5 ms·

Are there any decent plausible solutions to the problem of regulatory capture? Are there any laws restricting companies from "lobbying" regulators or engaging

by custos 8y ago

Are there any decent plausible solutions to the problem of regulatory capture? Are there any laws restricting companies from "lobbying" regulators or engaging in quid pro quo?

alex_anglin 8y ago
On the upside - competitive pay and benefits with industry. Probably a tough sell for many. On the downside - restrict employment opportunities for X years after being in a specific position. Clearly both have issues, but regulatory capture is a problem worth solving.
- patentatt 8y ago
  Patent examiners top out at like $140’s pretty much. Nobody that’s GS scale makes over $160. Starting salary at big law firms is $180 + bonus. So you have a fair pint there. Also, as far as time bars, the PTO does something like this. Former examiners are not allowed to apply for a patent for a term after they leave. Doesn’t really solve the problem, but it’s something.
  - pwg 8y ago
    The USPTO also bars former examiner's from working as an attorney on cases in the area in which they previously examined for two years after they leave the USPTO. I do not know how carefully this rule is enforced.
    - patentatt 8y ago
      Good point, I think it’s really on the honor system with the threat of invalidating a patent in some later litigation.
forapurpose 8y ago
> Are there any decent plausible solutions to the problem of regulatory capture? It would be interesting to see research on various solutions around the world. One obvious solution is paying people market rates for their work; then they don't have an incentive to work in industry. One way government has done that is by providing job security and regular hours as a perk to compensate for lower pay. In the U.S., the Republican Party (I'm not saying it to be partisan; it's just fact) had been trying to cut pay, cut job security, and also cut personnel, which increases the workload. It's not hard to see where that might lead.
rayiner 8y ago
Regulation puts you between a rock and a hard place: regulators are either people without industry experience who don't understand the relevant dynamics (e.g. GDPR, SESTA, SOPA) or people with industry experience who have incentives or predispositions towards favoring the industry. The best solution to that is simply to regulate as little as necessary, and leave as much up to the market as possible. A good example is infrastructure and utility deregulation in the U.S. and western Europe in the 1980s-1990s. There was a time when government regulators would set, e.g. prices for electricity. Today, electric markets are mostly deregulated, with only distribution utilities remaining as regulated monopolies.

by custos 8y ago

Are there any decent plausible solutions to the problem of regulatory capture? Are there any laws restricting companies from "lobbying" regulators or engaging in quid pro quo?

alex_anglin 8y ago

On the upside - competitive pay and benefits with industry. Probably a tough sell for many. On the downside - restrict employment opportunities for X years after being in a specific position. Clearly both have issues, but regulatory capture is a problem worth solving.

patentatt 8y ago
Patent examiners top out at like $140’s pretty much. Nobody that’s GS scale makes over $160. Starting salary at big law firms is $180 + bonus. So you have a fair pint there. Also, as far as time bars, the PTO does something like this. Former examiners are not allowed to apply for a patent for a term after they leave. Doesn’t really solve the problem, but it’s something.
- pwg 8y ago
  The USPTO also bars former examiner's from working as an attorney on cases in the area in which they previously examined for two years after they leave the USPTO. I do not know how carefully this rule is enforced.
  - patentatt 8y ago
    Good point, I think it’s really on the honor system with the threat of invalidating a patent in some later litigation.

forapurpose 8y ago

> Are there any decent plausible solutions to the problem of regulatory capture? It would be interesting to see research on various solutions around the world. One obvious solution is paying people market rates for their work; then they don't have an incentive to work in industry. One way government has done that is by providing job security and regular hours as a perk to compensate for lower pay. In the U.S., the Republican Party (I'm not saying it to be partisan; it's just fact) had been trying to cut pay, cut job security, and also cut personnel, which increases the workload. It's not hard to see where that might lead.

rayiner 8y ago

Regulation puts you between a rock and a hard place: regulators are either people without industry experience who don't understand the relevant dynamics (e.g. GDPR, SESTA, SOPA) or people with industry experience who have incentives or predispositions towards favoring the industry. The best solution to that is simply to regulate as little as necessary, and leave as much up to the market as possible. A good example is infrastructure and utility deregulation in the U.S. and western Europe in the 1980s-1990s. There was a time when government regulators would set, e.g. prices for electricity. Today, electric markets are mostly deregulated, with only distribution utilities remaining as regulated monopolies.