3 ms·

I think the people from CRI might argue the counter to Amazon lobbying is counterintuitively to have less transparency in Congress. Some proposals being as sim

I think the people from CRI might argue the counter to Amazon lobbying is counterintuitively to have less transparency in Congress. Some proposals being as simple to restore more closed-door committees and committees votes, that were removed in the sunshine reform laws of the 70s. Lobbying orgs often lobby for greater Congressional transparency while simultaneously trying to get more corporate privacy, creating more info asymmetry. Also, with more congressional transparency, while citizens can theoretically lobby as well, these big lobby orgs seem to do it much much better, sitting in committee meetings, tracking every committee vote, etc. This is what I've gleaned from the research at CRI and conversations with James D'Angelo but you may read it differently. Regardless, I highly recommend checking out their work. Congressionalresearch.org

Spooky23 5y ago
Absolutely agree. Think about how LBJ pushed through civil rights and voting rights act, as a Senator of the “solid south” that kept anti-lynching legislation in committee for a half century. It wouldn’t be possible today. The situation in state legislatures is even worse.
- jimkleiber 5y ago
  Exactly. That site I linked has a lot of examples like that. But just more intuitively, imagining that committee mark-up sessions have lobbyists sitting in the back reporting almost every single move, decision, word, etc., does not make me excited to want to be in Congress. For me, I used to believe that it was the most deliberative body in the world, and yet, with the current over-the-shouldering, I don't know how people deliberate. But I think we can restore it, if we want to. I think we can get caught in the trap of wanting others to not manipulate Congress into doing what they want them to do, but wanting us to be able to manipulate them to do what we want them to do. Personally, I'd rather elect people who I think are smart, talented, kind, and considerate, and let them make the best decisions they can.

Spooky23 5y ago

Absolutely agree. Think about how LBJ pushed through civil rights and voting rights act, as a Senator of the “solid south” that kept anti-lynching legislation in committee for a half century. It wouldn’t be possible today. The situation in state legislatures is even worse.

jimkleiber 5y ago
Exactly. That site I linked has a lot of examples like that. But just more intuitively, imagining that committee mark-up sessions have lobbyists sitting in the back reporting almost every single move, decision, word, etc., does not make me excited to want to be in Congress. For me, I used to believe that it was the most deliberative body in the world, and yet, with the current over-the-shouldering, I don't know how people deliberate. But I think we can restore it, if we want to. I think we can get caught in the trap of wanting others to not manipulate Congress into doing what they want them to do, but wanting us to be able to manipulate them to do what we want them to do. Personally, I'd rather elect people who I think are smart, talented, kind, and considerate, and let them make the best decisions they can.