3 ms·
We don't need a congress full of subject-matter experts. What we need are people who respect and can work effectively with subject-matter experts. I agree with
by Silhouette 8y ago
We don't need a congress full of subject-matter experts. What we need are people who respect and can work effectively with subject-matter experts.
I agree with the spirit of this argument, but there is a clear downside to not giving subject matter experts a vote at all. Ultimately there is then nothing to stop political expediency overriding facts and understanding, and the elected representatives are free to discard the opinions of the SMEs no matter how valid or correct they might be.
Obviously most representatives still couldn't be true experts all the different subjects that lawmakers vote on. You'd only ever have a limited number of representatives who were voting fully informed on any given issue. Still, at least that number would be greater than zero, and if you're a politician voting for a "health" law that 100% of the qualified medical practitioners among your colleagues are voting against on the same record, that tells everyone something.
- mmt 8y ago> Ultimately there is then nothing to stop political expediency overriding facts and understanding, and the elected representatives are free to discard the opinions of the SMEs no matter how valid or correct they might be. Sadly, I've "seen" this (first- and second-hand) happen even with private-sector managers. When it happens to me, I always wonder, why did they bother to hire us (relatively expensive) experts in the first place? I've heard tell on HN of "engineering first" company cultures where decisions are supposedly made based (exclusively, when possible) on objective criteria, but I have yet to see it at companies above a certain size.