4 ms·

Uhh... a new website, great. I know it takes the federal agencies a lot of time to do literally anything, so let's stop for a moment and bask in this site. To

Uhh... a new website, great. I know it takes the federal agencies a lot of time to do literally anything, so let's stop for a moment and bask in this site. To more important matters: what about stopping the flow of corporate and foreign money into our elections? What about shutting down Super PACs or making their info transparent? What about enshrining publicly funded elections? Given all those recent studies/reports that claim the USA is an oligarchy and average citizens have no real impact on the direction of policy, why should we care about a shiny new website? We vote, but the votes don't matter anyway.

hobs 11y ago
Fair, but I think this is just a project of the new 18f initiative. It is a good thing to make our government data more accessible and useful to all of us, it makes it harder to lie about things, or make it even more egregious when they take additional steps to hide malfeasance. It doesn't change that we are re-painting the house when the roof is collapsing.
bjacobel 11y ago
The ability to explore and analyze campaign finance data on a website that actually works (I don't know if anyone else has ever tried to use the old FEC site...) is a huge step in being able to name and shame abuses of money in politics. This isn't just "a new website," it's a platform for effecting change.
- cryoshon 11y ago
  What's your proposed mechanism for effecting change? Shame doesn't do anything, they are already well-funded and exactly where they wanted to be.
  - TeMPOraL 11y ago
    Does it matter? If the website lets you identify and pick right targets for maximum effect, then it helps regardless of the "mechanism for effecting change" you seek to employ.
    - cryoshon 11y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_action_committee#Disclosure_rules https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_action_committee#Dis... "Yet despite disclosure rules, it is possible to spend money without voters knowing the identities of donors before the election.[36] In federal elections, for example, political action committees have the option to choose to file reports on a "monthly" or "quarterly" basis.[37][38][39] This allows funds raised by PACs in the final days of the election to be spent and votes cast before the report is due." It matters. Transparency that is deferred until after the decision point of an election means that the potential for change is torpedoed for at least a few years each time. I very much agree that we are better off with any information we can get, but trying to eke democracy out of election forensics is going to be extremely tough.
zacharycohn 11y ago
Transparency is a wonderful tool in supporting change.
jzd 11y ago
Do not downvote the posts by cryoshon cryoshon is addressing the elephant in the room. Anybody who downvotes his/her posts is unwilling to address the elephant in the room. This is an important topic which warrants further discussion.
- jonknee 11y ago
  No, it's just whining that the FEC isn't doing what cryoshon wants. In reality the FEC can't do much because it's stuck in partisan deadlock and things like the Citizens Vs. United ruling allow them to do even less. This website has nothing to do with the infighting between political parties, it's about giving citizens the actual data. Change will come not from the FEC magically agreeing on anything, but from people finding out where the money is going and voting for people who vow to change it. This is literally the best the FEC can do!
  - jzd 11y ago
    Agreed. However cryoshon's point is that just giving us all the data isn't going to change anything even if we have the information. i.e. our votes are irrelevant. So even though we have a nice new site, it's a waste since the outcome is the same.
    - jonknee 11y ago
      I completely disagree that it's a waste. The new site is great.
      - jzd 11y ago
        But the politics don't change as a result of it.
  - cryoshon 11y ago
    ...there's always more they can do, and frankly making a new website which will post forensic election data after the time when it is relevant doesn't count as an action on the political chessboard of the health of the country-- on the separate, smaller stakes chessboard of getting agency funding and squabbling over the budgeting of that funding, sure, this helps the FEC say they did something, which is worthwhile to them and maybe us as well. I think that we'd be better off discussing problem A than problem B, though. As far as what the FEC can do which might have an actual impact: the heads of the federal agencies can access the bully pulpit if they choose to, but typically their leaders are selected for pliability rather than assertiveness. I believe relatively recently the head of the SEC came out and told the media that they don't have enough resources to enforce their regulations in any capacity, which made quite a stir at the time and likely lead to funding for their more recent attempts to build high profile cases.
akgerber 11y ago
"Politics is a strong and slow boring of hard boards." [0] How do we ask people to care about this problem without being able to do any research about it? [0] http://www.harpers.org/blog/2008/06/weber-on-the-political-vocation/ http://www.harpers.org/blog/2008/06/weber-on-the-political-v...

