6 ms·
What I don't see in the writeup, is which senators are voting which way. I can tell from the writeup what Blumenthal thinks of it, but not any other committee p
by travisgriggs 5y ago
What I don't see in the writeup, is which senators are voting which way. I can tell from the writeup what Blumenthal thinks of it, but not any other committee participants.
I really wish politicians would embrace a "we will make policies for things we can understand" motto.
- vkou 5y agoWhat makes you think they don't understand this?
- trevoristall 5y ago> I really wish politicians would embrace a "we will make policies for things we can understand" motto. I don't think they'd make many policies if that were the case
- DamnYuppie 5y agothat isn't a bad thing.
- trevoristall 5y agoI'm inclined to agree, though I feel they're already pretty hands-off for most things that don't have corporate interest or overreaching power driving them.
- mhh__ 5y agoIt would potentially mean a huge backlog of boring but basically uncontroversial technical legislation, most likely.
- zeruch 5y agoThat could be a feature or a bug I suppose.
- ekianjo 5y ago> I don't think they'd make many policies if that were the case That would be progress.
- xmprt 5y agoIt doesn't seem like many policies are being made in the first place.
- BiteCode_dev 5y agoThat's assuming policies are made for the good of society, and not the good of the policy makers.
- koolba 5y ago> I really wish politicians would embrace a "we will make policies for things we can understand" motto. If that were the case we’d have a lot less cockamamie gun laws.
- icodestuff 5y agoHere's the list of cosponsors, who will presumably vote for it. I don't see the list of committee members who voted for it. https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/3538/cosponsors https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/353...
- mdorazio 5y agoPretty even split down the aisle on this one. Which in this case is a bad thing.
- smt88 5y agoI actually see it as hopeful. If this were polarized, it would mean that no senator could risk offending their base by opposing it. They wouldn't budge in the face of popular outrage. Since it's bipartisan, it means neither party's base badly wants it to pass (which we would already suspect from our own personal experiences).
- paxys 5y agoYup, a lot of heavy hitters in there too.
- sillyquiet 5y agoI'd say this is actually pretty partisan if you ignore the mostly imaginary lines between the parties and think in terms of establishment vs. non-establishment.
- rectang 5y agoI'm disappointed that Jacky Rosen (D - Nevada) is a co-sponsor. She's a former software developer and should know better. I just watched some of the Senate hearing on Log4J and she seemed reasonably together on security, open source etc. I was feeling optimistic that she could become the Senatorial analogue to Judge Alsup[1]! But if she's on board with EARN IT, scratch that idea. [1] https://www.theverge.com/2017/10/19/16503076/oracle-vs-google-judge-william-alsup-interview-waymo-uber https://www.theverge.com/2017/10/19/16503076/oracle-vs-googl...
- pmontra 5y ago> [politicians embrace] "we will make policies for things we can understand" I wish that too but to be fair: what would any of us be able to make a policy for if we had to really understand the subject first? I'm afraid we'd have to elect about 1 million politicians and let any subset of them make policies about what they are experts about. This is probably what's already going on except nearly everyone in that million is not elected and is part of organizations lobbying for something.