
     Step-by-step checklist for Milestone B1 (publication readiness): Zenodo
     deposit preparation, Digital Object Identifier (DOI) registration,
     Internet Archive deposit, Wayback Machine capture, domain registration,
     hosting setup, citation metadata finalization. Covers the
     technical-publication side; companion to the External Engagement Plan.

 77. Hosting Setup Quick Reference
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Hosting_Setup_Quick_Reference.docx
     Best for: Lead author executing Cloudflare-based hosting setup (domain
     registration, Cloudflare Pages, DNS, SSL/TLS, email routing). Companion
     to the Milestone B1 Execution Checklist with technical configuration
     specifics. Covers dashboard navigation, verification steps at each phase,
     cost expectation, and failure-mode recovery.

 78. Persona-Based Reading-Path Simulations: Pillars 2-6
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Persona_Simulations_P2_P6.docx
     Best for: Verifying that the platform's documentation answers the
     questions a persona-typical reader would actually ask. Walks a
     representative reader persona through Pillars Two through Six (Wage
     Floors, Education Fund, Healthcare, Childcare, Mental Health) and
     documents what questions each persona asks, where the answers are, and
     whether findable from cold start.

 79. Persona-Based Reading-Path Simulations: Pillars 7-11
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Persona_Simulations_P7_P11.docx
     Best for: Verifying that the platform's documentation answers the
     questions a persona-typical reader would actually ask. Walks a
     representative reader persona through Pillars Seven through Eleven (Civic
     Infrastructure, Paid Family Time, Long-Term Care, Housing, Climate).
     Companion to the Pillars 2-6 simulations.

 80. Reader's Path Through Resolved Open Issues: Scoping Specification
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Readers_Path_Scoping.docx
     Best for: Anyone who would write or commission the Reader's Path
     Synthesis. Scoping specification for the synthesis document: audience,
     intended reader takeaway, scope (covers the canonical platform-issue set
     tracked in Section 47), format and length, update cadence, relationship
     to existing documents, structural outline, decision criterion for when to
     actually write the synthesis. Not the synthesis itself; the specification
     for it.

 81. Reader's Path Through Resolved Open Issues: Synthesis
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Readers_Path_Synthesis.docx
     Best for: External reviewers evaluating the platform's analytical
     discipline before recommending it for institutional engagement. The
     synthesis specified by the Reader's Path Scoping companion. Walks through
     the platform's resolved open issues demonstrating: loose ends surfaced
     rather than hidden; consistent author-responsibility convention; v3.1.2
     Mitigated criterion change shows willingness to refine conventions;
     external-expertise items tracked transparently.

 82. Sovereign Education Fund: Substantiation
     05_Analytical_Framing/05_Sovereign_Education_Fund_Substantiation.docx
     Best for: External reviewers evaluating the Pillar Three (Sovereign
     Education Fund) architectural design. Substantiates the v3.7.14 expansion
     including: no-cap academic-performance-based architecture (citizens may
     pursue one field or many, one credential or several, vocational through
     doctoral); doctoral tuition plus living stipends at Pillar Two
     occupation-specific wage floors; curriculum-approval framework with
     job-field-backward design and general-education preservation;
     credit-transfer with substance-of-content test; student-support
     intervention architecture (four-signal struggling detection, four-line
     intervention pathway, counselor staffing ratios); federal liaison program
     (parallel to USDA Cooperative Extension model); counselor workforce
     buildout to ~130,000 FTE. Cost estimates ~$180-250B annually at steady
     state (2.5-3.5% of Sovereign Fund expected returns). Six new Section 47
     entries (PERSONA-SIG-10/11/12, RESEARCH-15/16/17) document
     external-expertise needs.

FORMAT
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Each document is included in two formats:
  - .docx — original Word document (best for editing or full-fidelity reading)
  - .html — self-contained browser-viewable version (works on any device)

The .html files include the platform's flag background, formatting, and
a navigation link back to the platform index (if you have the rest of the
package). They open in any web browser by double-clicking.

ABOUT THE PLATFORM
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The We The People Platform is a federal-policy reform proposal package
authored by Jason Robertson. The full platform consists of 109 documents
across 12 policy pillars. This ZIP is a curated subset.

Full platform: https://wethepeopleplatform.com
(or the platform_index.html page from the full package)

==============================================================================