5 ms·

Nice thoughts, but resolve individual clauses down to individual lawmakers, then back to lobbyists. In some cases you might be able to attribute a clause to a

Nice thoughts, but resolve individual clauses down to individual lawmakers, then back to lobbyists. In some cases you might be able to attribute a clause to a lobbyist, but this isn't the general case. And how could this be enforced? outward facing interface allowing the public to track the progress of bills in real time, increasing democratic awareness and participation. This exists, and doesn't seem to be helping. See thomas.loc.gov. For example, concerneing SOPA: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d112:1:./temp/~bdNuye::|/home/LegislativeData.php?n=BSS;c=112| http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d112:1:./temp/~bdNuy... (Suggestion for enhancement: easy permalinks) Legally mandated commit messages accompanying each change justifying and explaining it ... force them to write these in simple english There are already requirements that bills specify the authority on which they're grounded. Most of these just wind up saying "Interstate Commerce". In other words, you'll never be able to enforce this in any meaningful way.

JonnieCache 15y ago
>Most of these just wind up saying "Interstate Commerce". In other words, you'll never be able to enforce this in any meaningful way. In my imagined utopia, all these justifying messages would be listed on a lawmaker's github profile-style page next to a big picture of their face, and any lawmaker with a long list of "interstate commerce" type messages would look like an unelectable crypto-fascist in the eyes of the public. I'd put the messages in speech bubbles emanating from the headshot photo, like you see in some commenting systems, just to drive the point home.
- jerf 15y ago
  And how do you plan on getting Congress to agree to use a system in which vast swathes of them will "look like an unelectable crypto-fascist in the eyes of the public"? Do you want to bring Democracy back to the system (or your choice of roughly equivalent question), or are you just trying to put your own political ideals on a privileged pedestal? I think one of the key reasons we have been unable to successfully reform things is that in general, people want the latter a lot more than they want the former. And DC knows what to do with those types... embrace, extend, embed.
  - JonnieCache 15y ago
    >And how do you plan on getting Congress to agree to use a system in which vast swathes of them will "look like an unelectable crypto-fascist in the eyes of the public"? Maybe they'd be forced to do so in order to compete with the new cohort of younger, technology-embracing politicians which will sweep to power on the crest of a wave of louis ck-style "OMG finally someone who understands" sentiment from the reddit generation, bumrushing congress in much the same way that the tea party has done. I fully admit that these ideas are not workable in this form. I'm trying to "dream big." That's why I used the phrase in my imagined utopia.
    - redrobot5050 15y ago
      >bumrushing congress in much the same way that the tea party has done. Let's hope not. The Teaparty congress started going to work on things that didn't serve the tea party, but rather, corporate benefactors. Another example of the big problem being that money == speech.
    - SoftwareMaven 15y ago
      That will never happen because too few of the Reddit generation are willing and/or capable of pulling out their checkbook (err, PayPal account) to cover the cost of that. In fact, too few of them are even willing to show up at the polls (40ish% compared to over 70% for age 55+[1]). Until those change, nobody is getting kicked out by the Reddit generation. [1] http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/socdemo/voting/publications/p20/2010/tables.html http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/socdemo/voting/publications/p...
      - nitrogen 15y ago
        One problem is that the 55+ demographic is able to vote in the civic centers they grew up with. Let us vote from our civic centers (e.g. the net) and we'll do so in much higher numbers. Increasing the barrier to political participation has the effect of excluding all but the highly motivated, thus pushing politics toward extremes.
- Noughmad 15y ago
  Still, you would get all kinds of "Ensuring freedom and security for all citizens", "providing new opportunities" and similar crap.
- mbreese 15y ago
  I think you'll find that much of the power that Congress wields is due to the interstate commerce clause. It is one of a few bits of constitutional authority that Congress can use to justify laws. It would be more apropos to talk about "commit messages" that were a long list of : "typos", "bugfix"... not that I have commit messages that look like this... nope, not me...

JonnieCache 15y ago

>Most of these just wind up saying "Interstate Commerce". In other words, you'll never be able to enforce this in any meaningful way. In my imagined utopia, all these justifying messages would be listed on a lawmaker's github profile-style page next to a big picture of their face, and any lawmaker with a long list of "interstate commerce" type messages would look like an unelectable crypto-fascist in the eyes of the public. I'd put the messages in speech bubbles emanating from the headshot photo, like you see in some commenting systems, just to drive the point home.

jerf 15y ago
And how do you plan on getting Congress to agree to use a system in which vast swathes of them will "look like an unelectable crypto-fascist in the eyes of the public"? Do you want to bring Democracy back to the system (or your choice of roughly equivalent question), or are you just trying to put your own political ideals on a privileged pedestal? I think one of the key reasons we have been unable to successfully reform things is that in general, people want the latter a lot more than they want the former. And DC knows what to do with those types... embrace, extend, embed.
- JonnieCache 15y ago
  >And how do you plan on getting Congress to agree to use a system in which vast swathes of them will "look like an unelectable crypto-fascist in the eyes of the public"? Maybe they'd be forced to do so in order to compete with the new cohort of younger, technology-embracing politicians which will sweep to power on the crest of a wave of louis ck-style "OMG finally someone who understands" sentiment from the reddit generation, bumrushing congress in much the same way that the tea party has done. I fully admit that these ideas are not workable in this form. I'm trying to "dream big." That's why I used the phrase in my imagined utopia.
  - redrobot5050 15y ago
    >bumrushing congress in much the same way that the tea party has done. Let's hope not. The Teaparty congress started going to work on things that didn't serve the tea party, but rather, corporate benefactors. Another example of the big problem being that money == speech.
  - SoftwareMaven 15y ago
    That will never happen because too few of the Reddit generation are willing and/or capable of pulling out their checkbook (err, PayPal account) to cover the cost of that. In fact, too few of them are even willing to show up at the polls (40ish% compared to over 70% for age 55+[1]). Until those change, nobody is getting kicked out by the Reddit generation. [1] http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/socdemo/voting/publications/p20/2010/tables.html http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/socdemo/voting/publications/p...
    - nitrogen 15y ago
      One problem is that the 55+ demographic is able to vote in the civic centers they grew up with. Let us vote from our civic centers (e.g. the net) and we'll do so in much higher numbers. Increasing the barrier to political participation has the effect of excluding all but the highly motivated, thus pushing politics toward extremes.
Noughmad 15y ago
Still, you would get all kinds of "Ensuring freedom and security for all citizens", "providing new opportunities" and similar crap.
mbreese 15y ago
I think you'll find that much of the power that Congress wields is due to the interstate commerce clause. It is one of a few bits of constitutional authority that Congress can use to justify laws. It would be more apropos to talk about "commit messages" that were a long list of : "typos", "bugfix"... not that I have commit messages that look like this... nope, not me...