4 ms·

I agree with you, but this should not be the #1 comment on HN. There's a lot of interesting things going on here. But, specifically, I want to comment on the d

by noahc 14y ago

I agree with you, but this should not be the #1 comment on HN. There's a lot of interesting things going on here. But, specifically, I want to comment on the disconnect between legislators and reality caused by isolation from various aspects of everyday life due to the nature of specialization. A lot of folks complain about lobbyist, but this a critically important role they play. They don't buy their votes as many suspect, they instead educate the congressmen they work with into believing what they believe. Or, a slightly more realistic phrasing is that they provide congressmen with the ideological ammunition they use on the floor and in the press to push their agenda. In this case it's rather trivial, because currently 3d printed all plastic guns and magazines are mostly non-viable which explains why there are no lobbyist to help correct congress when they go astray. But the next time you call lobbying bad, just remember that lobbying is an important part of having informed legislatures.

nitrogen 14y ago
I agree with you, but this should not be the #1 comment on HN. HN comments are sorted by age as well as number of votes (and supposedly the reputation of the poster, in some cases), so being in the top spot may not mean that it's the highest voted comment, and may be temporary. But the next time you call lobbying bad, just remember that lobbying is an important part of having informed legislatures. Surely there's a better way, like maybe the Congressional Research Service? Or legislators actually -- and I know, this is a radical suggestion -- learning on their own about the topics on which they legislate?
- noahc 14y ago
  You're right on the first point. However, as a first approximation the top comment is likely the highest upvoted comment, particularly when the name isn't one of the top 10 posters on HN. The CRS and CBO do provide a useful service. But, it would be impossible for each congress person to research the effects of a tariff, increasing pre-k funding to the states, chimpanzee sanctuary funding needs at the NIH as well as the changing feelings related to technology, copyright, gun control and how it effects their various constituents who all have their own interests. It's much easier and more practical for lobbyist just to hand them a "fact sheet" that says: "This bill will save 240 lives this year in your district." or "This bill will provide 430 jobs in and increase the tax base 2 million dollars in your district" Of course, maybe you meant "hand all this off to an LA" which they already do to some extent.
  - nitrogen 14y ago
    The obvious problem with relying on lobbyists is that they represent the interests of their employers, which often conflict with the interests of the people. If legislators have too many domains to deal with to understand any of them, maybe we could go further than the committee system and have separate legislatures for separate domains.

by noahc 14y ago

nitrogen 14y ago

I agree with you, but this should not be the #1 comment on HN. HN comments are sorted by age as well as number of votes (and supposedly the reputation of the poster, in some cases), so being in the top spot may not mean that it's the highest voted comment, and may be temporary. But the next time you call lobbying bad, just remember that lobbying is an important part of having informed legislatures. Surely there's a better way, like maybe the Congressional Research Service? Or legislators actually -- and I know, this is a radical suggestion -- learning on their own about the topics on which they legislate?

noahc 14y ago
You're right on the first point. However, as a first approximation the top comment is likely the highest upvoted comment, particularly when the name isn't one of the top 10 posters on HN. The CRS and CBO do provide a useful service. But, it would be impossible for each congress person to research the effects of a tariff, increasing pre-k funding to the states, chimpanzee sanctuary funding needs at the NIH as well as the changing feelings related to technology, copyright, gun control and how it effects their various constituents who all have their own interests. It's much easier and more practical for lobbyist just to hand them a "fact sheet" that says: "This bill will save 240 lives this year in your district." or "This bill will provide 430 jobs in and increase the tax base 2 million dollars in your district" Of course, maybe you meant "hand all this off to an LA" which they already do to some extent.
- nitrogen 14y ago
  The obvious problem with relying on lobbyists is that they represent the interests of their employers, which often conflict with the interests of the people. If legislators have too many domains to deal with to understand any of them, maybe we could go further than the committee system and have separate legislatures for separate domains.