4 ms·

This isn't a reason to not support the current effort. Democracy is an iterative process, not a magic wand that you wave to instantly teleport to a flawless sys

This isn't a reason to not support the current effort. Democracy is an iterative process, not a magic wand that you wave to instantly teleport to a flawless system. This bill is step one. When (not if) it gets circumvented, that's when the next law addressing that problem can be passed.

bell-cot 3y ago
> ...iterative process... ...When (not if it gets circumvented), that's when... If the politicians manage the process correctly, they can forever be passing "reform bills" which sound good...but have enough loopholes so that nothing resembling actual reform ever happens. Rule of Thumb: If somebody claims they want to build a transportation system, then starts with a square wheel and talks about improving it as the next step - then either [1] they're teaching, and it's only a pedagogical exercise, or [2] they are lying about wanting to build a transportation system.
- anonym29 3y ago
  Inefficient action being taken is still better than absolutely zero action being taken in addressing a problem. Think, for instance, about how many more people might become aware of / interested in the problem, who were previously unaware or uninterested in insider stock trading by members of congress, should a historic bill be passed to initialize the process of stopping the problem.
  - givemeethekeys 3y ago
    People will be more frustrated with no action. That is why politicians (like so many others) do the bare minimum to kick the can down the road some more.
  - respondo2134 3y ago
    This sounds good in principal but is not always true. You have limited resources, including time, public goodwill and attention. If you waste it all on inefficient action you've got nothing left for working on actual solutions. >> should a historic bill be passed Passed? They've never brought even a flawed bill like this to a vote, let alone passed one.
  - dotnet00 3y ago
    Inefficient action is not necessarily better than absolutely no action. Inefficient action is a way for politicians to kick the can down the road so they can still use the issue to buy votes. That's how you get 40+ years of abortion being legal on a technicality, rather than being properly codified into law. It's how you get "student loan forgiveness" instead of any attempt at fixing the student loan racket. It's how you get a NASA where the overall budget is constantly decreasing with the exception of the super expensive rocket no one wants. Sure, in the moment, these were nice decisions and helped while they lasted, but overall they're simply suppressing actual solutions to focus on feelgood promises.
  - bell-cot 3y ago
    > Inefficient action... For actions which are not free (and getting any bill through Congress sure as h*ell isn't), one can write a very simple "break even" formula - relating the cost of action A, the efficiency of action A, and the value of the benefits that a 100%-efficient action would provide. For actions falling short of break-even, it's generally considered wiser to spend the resources on something else. You can spend money re-roofing your house with cotton candy - because shingles were too expensive, or unavailable, or whatever. Yeah, that does scratch the itchy need to "do something!". But longer-term...
  - mcpackieh 3y ago
    "Raising awareness" is for slacktivists, not legislators. They should propose good well thought-out laws or sit the hell down. Presenting half-baked nonsense to "raise awareness" only shows that they aren't good at their job, or worse, have an ulterior motive.
jqpabc123 3y ago
This bill is step one. No, it's not. It's just the latest in a long line of campaign finance reform --- most of which is ineffective because it was purposely designed from the get-go to be easily circumvented. The open secret here is that you're counting on an organization (Congress) to police itself. This makes no more sense than an counting on Congress to avoid raising it's own pay. How has that worked out?
- strictnein 3y ago
  > This makes no more sense than an counting on Congress to avoid raising it's own pay Congress hasn't had a raise since 2009. Their current effective pay is the lowest its been in 75 years. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salaries_of_members_of_the_United_States_Congress https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salaries_of_members_of_the_Uni...
  - kjkjadksj 3y ago
    No wonder the congress to consultancy revolving door is so well greased
  - jqpabc123 3y ago
    No one is really counting but graft is probably the highest it's been in 75 years. The reform laws (like this one) are written to make it's incredibly easy for politicians to personally profit from "campaign contributions" --- among other things. Example: Trump personally buys copyrighted MAGA hats in bulk from China for $3 each and sells them to his campaign for $35 each. Instant personal profit --- from your "contributions". His campaign sells some, gives some away and trashes any remainder. They don't care, it's your money, not theirs.
ericmcer 3y ago
What if making hollow grand gestures is the process, with reelection and career progression as the end goal.