hobs 11y ago

Fair, but I think this is just a project of the new 18f initiative. It is a good thing to make our government data more accessible and useful to all of us, it makes it harder to lie about things, or make it even more egregious when they take additional steps to hide malfeasance. It doesn't change that we are re-painting the house when the roof is collapsing.

bjacobel 11y ago

The ability to explore and analyze campaign finance data on a website that actually works (I don't know if anyone else has ever tried to use the old FEC site...) is a huge step in being able to name and shame abuses of money in politics. This isn't just "a new website," it's a platform for effecting change.

cryoshon 11y ago
What's your proposed mechanism for effecting change? Shame doesn't do anything, they are already well-funded and exactly where they wanted to be.
- TeMPOraL 11y ago
  Does it matter? If the website lets you identify and pick right targets for maximum effect, then it helps regardless of the "mechanism for effecting change" you seek to employ.
  - cryoshon 11y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_action_committee#Disclosure_rules https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_action_committee#Dis... "Yet despite disclosure rules, it is possible to spend money without voters knowing the identities of donors before the election.[36] In federal elections, for example, political action committees have the option to choose to file reports on a "monthly" or "quarterly" basis.[37][38][39] This allows funds raised by PACs in the final days of the election to be spent and votes cast before the report is due." It matters. Transparency that is deferred until after the decision point of an election means that the potential for change is torpedoed for at least a few years each time. I very much agree that we are better off with any information we can get, but trying to eke democracy out of election forensics is going to be extremely tough.

zacharycohn 11y ago

Transparency is a wonderful tool in supporting change.

jzd 11y ago

Do not downvote the posts by cryoshon cryoshon is addressing the elephant in the room. Anybody who downvotes his/her posts is unwilling to address the elephant in the room. This is an important topic which warrants further discussion.

jonknee 11y ago
No, it's just whining that the FEC isn't doing what cryoshon wants. In reality the FEC can't do much because it's stuck in partisan deadlock and things like the Citizens Vs. United ruling allow them to do even less. This website has nothing to do with the infighting between political parties, it's about giving citizens the actual data. Change will come not from the FEC magically agreeing on anything, but from people finding out where the money is going and voting for people who vow to change it. This is literally the best the FEC can do!
- jzd 11y ago
  Agreed. However cryoshon's point is that just giving us all the data isn't going to change anything even if we have the information. i.e. our votes are irrelevant. So even though we have a nice new site, it's a waste since the outcome is the same.
  - jonknee 11y ago
    I completely disagree that it's a waste. The new site is great.
    - jzd 11y ago
      But the politics don't change as a result of it.
- cryoshon 11y ago
  ...there's always more they can do, and frankly making a new website which will post forensic election data after the time when it is relevant doesn't count as an action on the political chessboard of the health of the country-- on the separate, smaller stakes chessboard of getting agency funding and squabbling over the budgeting of that funding, sure, this helps the FEC say they did something, which is worthwhile to them and maybe us as well. I think that we'd be better off discussing problem A than problem B, though. As far as what the FEC can do which might have an actual impact: the heads of the federal agencies can access the bully pulpit if they choose to, but typically their leaders are selected for pliability rather than assertiveness. I believe relatively recently the head of the SEC came out and told the media that they don't have enough resources to enforce their regulations in any capacity, which made quite a stir at the time and likely lead to funding for their more recent attempts to build high profile cases.

akgerber 11y ago

"Politics is a strong and slow boring of hard boards." [0] How do we ask people to care about this problem without being able to do any research about it? [0] http://www.harpers.org/blog/2008/06/weber-on-the-political-vocation/ http://www.harpers.org/blog/2008/06/weber-on-the-political-v...