4 ms·
I like this idea, but I think that the biggest risk would be in the legal assistants needed to navigate the sea of bureaucracy that legislative work usually nee
by haolez 7y ago
I like this idea, but I think that the biggest risk would be in the legal assistants needed to navigate the sea of bureaucracy that legislative work usually needs.
The lottery-selected citizens would come and go, but the assistant would probably remain in office for several “elections”. The selected citizens would probably be oblivious to what’s currently going on and the assistants would have incentives to influence those overwhelmed citizens to the assistant’s own agenda.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- macintux 7y agoThat's a common argument against term limits: by shifting the burden of institutional memory even farther away from the elected officials, you're further empowering the bureaucrats.
- BiteCode_dev 7y agoIsn't already the case though? If yes, it should not prevent us from tying out term limit, only push us to also add some mechanism to deal with bureaucrats.
- macintux 7y agoIt also further empowers the lobbyists, which adds to the risks. A government full of ignorant people will tend to fall back on those who seem to know what they're talking about.
- BiteCode_dev 7y agoLobbying is a problem on its own, and should be dealt with anyway, and independently of other changes to the system. There is no way to preserve democracy when there is a legal path for bribing those in charge of power.
- haolez 7y ago“Institutional memory”. It’s the first time I’ve heard this term. I like it! Is this common in public administration literature?
- macintux 7y agoI've probably heard it somewhere before, but I was translating from the phrase I use a lot in computer world: tribal knowledge.