4 ms·

It's ridiculous how much of our bills are completely written by interest groups like the coal industry. I'm surprised they even reviewed it enough to catch it

by culi 10mo ago

It's ridiculous how much of our bills are completely written by interest groups like the coal industry. I'm surprised they even reviewed it enough to catch it In 2010 Arizona passed an anti-immigrant bill written by the private prison company Corrections Corporation of America (now CoreCivic). We know it was written by CCA because they literally left the logo on the bill

deleted 10mo ago
[deleted]
atlasunshrugged 10mo ago
In a former job I worked on a tech co's policy response to a major piece of California AI legislation a couple of years ago and was stunned to learn that nonprofits (at least, I'd be shocked if this didn't also include companies) basically sponsor bills and just find lawmakers to introduce and champion them.
- phil21 10mo ago
  Many Judicial opinions are done in the same manner. An attorney from the winning side prepares a draft opinion and a judge reviews/edits it and away it goes. The edits in the couple I've personally seen are incredibly light - more or less a rubber stamp with the judge's name on it. I imagine this holds true (via chatting with insider friends) for many such "industries" including lawmaking, scientific/academic papers, industry RFCs, etc. More or less credential washing.
  - cogman10 10mo ago
    I'm not sure this is true. I've payed attention to a few high profile cases and I've not seen anything like that come up. The closest I can think of is when jury instructions are issued. But in that, the two sides ultimately work with the court to hammer out the details of how those instructions should look. And often, they are based on a more or less standard template with minor revisions.
    - mothballed 10mo ago
      I was watching the Abrego Garcia case. It was done routinely by Garcia's lawyer. They would write an order for the judge to sign then ask them to sign it.
      - cogman10 10mo ago
        Do you have an example of this? Generally speaking, an attorney can make a request for a ruling by the judge and the other side can oppose it. However, beyond just citing relevant case law there wouldn't be anything that could be copied verbatim by a judge. There should be relevant court filings that show what you are saying happen. Do you have them?
        mothballed 10mo ago
        Here's one: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mdd.589189/gov.uscourts.mdd.589189.83.1.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mdd.589... Go to https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71191591/abrego-garcia-v-noem/ https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71191591/abrego-garcia-... and search "proposed order." You will find like 20+ of them, they are basically complete orders where they wrote the judge name and everything, just left the signature blank.
        cogman10 10mo ago
        I see the proposed orders, but when I try to find the judge's order exactly copying the proposed order I'm not seeing it. I could be blind. For example, here's the proposed order to strike [1], and here is the Judge's order granting that strike [2] It's definitely ignorance on my part. I didn't realize the motions filed by a party ultimately took the form of unsigned orders. [1] https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71191591/81/2/abrego-garcia-v-noem/ https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71191591/81/2/abrego-ga... [2] https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71191591/90/abrego-garcia-v-noem/ https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71191591/90/abrego-garc...
        10mo ago
  - pbh101 10mo ago
    The judge still decided this was the winning side. I don’t really see a problem with this, especially as seeing it is at the end of a deliberative process. By that time, the winning attorney may have a good idea of where the judge stands, what the ruling would be and is also incentivized to stay on their good side.
    - mmooss 10mo ago
      The judge is supposed to be independent of influence, and fair to both sides. A decision for one side is rarely that 'one party gets everything they want'; it just leans in their direction, especially on the fundamental issues. The ruling also may yield an outcome more aligned with one party, but for different reasons. > the winning attorney may have a good idea of where the judge stands, what the ruling would be and is also incentivized to stay on their good side. You haven't seen many litigators at work. Their job is to "zealously" represent their client, getting as much as possible. The speculation about the rest is just hope, not due process.
  - turtlesdown11 10mo ago
    > An attorney from the winning side prepares a draft opinion and a judge reviews/edits it and away it goes. this claim is utter fiction, your extraordinary claim requires evidence
- potato3732842 10mo ago
  nonprofits like the <random thing research association> that just happens to be funded by that very industry. It's literally a laundering scheme. The industry can't wine and dine and send bills over to the politicians directly so they create some "clean" middle men to make it all look legit at first glance.
  - atlasunshrugged 10mo ago
    In the case I encountered it was an AI safety org that many in industry were against but indeed, I would guess your example to be the standard case
georgefrowny 10mo ago
> I'm surprised they even reviewed it enough to catch it Maybe they forgot to tack it onto 5000 pages of unrelated legislation at 10pm the night before the vote.
ryandrake 10mo ago
There's not many things more "Stereotypically American" than legislation with a corporate logo on it. In the interest of full transparency, it would be nice to stamp all laws with the logos of the companies that write them, so we at least know who our real legislators are for any given law.
- georgefrowny 10mo ago
  Labelling laws are Unamerican and that's why inhibiting other countries from requiring clear food labelling is a clear part of the American trade negotiation platform. > Establish new and enforceable rules to eliminate unjustified trade restrictions or unjustified commercial requirements (including unjustified labeling) that affect new technologies. https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/Summary_of_U.S.-UK_Negotiating_Objectives.pdf https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/Summary_of_U.S.-UK_Nego... I don't think laws would be much different.
JumpCrisscross 10mo ago
“Due to the Legislative Assembly being a biennial legislature, with the House and Senate sitting for only 80 days in odd-numbered years, a Legislative Council oversees legislative affairs in the interim periods, doing longer-term studies of issues, and drafting legislation for consideration of both houses during the next session” [1]. Did this come out of the LegCo? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Dakota_Legislative_Assembly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Dakota_Legislative_Assem...

