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

Big Tech lobbyist language made it verbatim into NY’s hedged repair bill

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–176 of 176 posts

Re: Big Tech lobbyist language made it verbatim into NY’s hedged repair bill

#171

Post by hayst4ck »

Frankly, I don't see lobbyist language making it into bills as a problem, but which lobbyists language get into the bills.

Should you make a law without being informed? No, you would want to have a lot of information and understanding of a problem to make a law, preferably informed by history of attempts at reform and comparison to other countries attempts with critical assessments.

Do our political offices have the institutions in place to deeply understand problems and create potential solutions? I doubt we have the time or the resources at our politicians command to do that.

Would you be happy if the ACLU, EFF, or whatever political organization you donate to wrote the laws that eventually congress voted on? I think the EFF probably has a better grasp on tech issues than our representatives and I think they could write a better law than our senile stone age dinosaur politicians could.

This headline breeds cynicism and completely focuses on the wrong thing.

It's not that "a Big Tech lobbyist got language into a bill", but that "Apple, Google, and Samsung corrupted our legal process to benefit themselves over the public."

Re: Big Tech lobbyist language made it verbatim into NY’s hedged repair bill

#172

Post by ncallaway »

christkv wrote: post #90
ncallaway wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Tyranny of the majority” I dunno, I can definitely think of some times in our history when it impacted the poorest people. I think there’s something very useful in the elections for representatives, in terms of it being an official poll of the people. I think sortition is a really interesting concept and could work well, but I think it won’t work if it’s the only legislative body. I would be pretty starkly against t…

Proportional does not work. Most European parliaments are proportional and has the same dysfunctions as the us system. The root is always the parties. They have to go.

> The root is always the parties. They have to go.

I don't really think sortition itself would kill the parties. It does seem like a good way to weaken them, but...I suspect they would find a way to survive.

I genuinely don't know of how to do away with political parties. Is there a good example of a democratic system (or a governance by the people) that doesn't have political parties?

Re: Big Tech lobbyist language made it verbatim into NY’s hedged repair bill

#173

Post by indymike »

jmugan wrote: post #77
indymike wrote: post #33

Laws are written in the US by the people who have time to write them: interns or lobbyists. Being a legislator is a crappy job where you have little time between fundraising and voting to read the laws you vote on, let alone write them. If you want to make a change, show up and meet in person with state and federal legislators. And if you think, "there outght to be a law" get one written with the help of a few lawyer…

My understanding is that you can't "show and meet with" them unless you are already a significant donor.

> My understanding is that you can't "show and meet with" them unless you are already a significant donor.

Very untrue. Very few US legislators will refuse a meeting with a constituent - even if you are a known donor to someone running for their seat! Most legislators have office hours in their home districts (one of my favorite Indiana senators does it at a Starbucks), and at the capitol when the legislature is in session. It may be hard (especially at the US Congress) level to travel to meet.

Where most people go wrong is trying to have an adversarial meeting where you have a big debate on some issue. Far better to get a meeting (even better if you invite friends who want to discuss an issue) to discuss how an issue is affecting you, or something you need help with. You may get pushed to a staffer and get a quick meet & greet with the legislator... A lot of people get insulted that the staffer is an intern. Remember, interns are one of two parties that write laws and interns are literally the bulk of most legislator's staff! Also, come armed with real stories, and real people who would like to talk to the rep about the same issue. You'll be amazed how approachable most congresspeople are on most issues.

Re: Big Tech lobbyist language made it verbatim into NY’s hedged repair bill

#174

Post by indymike »

beezlebroxxxxxx wrote: post #126
jmugan wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understanding is that you can't "show and meet with" them unless you are already a significant donor.

That's not entirely true. It's more like if you are a significant donor your name is always going first on the schedule of meetings for that day. Local constituents will usually get scheduled over and over again until some random 15-min block that the politician usually just glazes over for. They will meet with you if whatever your issues is directly affects their ability to fundraise though.

> local constituents will usually get scheduled over and over again

I've had four US different congresspersons from both parties make a lobbyist wait when they found out it was four constituents. All of them said this: "I get so few visitors from home, and I already know what ______ is going to say." I've even ended up at lunch with senators because they are sick of talking to the same people over and over.

(I go to DC as a citizen every other year to advocate for things I care deeply about)

Re: Big Tech lobbyist language made it verbatim into NY’s hedged repair bill

#175

Post by TimTheTinker »

andromeduck wrote: post #85
comte7092 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Example?

War on drugs.

That's not a positive example of what I was referring to.

A positive example would be something that would have passed if the majority party wanted it when the minority party was against it.

Re: Big Tech lobbyist language made it verbatim into NY’s hedged repair bill

#176

Post by dantheman »

arrosenberg wrote: post #152
dantheman wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the government followed the constituion this wouldn't be problems: 1. Marijuana would never have been illegal at the federal level because an amendment wasn't passed. 2. Healthcare and any other federal welfare policies could be ennacted by passing an amendment. If there isn't broad consensus across the country to pass an amendment then states can do it independently. There is no reason a state can't have single p…

> Healthcare and any other federal welfare policies could be enacted by passing an amendment. All federal welfare policies can be enacted under the commerce clause and/or the general welfare clause.

Yeah, exactly - what can't be enacted under the commerce clause. Everything impacts commerce, growing wheat on your own land for your own use impacts commerce. It's not legitimate. Once that door was opened, it went from enumerated power to anything not prohibited.
Post reply on HN