> America gave birth to the idea of representative democracy And here was me thinking that was the Greeks. Thousands of years before America existed.
I believe the Athenians practiced direct democracy rather than representative.
Larry Lessig: I'm All In
61–70 of 167 posts
Re: Larry Lessig: I'm All In
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't "fairer" roughly coterminous with "more likely to get people I like elected"? I don't trust one major political party to draw unbiased boundaries any more than I trust the other.
“Fairer” in this case means “composition of each state’s congressional delegation roughly represents the composition of political affiliation among the state’s citizens, and elections are reasonably competitive in areas with mixed support”. Currently, there is no question that the Republican Party has a significant structural advantage in Congress due to the gerrymandered district boundaries in states they controlled…
I think there's no such thing as an independent commission. I'd rather it be part of the political process but improve the checks and balances somehow. Not sure what that looks like. Maybe explore special referendums or require more involvement from another branch of the government.
It's also worth pointing out that the courts have actually mandated gerrymandering at times to promote majority minority districts... which actually help create supermajority caucasian districts. We would need to stop this kind of gerrymandering or somehow establish the bright line between 'beneficial' (scare quotes for skepticism, not sarcasm) gerrymandering and corrupt gerrymandering.
Re: Larry Lessig: I'm All In
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
The thing is though, Lessig is completely right. Members of Congress spend 70% of their time raising money. They're not lawmakers, they're professional fundraisers. Think of a startup whose founders spent 70% of their time raising money, they would never get anything done. And since fundraising is now such an integral part of a Congressman's day to day, they have two classes of constitutes to think about: the voters,…
Any other election he'd have been right. This time there's Bernie Sanders, who is pretty much the first presidential candidate to support common sense laws. He raises money from lots of small donors with interests like you and me rather than a few big donors with interests diametrically opposed to you and me.
As awesome as Sanders is, I also happen to agree with Lessig in that campaign finance reform needs to take priority over every other issue.
Sanders is fighting for the right issues, but without campaign finance reform, every issue worth fighting for is going to face an almost impossible uphill battle.
Re: Larry Lessig: I'm All In
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
The "limit" on campaign donations is a complete farce though. Let's look at Jeb Bush. Jeb stated multiple times that he wasn't running for president in 2016, and instead started a Super PAC that let him raise uncapped campaign donations, and ultimately raised over $100 million. Then he announces that he had a change of heart, was indeed going to run for president, and gave control of his Super PAC to a friend of his.…
Yes, SuperPACs and presidential races are another beast altogether. Like I said, I was talking about a general case, since you referred to legislators, which by definition excludes presidential candidates. SuperPACs are difficult to play the devil's advocate for. They are a feature of running a widespread democratic campaign in a big country, where the ad impressions on voters are prohibitively expensive because of s…
> SuperPACs are difficult to play the devil's advocate for.
I'll take a shot. They could be megaphones for oligarchs, sure. But they can also be fledgling political parties. Or at least non-governmental counter-movements within a party. I mean, that's basically what Lessig has been doing, right?
Re: Larry Lessig: I'm All In
#65I love Lessig but speaking of mistakes, he should do a poll about his glasses. Whether he switches to something more likable or not will be an indicator of how savvy he would be on the job.
I'm assuming half of your point is humour and the other is the fact you don't like his glasses. It is on this second half I'd like to comment. It shifts the focus on form rather than content. Sure form has its non-negligible role, but in politics and most domains it should never take precedence over content, the actual message itself. And here lies one part of the problem Lessig is trying to go after: the corruption…
Well you totally missed the point.
There's plenty of substance with Lessig. I just am talking about one bit of substance, which is whether he has the pragmatism needed to get and then to do the job or not.
The glasses (which I actually like; not sure where you got your "fact"... but I doubt US voters will) are the form here, to use your word. Not the substance. They are trivial.
So yes, the glasses are not substance. His lack of pragmatism in clinging to them is substance.
Re: Larry Lessig: I'm All In
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
Any other election he'd have been right. This time there's Bernie Sanders, who is pretty much the first presidential candidate to support common sense laws. He raises money from lots of small donors with interests like you and me rather than a few big donors with interests diametrically opposed to you and me.
As awesome as Sanders is, I also happen to agree with Lessig in that campaign finance reform needs to take priority over every other issue. Sanders is fighting for the right issues, but without campaign finance reform, every issue worth fighting for is going to face an almost impossible uphill battle.
Sanders' self-claimed biggest issue is climate change, which in my opinion trumps campaign finance reform.
Re: Larry Lessig: I'm All In
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
As awesome as Sanders is, I also happen to agree with Lessig in that campaign finance reform needs to take priority over every other issue. Sanders is fighting for the right issues, but without campaign finance reform, every issue worth fighting for is going to face an almost impossible uphill battle.
Sanders' self-claimed biggest issue is climate change, which in my opinion trumps campaign finance reform.
I think the point is, until there's funding reform, climate reform doesn't stand much of a chance. Similarly, once the funding reform is done, climate reform will get promoted.
Re: Larry Lessig: I'm All In
#68Observations from Australia:
* Lessig is trying to reform US politics with minimal grassroots support and from the outside. That's pretty much impossible, even without the sort of broken system he's trying to reform.
* Bernie Sanders seems to be offering similar reforms, though not as a No.1 priority. Lessig is essentially arguing that he'll implement one Sanders policy as a priority, and then get out of the way - that sounds completely silly to me, and I don't see why you wouldn't just vote Sanders instead.
* I'd contend that the problems in US politics run much deeper than campaign finance - voting systems, the structure of government, separation of powers, etc all need a thorough look and possible overhaul. Any campaign finance reform would probably end up being disappointingly ineffective compared to how it's being sold.
Re: Larry Lessig: I'm All In
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
The thing is though, Lessig is completely right. Members of Congress spend 70% of their time raising money. They're not lawmakers, they're professional fundraisers. Think of a startup whose founders spent 70% of their time raising money, they would never get anything done. And since fundraising is now such an integral part of a Congressman's day to day, they have two classes of constitutes to think about: the voters,…
> Members of Congress spend 70% of their time raising money. They're not lawmakers, they're professional fundraisers. > they would never get anything done You will have a hard time convincing HN that what US needs are more laws, especially at a rate limited by time available to politicians for writing them! Broadly speaking limits on campaign donations are fairly small (Max $5k) and average donation sums ($100-200) a…
There is no requirement in the US that your donors are your constituents. Amass sufficiently many people to whom the maximum contribution is a trivial sum of money, and donate to every campaign. Done.
Re: Larry Lessig: I'm All In
#70I admire Mr. Lessig's convictions and his ideas, but frankly the concept of a self-resigning President is half-baked. It reveals a fundamental lack of understanding about the role of the Presidency in United States politically and socially and image it projects to the world at large.
The United States isn't a startup. You can't have a Minimum Viable Presidency focused on a single issue.