by culi 10mo ago

deleted 10mo ago

[deleted]

atlasunshrugged 10mo ago

In a former job I worked on a tech co's policy response to a major piece of California AI legislation a couple of years ago and was stunned to learn that nonprofits (at least, I'd be shocked if this didn't also include companies) basically sponsor bills and just find lawmakers to introduce and champion them.

phil21 10mo ago
Many Judicial opinions are done in the same manner. An attorney from the winning side prepares a draft opinion and a judge reviews/edits it and away it goes. The edits in the couple I've personally seen are incredibly light - more or less a rubber stamp with the judge's name on it. I imagine this holds true (via chatting with insider friends) for many such "industries" including lawmaking, scientific/academic papers, industry RFCs, etc. More or less credential washing.
- cogman10 10mo ago
  I'm not sure this is true. I've payed attention to a few high profile cases and I've not seen anything like that come up. The closest I can think of is when jury instructions are issued. But in that, the two sides ultimately work with the court to hammer out the details of how those instructions should look. And often, they are based on a more or less standard template with minor revisions.
  - mothballed 10mo ago
    I was watching the Abrego Garcia case. It was done routinely by Garcia's lawyer. They would write an order for the judge to sign then ask them to sign it.
    - cogman10 10mo ago
      Do you have an example of this? Generally speaking, an attorney can make a request for a ruling by the judge and the other side can oppose it. However, beyond just citing relevant case law there wouldn't be anything that could be copied verbatim by a judge. There should be relevant court filings that show what you are saying happen. Do you have them?
      - mothballed 10mo ago
        Here's one: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mdd.589189/gov.uscourts.mdd.589189.83.1.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mdd.589... Go to https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71191591/abrego-garcia-v-noem/ https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71191591/abrego-garcia-... and search "proposed order." You will find like 20+ of them, they are basically complete orders where they wrote the judge name and everything, just left the signature blank.
        cogman10 10mo ago
        I see the proposed orders, but when I try to find the judge's order exactly copying the proposed order I'm not seeing it. I could be blind. For example, here's the proposed order to strike [1], and here is the Judge's order granting that strike [2] It's definitely ignorance on my part. I didn't realize the motions filed by a party ultimately took the form of unsigned orders. [1] https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71191591/81/2/abrego-garcia-v-noem/ https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71191591/81/2/abrego-ga... [2] https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71191591/90/abrego-garcia-v-noem/ https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71191591/90/abrego-garc...
        10mo ago
- pbh101 10mo ago
  The judge still decided this was the winning side. I don’t really see a problem with this, especially as seeing it is at the end of a deliberative process. By that time, the winning attorney may have a good idea of where the judge stands, what the ruling would be and is also incentivized to stay on their good side.
  - mmooss 10mo ago
    The judge is supposed to be independent of influence, and fair to both sides. A decision for one side is rarely that 'one party gets everything they want'; it just leans in their direction, especially on the fundamental issues. The ruling also may yield an outcome more aligned with one party, but for different reasons. > the winning attorney may have a good idea of where the judge stands, what the ruling would be and is also incentivized to stay on their good side. You haven't seen many litigators at work. Their job is to "zealously" represent their client, getting as much as possible. The speculation about the rest is just hope, not due process.
- turtlesdown11 10mo ago
  > An attorney from the winning side prepares a draft opinion and a judge reviews/edits it and away it goes. this claim is utter fiction, your extraordinary claim requires evidence
potato3732842 10mo ago
nonprofits like the <random thing research association> that just happens to be funded by that very industry. It's literally a laundering scheme. The industry can't wine and dine and send bills over to the politicians directly so they create some "clean" middle men to make it all look legit at first glance.
- atlasunshrugged 10mo ago
  In the case I encountered it was an AI safety org that many in industry were against but indeed, I would guess your example to be the standard case

georgefrowny 10mo ago

> I'm surprised they even reviewed it enough to catch it Maybe they forgot to tack it onto 5000 pages of unrelated legislation at 10pm the night before the vote.

ryandrake 10mo ago

There's not many things more "Stereotypically American" than legislation with a corporate logo on it. In the interest of full transparency, it would be nice to stamp all laws with the logos of the companies that write them, so we at least know who our real legislators are for any given law.

georgefrowny 10mo ago
Labelling laws are Unamerican and that's why inhibiting other countries from requiring clear food labelling is a clear part of the American trade negotiation platform. > Establish new and enforceable rules to eliminate unjustified trade restrictions or unjustified commercial requirements (including unjustified labeling) that affect new technologies. https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/Summary_of_U.S.-UK_Negotiating_Objectives.pdf https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/Summary_of_U.S.-UK_Nego... I don't think laws would be much different.

JumpCrisscross 10mo ago

“Due to the Legislative Assembly being a biennial legislature, with the House and Senate sitting for only 80 days in odd-numbered years, a Legislative Council oversees legislative affairs in the interim periods, doing longer-term studies of issues, and drafting legislation for consideration of both houses during the next session” [1]. Did this come out of the LegCo? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Dakota_Legislative_Assembly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Dakota_Legislative_Assem...