Live data from Hacker News

White House Refuses To Comment On Petition To Investigate Chris Dodd

politics.slashdot.org

31–40 of 70 posts

Re: White House Refuses To Comment On Petition To Investigate Chris Dodd

#31
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's nothing illegal about it. That's why it's annoying as hell that people waste time on pointless crusades instead of focusing on real solutions.

I think most of us realize that the petitions are pointless (though then again, it takes like 3 seconds to sign it so enough people do it), but how would you suggest we fix this problem? Because although this is legal, pretty much everyone can sense that there's something fishy about it and needs to be changed.

Petitions are fine (but mostly useless), but c'mon, framing lobbying as illegal bribery? Fishy is not the same as illegal, which is the image that people are trying to paint. Since there's nothing illegal about it, nothing is going to come of it.

I was thinking about how campaign finance works in how candidates tend to get paid during in elections less so than afterwards, but while people - in Texas in particular - get a lot of cronyist returns on their investments, maybe there is something to be said for in-office donations. Votes and campaign contributions are sunk cost, so you can't threaten with pulling them back, but you might donate to your politicians, once they do something you support, like how some politicians have been staunch opponents of SOPA/PIPA since the start and lead the charge against them.

Rather than just writing them a letter or giving their assistants a phone call, maybe consider donating some money?

The old incentive structure in politics is old to the degree of obsolescence, so maybe microdonations can serve to alter that or at least erode it over time? Think of all the people who've praise Senator Wyden, but haven't donated to him. Maybe that's something that should be considered.

If I could vote, I'd try to do what I could to bring SOPA/PIPA into the next election as a reminder of what they supported an do my best to explain it in plain terms to people, but I'm basically outside the American system, but let's a least not do something ridiculous that will have no effect aside from making one side in politics look like clueless teenagers.

Re: White House Refuses To Comment On Petition To Investigate Chris Dodd

#32
post #18

It seems like this whole hubub is about someone stating openly what's a well known open secret in US politics: He who pays the piper calls the tune. I mean, really, EVERYONE knows this. "Why did my industry's trade association spend 1.8 million dollars on various candidates who may be voting on legislation that makes or costs us 10 times that much? Oh, no reason... we just think they are very nice ladies and gentleme…

> I'd really like to hear ideas of how we can stop this racket The simple solution - in the sense that it's an obvious one, and a naive one - is to just forbid campaign contributions altogether.

Which is why we finesse the obvious but naive solution.

Campaign contributions are becoming / have become de facto bribery, but without campaign contributions only the independently wealthy can stand for office.

How about limiting how much an individual entity can donate? We don't allow the rich more votes because they've got more assets so could we not also restrict the amount they're able to donate?

How about restricting donors to entites entitled to vote in an election? Whatever my opinion on (say) Julia Gillard, I'm not eligible to vote for her or for any of her opponents because I've got nothing to do with Australia. Logically therefore (and my knowledge of Australian electoral law is almost nil, so this point is purely hypothetical), what is the justification for allowing me to influence the election by funding candidates?

Corporations don't have votes beyond the individual votes of their owners and employees in spite of their legal personhood, and that's good. Likewise, I think there's a case to be made that as unenfranchised legal persons, they shouldn't be able to influence elections financially.

Re: White House Refuses To Comment On Petition To Investigate Chris Dodd

#33
post #18

It seems like this whole hubub is about someone stating openly what's a well known open secret in US politics: He who pays the piper calls the tune. I mean, really, EVERYONE knows this. "Why did my industry's trade association spend 1.8 million dollars on various candidates who may be voting on legislation that makes or costs us 10 times that much? Oh, no reason... we just think they are very nice ladies and gentleme…

I'd really like to hear ideas of how we can stop this racket

I can think of a way to get money out of congress: remove elections.

Think of it: serving in Congress could be like Jury Duty. Everyone's in the pool and every election cycle random people are selected from the pool and asked to serve.

With no elections, there are no campaigns to donate to. It would be illegal for any Congressperson to accept any gifts or money from anyone other than their paycheck from the government and a ban on working for, directly or indirectly, with any person or corporation that was affected by any bills in which the Congressperson participated or voted.

Would there still be corruption and political favors? Absolutely. People would still have a tendency to push for laws that would benefit either themselves, family, or friends or the industry in which they worked.

The lack of up-front monetary gain would likely have a significant impact but corruption is a problem of honesty and integrity which human nature tends to lack and tacks personal disciple to evolve.

Until mankind becomes entirely focused on building social welfare (what's good for all) instead of personal welfare (what's good for me), these problems will always be here.