bell-cot 3y ago

> ...iterative process... ...When (not if it gets circumvented), that's when... If the politicians manage the process correctly, they can forever be passing "reform bills" which sound good...but have enough loopholes so that nothing resembling actual reform ever happens. Rule of Thumb: If somebody claims they want to build a transportation system, then starts with a square wheel and talks about improving it as the next step - then either [1] they're teaching, and it's only a pedagogical exercise, or [2] they are lying about wanting to build a transportation system.

anonym29 3y ago
Inefficient action being taken is still better than absolutely zero action being taken in addressing a problem. Think, for instance, about how many more people might become aware of / interested in the problem, who were previously unaware or uninterested in insider stock trading by members of congress, should a historic bill be passed to initialize the process of stopping the problem.
- givemeethekeys 3y ago
  People will be more frustrated with no action. That is why politicians (like so many others) do the bare minimum to kick the can down the road some more.
- respondo2134 3y ago
  This sounds good in principal but is not always true. You have limited resources, including time, public goodwill and attention. If you waste it all on inefficient action you've got nothing left for working on actual solutions. >> should a historic bill be passed Passed? They've never brought even a flawed bill like this to a vote, let alone passed one.
- dotnet00 3y ago
  Inefficient action is not necessarily better than absolutely no action. Inefficient action is a way for politicians to kick the can down the road so they can still use the issue to buy votes. That's how you get 40+ years of abortion being legal on a technicality, rather than being properly codified into law. It's how you get "student loan forgiveness" instead of any attempt at fixing the student loan racket. It's how you get a NASA where the overall budget is constantly decreasing with the exception of the super expensive rocket no one wants. Sure, in the moment, these were nice decisions and helped while they lasted, but overall they're simply suppressing actual solutions to focus on feelgood promises.
- bell-cot 3y ago
  > Inefficient action... For actions which are not free (and getting any bill through Congress sure as h*ell isn't), one can write a very simple "break even" formula - relating the cost of action A, the efficiency of action A, and the value of the benefits that a 100%-efficient action would provide. For actions falling short of break-even, it's generally considered wiser to spend the resources on something else. You can spend money re-roofing your house with cotton candy - because shingles were too expensive, or unavailable, or whatever. Yeah, that does scratch the itchy need to "do something!". But longer-term...
- mcpackieh 3y ago
  "Raising awareness" is for slacktivists, not legislators. They should propose good well thought-out laws or sit the hell down. Presenting half-baked nonsense to "raise awareness" only shows that they aren't good at their job, or worse, have an ulterior motive.

jqpabc123 3y ago

This bill is step one. No, it's not. It's just the latest in a long line of campaign finance reform --- most of which is ineffective because it was purposely designed from the get-go to be easily circumvented. The open secret here is that you're counting on an organization (Congress) to police itself. This makes no more sense than an counting on Congress to avoid raising it's own pay. How has that worked out?

strictnein 3y ago
> This makes no more sense than an counting on Congress to avoid raising it's own pay Congress hasn't had a raise since 2009. Their current effective pay is the lowest its been in 75 years. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salaries_of_members_of_the_United_States_Congress https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salaries_of_members_of_the_Uni...
- kjkjadksj 3y ago
  No wonder the congress to consultancy revolving door is so well greased
- jqpabc123 3y ago
  No one is really counting but graft is probably the highest it's been in 75 years. The reform laws (like this one) are written to make it's incredibly easy for politicians to personally profit from "campaign contributions" --- among other things. Example: Trump personally buys copyrighted MAGA hats in bulk from China for $3 each and sells them to his campaign for $35 each. Instant personal profit --- from your "contributions". His campaign sells some, gives some away and trashes any remainder. They don't care, it's your money, not theirs.

ericmcer 3y ago

What if making hollow grand gestures is the process, with reelection and career progression as the end goal.