8 ms·

Most lawmakers are lawyers. Meaning most of the time when they are writing laws in things, they are not th experts on such things. That the purpose of public c

by kyrra 3y ago

Most lawmakers are lawyers. Meaning most of the time when they are writing laws in things, they are not th experts on such things. That the purpose of public comment periods, Publix hearings, and lobbyists being able to help craft laws. Now, this seems to be a failure where there were not protests raised to this amendments or the lawmakers ignored such things. Either way, the point of lobbyists is to allow industry experts to provide input. If there is nothing wrong with their suggestions, I don't see a problem with verbatim including of their wording. (I disagree with how the NY law was changed, but there are reasons lobbying exists).

bordercases 3y ago
How would you approach thinking about this in a way which makes the lawyers culpable rather than an acceptable part of the status quo?
- bawolff 3y ago
  Are you really asking someone how they would rephrase their statement so it expresses a different point of view? Traditionally in an debate, it is your responsibility to convince the other side of your view. You can't just get the other side to make your argument for you.
  - bordercases 3y ago
    I'm assuming that this wasn't a debate but a matter of open minded thinking.
RugnirViking 3y ago
> the point of lobbyists ??? There is no "point" to lobbyists, its literally a guy paying to play. Take any industry expert from any industry and unless they themselves are a lobbyist I can near guarantee they would be happier if lobbying was illegal with very harsh punishment
- hutzlibu 3y ago
  "if lobbying was illegal with very harsh punishment" I suppose you mean professional lobbying, with the purpose of influencing laws to make money? Because when a environmental group tries to block some dirty mining project for example, than this is also lobbying. It is just people using influence. You cannot really make that illegal. You can force the parties involved for transparency and punish bribery, but you cannot make it illegal for people to talk to politicians. Even when it is done "professional". The problem in reality is, that when you look closely, in effect lots of lobbying is indeed bribery. (most of the indirect kind, like informal promising lucrative jobs after their terms are over, or giving overpaid talks). And that is and remains illegal.
  - blitzar 3y ago
    When you write a letter to your congressman ... lobbying.
  - triska 3y ago
    So far, I have never before seen an environment group trying to block a mining project referred to as "lobbying". Is the term really that generally used in practice?
    - pedrosorio 3y ago
      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobbying https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobbying “Lobbying, which usually involves direct, face-to-face contact in cooperation with support staff that may not meet directly face-to-face, is done by many types of people, associations and organized groups, including individuals on a personal level in their capacity as private citizens, it is also practiced by corporations in the private sector serving their own interests, by non-profits and non-governmental organizations in the voluntary sector, by fellow legislators or government officials influencing each other through legislative affairs (legislative assistance) in the public sector, and by advocacy groups (interest groups).”
      - 3y ago
mxkopy 3y ago
> Most lawmakers are lawyers. Whatever they are they should be representing the people first. If that involves learning more about whatever they're in charge of, then they should do that, since that's what we pay them to do. Plato said our kings should be philosophers, but what we have are sophists.
contravariant 3y ago
Likewise programmers are not experts on the things they write programs for so it is acceptable for them to just do the bare minimum of translating business requirements into code and see what bugs pop up. Right?
- Karunamon 3y ago
  Programmers usually have documented acceptance criteria to meet, and those criteria are usually not up to them. Poor analogy.

by kyrra 3y ago

bordercases 3y ago

How would you approach thinking about this in a way which makes the lawyers culpable rather than an acceptable part of the status quo?

bawolff 3y ago
Are you really asking someone how they would rephrase their statement so it expresses a different point of view? Traditionally in an debate, it is your responsibility to convince the other side of your view. You can't just get the other side to make your argument for you.
- bordercases 3y ago
  I'm assuming that this wasn't a debate but a matter of open minded thinking.

RugnirViking 3y ago

> the point of lobbyists ??? There is no "point" to lobbyists, its literally a guy paying to play. Take any industry expert from any industry and unless they themselves are a lobbyist I can near guarantee they would be happier if lobbying was illegal with very harsh punishment

hutzlibu 3y ago
"if lobbying was illegal with very harsh punishment" I suppose you mean professional lobbying, with the purpose of influencing laws to make money? Because when a environmental group tries to block some dirty mining project for example, than this is also lobbying. It is just people using influence. You cannot really make that illegal. You can force the parties involved for transparency and punish bribery, but you cannot make it illegal for people to talk to politicians. Even when it is done "professional". The problem in reality is, that when you look closely, in effect lots of lobbying is indeed bribery. (most of the indirect kind, like informal promising lucrative jobs after their terms are over, or giving overpaid talks). And that is and remains illegal.
- blitzar 3y ago
  When you write a letter to your congressman ... lobbying.
- triska 3y ago
  So far, I have never before seen an environment group trying to block a mining project referred to as "lobbying". Is the term really that generally used in practice?
  - pedrosorio 3y ago
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobbying https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobbying “Lobbying, which usually involves direct, face-to-face contact in cooperation with support staff that may not meet directly face-to-face, is done by many types of people, associations and organized groups, including individuals on a personal level in their capacity as private citizens, it is also practiced by corporations in the private sector serving their own interests, by non-profits and non-governmental organizations in the voluntary sector, by fellow legislators or government officials influencing each other through legislative affairs (legislative assistance) in the public sector, and by advocacy groups (interest groups).”
    - 3y ago

mxkopy 3y ago

> Most lawmakers are lawyers. Whatever they are they should be representing the people first. If that involves learning more about whatever they're in charge of, then they should do that, since that's what we pay them to do. Plato said our kings should be philosophers, but what we have are sophists.

contravariant 3y ago

Likewise programmers are not experts on the things they write programs for so it is acceptable for them to just do the bare minimum of translating business requirements into code and see what bugs pop up. Right?

Karunamon 3y ago
Programmers usually have documented acceptance criteria to meet, and those criteria are usually not up to them. Poor analogy.