4 ms·

So... how long is this going to last? The article says Holder's leaving his office. When he leaves, what stops the next person from simply reinstating this poli

So... how long is this going to last? The article says Holder's leaving his office. When he leaves, what stops the next person from simply reinstating this policy?

psaintla 12y ago
Nothing, but don't expect congress to do anything about this.
- jacobolus 12y ago
  Congress has been feeling a ton of heat since the big newspaper exposés of a few months ago. Plenty of people are pissed, irrespective of political party. From the OP here: Holder’s action comes as members of both parties in Congress are working together to craft legislation to overhaul civil asset forfeiture. Last Friday, Sens. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) and Mike Lee (R-Utah), along with Reps. F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Wis.) and John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.), signed a letter calling on Holder to end Equitable Sharing. Grassley praised Holder’s decision on Friday. “We’re going to have a fairer justice system because of it,” Grassley said. “The rule of law ought to protect innocent people and civil asset forfeiture hurt a lot of people.” He said he planned to continue pressing for legislative reforms. “I commend the department for this step and look forward to working with them on comprehensive forfeiture reform that protects Americans’ property rights,” Sensenbrenner said. “Equitable sharing has become a tool too often used to bypass state law. Forfeitures should be targeted and must have appropriate procedural protections.”
  - psaintla 12y ago
    Maybe I'm too cynical but laws get drafted with this congress and getting them past the house never happens.
    - dragonwriter 12y ago
      This seems reasonably bipartisan, but I'm not sure how broad the support is. Of course there's also the risk that even if it is bipartisan with broad support that singeing will overreach and use its popularity to get something else passed and that effort will kill the broader bill.
  - sp332 12y ago
    Not to mention the "Last Week Tonight" episode, 4.4 million views on YouTube, plus 600k on HBO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kEpZWGgJks https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kEpZWGgJks
innguest 12y ago
> When he leaves, what stops the next person from simply reinstating this policy? You mean how to keep politicians from stealing from their constituents? I have been asking statists for an answer to that question for a long time. Don't hold your breath. It's a flawed system and you just found the core issue that has no solution inside statism. If anyone disagrees with this statement, instead of down-voting please kindly point to an existing example of a State that has solved the problem of corrupt politicians. Now that you found the core problem of statism, you owe yourself some reading. It's a fun journey. Good luck.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- contingencies 12y ago
  Radical transparency? Edit: Of course not: it's a 'publish everything' model, so people can real time audit government behaviors. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radical_transparency#Radical_Political_Transparency http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radical_transparency#Radical_Po... and http://www.davidbrin.com/radicaltransparency.html http://www.davidbrin.com/radicaltransparency.html for some description.
  - woodman 12y ago
    Nope, circular logic. Who enforces the transparency? The state? edit: re: edit: The point is that the call for transparency as a solution presupposes the whole "consent of the governed" idea, which is laughable. Consider accident of birth and majority tyranny.
- woodman 12y ago
  "Give us a king to judge us" :) It is an old problem [0] [0] https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Samuel%208&version=KJV https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Samuel%208&...

So... how long is this going to last? The article says Holder's leaving his office. When he leaves, what stops the next person from simply reinstating this policy?

psaintla 12y ago

Nothing, but don't expect congress to do anything about this.

jacobolus 12y ago
Congress has been feeling a ton of heat since the big newspaper exposés of a few months ago. Plenty of people are pissed, irrespective of political party. From the OP here: Holder’s action comes as members of both parties in Congress are working together to craft legislation to overhaul civil asset forfeiture. Last Friday, Sens. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) and Mike Lee (R-Utah), along with Reps. F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Wis.) and John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.), signed a letter calling on Holder to end Equitable Sharing. Grassley praised Holder’s decision on Friday. “We’re going to have a fairer justice system because of it,” Grassley said. “The rule of law ought to protect innocent people and civil asset forfeiture hurt a lot of people.” He said he planned to continue pressing for legislative reforms. “I commend the department for this step and look forward to working with them on comprehensive forfeiture reform that protects Americans’ property rights,” Sensenbrenner said. “Equitable sharing has become a tool too often used to bypass state law. Forfeitures should be targeted and must have appropriate procedural protections.”
- psaintla 12y ago
  Maybe I'm too cynical but laws get drafted with this congress and getting them past the house never happens.
  - dragonwriter 12y ago
    This seems reasonably bipartisan, but I'm not sure how broad the support is. Of course there's also the risk that even if it is bipartisan with broad support that singeing will overreach and use its popularity to get something else passed and that effort will kill the broader bill.
- sp332 12y ago
  Not to mention the "Last Week Tonight" episode, 4.4 million views on YouTube, plus 600k on HBO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kEpZWGgJks https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kEpZWGgJks

innguest 12y ago

> When he leaves, what stops the next person from simply reinstating this policy? You mean how to keep politicians from stealing from their constituents? I have been asking statists for an answer to that question for a long time. Don't hold your breath. It's a flawed system and you just found the core issue that has no solution inside statism. If anyone disagrees with this statement, instead of down-voting please kindly point to an existing example of a State that has solved the problem of corrupt politicians. Now that you found the core problem of statism, you owe yourself some reading. It's a fun journey. Good luck.

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
contingencies 12y ago
Radical transparency? Edit: Of course not: it's a 'publish everything' model, so people can real time audit government behaviors. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radical_transparency#Radical_Political_Transparency http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radical_transparency#Radical_Po... and http://www.davidbrin.com/radicaltransparency.html http://www.davidbrin.com/radicaltransparency.html for some description.
- woodman 12y ago
  Nope, circular logic. Who enforces the transparency? The state? edit: re: edit: The point is that the call for transparency as a solution presupposes the whole "consent of the governed" idea, which is laughable. Consider accident of birth and majority tyranny.
woodman 12y ago
"Give us a king to judge us" :) It is an old problem [0] [0] https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Samuel%208&version=KJV https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Samuel%208&...