Re: White House Refuses To Comment On Petition To Investigate Chris Dodd

#34
post #33
post #18

It seems like this whole hubub is about someone stating openly what's a well known open secret in US politics: He who pays the piper calls the tune. I mean, really, EVERYONE knows this. "Why did my industry's trade association spend 1.8 million dollars on various candidates who may be voting on legislation that makes or costs us 10 times that much? Oh, no reason... we just think they are very nice ladies and gentleme…

I'd really like to hear ideas of how we can stop this racket I can think of a way to get money out of congress: remove elections. Think of it: serving in Congress could be like Jury Duty. Everyone's in the pool and every election cycle random people are selected from the pool and asked to serve. With no elections, there are no campaigns to donate to. It would be illegal for any Congressperson to accept any gifts or m…

Correct me if I'm wrong, but without elections, you also don't have democracy, right?

I of course do not mean to say that democracy is The Answer to All Problems, but this idea seems to touch the very core of the political system in place.

Re: White House Refuses To Comment On Petition To Investigate Chris Dodd

#35

The reaction to this frustrates me immensely, because Obama is doing the right thing. The Obama White House is attempting to regrow the wall between political and constituent concerns and law enforcement concerns. The Department of Justice should operate with the most minimal of political interferences (since I don't think it's possible to avoid them all together) with the goal of maintaining its independence. That s…

Then, don't you think the White House would send a letter to the DoJ pointing them to this if they really cared?

They may not need to investigate it themselves, but helping the message get sternly to the right people should be appropriate.

Re: White House Refuses To Comment On Petition To Investigate Chris Dodd

#36
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup, that's why it's naive. One possible patch for this issue is to forbid spending money on elections, but again, that just opens up new cans of worms.

As long as we have an uneven distribution of wealth, we will have an uneven distribution of power. It doesn't matter what laws you try to pass or what government you try to have. The entities who those laws threaten will fight against them.

You sound a lot like Obama, who wants everyone's paycheck to be same except his own.

Re: White House Refuses To Comment On Petition To Investigate Chris Dodd

#38
post #33
post #18

It seems like this whole hubub is about someone stating openly what's a well known open secret in US politics: He who pays the piper calls the tune. I mean, really, EVERYONE knows this. "Why did my industry's trade association spend 1.8 million dollars on various candidates who may be voting on legislation that makes or costs us 10 times that much? Oh, no reason... we just think they are very nice ladies and gentleme…

I'd really like to hear ideas of how we can stop this racket I can think of a way to get money out of congress: remove elections. Think of it: serving in Congress could be like Jury Duty. Everyone's in the pool and every election cycle random people are selected from the pool and asked to serve. With no elections, there are no campaigns to donate to. It would be illegal for any Congressperson to accept any gifts or m…

Well Athens had that system and made some bad kneejerk descisons - for example The Mytilenian Debate.

And you would be handing much more power to unelected civil servants.

I think both parties going to OMOV and doing away with primary's go back to state delegates deciding who the presidential candidates are - Oh and I would ban mandating of delegations.

Re: White House Refuses To Comment On Petition To Investigate Chris Dodd

#39
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd really like to hear ideas of how we can stop this racket I can think of a way to get money out of congress: remove elections. Think of it: serving in Congress could be like Jury Duty. Everyone's in the pool and every election cycle random people are selected from the pool and asked to serve. With no elections, there are no campaigns to donate to. It would be illegal for any Congressperson to accept any gifts or m…

Correct me if I'm wrong, but without elections, you also don't have democracy , right? I of course do not mean to say that democracy is The Answer to All Problems, but this idea seems to touch the very core of the political system in place.

Random selection (qua jury duty) is still "statistically democratic" and without bribery may very well be more democratic than what we have now.

Re: White House Refuses To Comment On Petition To Investigate Chris Dodd

#40
post #33
post #18

It seems like this whole hubub is about someone stating openly what's a well known open secret in US politics: He who pays the piper calls the tune. I mean, really, EVERYONE knows this. "Why did my industry's trade association spend 1.8 million dollars on various candidates who may be voting on legislation that makes or costs us 10 times that much? Oh, no reason... we just think they are very nice ladies and gentleme…

I'd really like to hear ideas of how we can stop this racket I can think of a way to get money out of congress: remove elections. Think of it: serving in Congress could be like Jury Duty. Everyone's in the pool and every election cycle random people are selected from the pool and asked to serve. With no elections, there are no campaigns to donate to. It would be illegal for any Congressperson to accept any gifts or m…

> Until mankind becomes entirely focused on building social welfare (what's good for all) instead of personal welfare (what's good for me), these problems will always be here.

Until we start building social and political systems for humanity as it is rather than humanity as we might idealistically want it to be, we're going to have these problems -- not that I'm convinced that self-interest is really something we want to eradicate from human psychology. Markets already have features which effectively translate self-interest into the greater good, and so does democracy in the sense that if everyone voted selfishly, majority rule would benefit the majority. So let's focus on where markets and democracy aren't working the way we'd want them to and stop wringing our hands about how evil and selfish the human nature is.

Post reply on HN