Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

House Democrats to propose ban on lawmaker stock trading – report

seekingalpha.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 382 posts

Re: House Democrats to propose ban on lawmaker stock trading – report

#291

Post by TameAntelope »

cwkoss wrote: post #179

Our political parties are failing us so badly, I wouldn't be surprised if the guillotine came back into fashion over the next decade. I hope congress can get its act together and serve its constituents better before it comes to that, but it feels naive.

Ahaha I always love the calls for political violence in the US, because we've experienced so little (relative to other parts of the world). Honestly it shows how well off we've been these last decades to have the luxury to call for someone else to kill a politician for us because we're upset. You have no concept of the injustice that would arise if "the people" begin murdering politicians in the street again.

So many books cover the hideous nature of mob justice, so-called "revolutions", and their gruesome knock-on effects, there's really no excuse to be this undereducated about what you're saying.

Re: House Democrats to propose ban on lawmaker stock trading – report

#292

Post by TameAntelope »

anonymoushn wrote: post #234
granfalloon wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like the idea of "blind" or anonymous congressional voting. It feels counterintuitive, but donors might be less willing to "buy" votes if they can't confirm that they're getting what they pay for. And a representative who has accepted lots of corporate money might feel safer "betraying" those donors. I think representatives would still feel pressure to vote in line with the interests of their constituents and get r…

How will voters know whether their reps are voting for the right things though

What they say and how they behave. I really don't believe there are a relevant number of people who can consistently say one thing and vote a completely different thing for years on end.

Maybe I'm naive, though. I really do think nearly everyone in congress does want to make the world a better place, they're just lost/confused about how to go about that, often getting caught up in the game of staying in congress rather than using their time there for good.

Re: House Democrats to propose ban on lawmaker stock trading – report

#293

Post by TameAntelope »

hayst4ck wrote: post #105

Lawrence Lessig (Harvard law professor famous for fighting for sane copyright law) does a great presentation on the root cause of Americas problems. He also ran for president in 2016. It can be watched here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJy8vTu66tE The short version is that to win primaries you need money. Money mainly comes from corporations and rich people. Taking money from corporations and rich people creates…

> Taking money from corporations and rich people creates a relationship where you have some loyalty to them or they can punish you if you don't act how they want.

This gets thrown around a lot, but how often does this actually happen? I feel like we all assume it's true, but I wouldn't be surprised if this specific form of corruption were a lot less common than we think.

Re: House Democrats to propose ban on lawmaker stock trading – report

#294

Post by AftHurrahWinch »

wyre wrote: post #212
dhritzkiv wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many reps do rent in DC, sometimes in frat-house-like conditions with other reps.[1] [1] https://www.cnn.com/2013/12/04/politics/real-alpha-house/ind...

Why isn’t this the basis for a tv show?

It was, the cartoonist behind Doonesbury did it for 2 years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_House

Re: House Democrats to propose ban on lawmaker stock trading – report

#295

Post by zeruch »

avn2109 wrote: post #188
zeruch wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure about the specifics you outlined, but I do think a comp package that incentivizes grown-ass behavior (read: full attendance, voting, actual participation in the legislative process) is a great idea. I don't think rewarding certain behaviors like sponsoring is good, because its too easily abused. When a KPI becomes a target, its no longer a KPI.

If we're designing a system of incentives and constraints for legislators, let's pay bounties for laws deleted . There are probably 2 or 3 orders of magnitude too many laws currently in America (have you ever estimated trying to read and comprehend the entire law? Borderline impossible in a single lifetime even under very optimistic reading-speed assumptions etc). If this metric becomes a target and ceases to be a go…

"let's pay bounties for laws deleted." That's still a target that can be abused for self-gain, so...no.

To be blunt, your whole polemic reads like a CATO fever dream, which is the opposite of what I was suggesting; ideological contrivance isn't a solve, and complexity at a nation our size and scope ain't gonna get reduced to a nice pamphlet of rules. It's the same reason you can't run a FAANG company the same way you run a 6 person A-round company.

Re: House Democrats to propose ban on lawmaker stock trading – report

#296

Post by zeruch »

cwkoss wrote: post #171
thebiss wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you clarify when/how a KPI ever not a target? Bonuses and promotions always go to those who exceed them, and "improvement plans" or "restructuring" is reserved to those who miss.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perverse_incentive#The_origina... Any imperfect measure that becomes a target gets pursued at the expense of the original intent.

You restated what I meant better than I stated it. Thank you.

Re: House Democrats to propose ban on lawmaker stock trading – report

#297

Post by jbaber »

granfalloon wrote: post #219
hayst4ck wrote: post #105

Lawrence Lessig (Harvard law professor famous for fighting for sane copyright law) does a great presentation on the root cause of Americas problems. He also ran for president in 2016. It can be watched here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJy8vTu66tE The short version is that to win primaries you need money. Money mainly comes from corporations and rich people. Taking money from corporations and rich people creates…

I like the idea of "blind" or anonymous congressional voting. It feels counterintuitive, but donors might be less willing to "buy" votes if they can't confirm that they're getting what they pay for. And a representative who has accepted lots of corporate money might feel safer "betraying" those donors. I think representatives would still feel pressure to vote in line with the interests of their constituents and get r…

I'd prefer the regular public voting and a secret non-binding vote. You'd get a lot of information out of the secret vote telling you what representatives really thought. Especially if it were a landslide in the secret ballot and down party lines in the public one. You can think of plenty of examples of past issues that would have gone that way.

Re: House Democrats to propose ban on lawmaker stock trading – report

#298

Post by _8j50 »

cortesoft wrote: post #176
_8j50 wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More like bonuses for LoC . The idea is to encourage decision making and discourage gridlocks and not attempting to pass laws because they don't have support.

You are going to end up with a lot of meaningless laws… they will pass laws like “apple pie is now the official American dessert”

Hopefully their opponent will use that against them on election year to prevent that

Re: House Democrats to propose ban on lawmaker stock trading – report

#299

Post by tastyfreeze »

pookha wrote: post #197
rgbrgb wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trying to get clarification, as a layman here I think I'm missing your point. My understanding is that laws are by their nature kind of vague because the world is full of edge cases and they always require interpretation as they encounter new cases. > hand over the actual rule-making to unelected government bureaucracies. Are you referring to the judicial branch? Isn't that the system laid out in the founding docs? >…

I'm pretty sure he's railing against an EU commission-like government where unelected bureaucrats create legislation. In the US only elected representatives can draft legislation (House or Senate).

Constitutionally you are correct. However, the Federal Register is approximately 4 times larger than the US Code. That is four times more rules that are enforced like laws than actual laws passed by Congress. Additionally, agencies are under the Executive that is explicitly prohibited from making laws.

Congress in many respects has abdicated it lawmaking authority to the Executive by creating administrative agencies. Violating agency rules will not land you in a court with a jury of your peers as required by the Constitution either. You will end up in a court run by the accusing agency with a judge appointed by the agency. But hey, they aren't laws just rules with criminal and financial penalties for violating them.

Re: House Democrats to propose ban on lawmaker stock trading – report

#300

Post by [deleted] »

hayst4ck wrote: post #105

Lawrence Lessig (Harvard law professor famous for fighting for sane copyright law) does a great presentation on the root cause of Americas problems. He also ran for president in 2016. It can be watched here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJy8vTu66tE The short version is that to win primaries you need money. Money mainly comes from corporations and rich people. Taking money from corporations and rich people creates…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN