Slashdot Mirror


'The Laws Are Written By Lobbyists,' Says Google's Schmidt

An anonymous reader sends this excerpt from The Atlantic: "'The average American doesn't realize how much of the laws are written by lobbyists' to protect incumbent interests, Google CEO Eric Schmidt told Atlantic editor James Bennet at the Washington Ideas Forum. 'It's shocking how the system actually works.' In a wide-ranging interview that spanned human nature, the future of machines, and how Google could have helped the stimulus, Schmidt said technology could 'completely change the way government works.' 'Washington is an incumbent protection machine,' Schmidt said. 'Technology is fundamentally disruptive.' Mobile phones and personal technology, for example, could be used to record the bills that members of Congress actually read and then determine what stimulus funds were successfully spent." We discussed a specific example of this from the cable industry back in August.

27 of 484 comments (clear)

  1. Not news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This isn't news. Anybody who hasn't been asleep the past 20 or more years already knows that organizations have stolen the government.

    Real news would be if somebody actually found a way to counteract their deeds.

    1. Re:Not news by PapayaSF · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Real news would be if somebody actually found a way to counteract their deeds.

      No, the solution is well-known, just unpalatable to many people: stop having the government attempting to micromanage the economy. Every time Congress decides to treat one segment of the economy differently than another, through special taxes, regulations, subsidies, privileges, etc., the lobbyists will appear. Note that I am not arguing against all taxes and such, just pointing out that all such interference produces lobbyists.

      Besides, if you want Congress to (e.g.) redesign the health care system, do you think they would actually do a better job if doctors, hospitals, and drug companies weren't consulted at all? I don't. I think they'd end up with legislation that was even more clueless. Just because lobbyists are arguing for a particular group doesn't mean they're always wrong.

      If you want to minimize lobbyists, advocate against all special tax breaks and subsidies and for making taxes and regulation as uniform, sensible, and simple as possible.

      --
      Q: What does the "B." in Benoit B. Mandelbrot stand for? A: Benoit B. Mandelbrot
    2. Re:Not news by WitnessForTheOffense · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Just because lobbyists are arguing for a particular group doesn't mean they're always wrong.

      No, it just means they're always biased and will use the truth to manipulate the legislative process to favor their interests. The most dangerous lies are 99% true.

    3. Re:Not news by P0ltergeist333 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Real news would be if somebody actually found a way to counteract their deeds.

      No, the solution is well-known, just unpalatable to many people: stop having the government attempting to micromanage the economy. Every time Congress decides to treat one segment of the economy differently than another, through special taxes, regulations, subsidies, privileges, etc., the lobbyists will appear. Note that I am not arguing against all taxes and such, just pointing out that all such interference produces lobbyists.

      Epic fail. Your words utterly fail to match reality. First off, even if there were no regulations, they would still be lobbying as much (more, actually, since 'regulation' also covers lobbying) to get favorable treatment, government contracts, etc. etc. Secondly, during our best and strongest years(post-WW2), the top tax rate was in the 90's, the banks were heavily regulated, and the government was distributing a large percentage of the GDP for the general welfare of people including helping retired and poor people with their bills and medical expenses, many grants for health and other technologies, and infrastructure (such as highways, power, water, and communications) without which both the commercial and private sectors (of the whole world, and especially the US) would have stagnated and possibly had another dark age!

      Both the commercial sector AND government can be great positive OR negative forces. Crippling EITHER is sheer idiocy! We merely need to curtail the TRUE threats without succumbing to slippery slope rhetoric by the radicals.

      --
      One of these days I'm going to cut you into little pieces. - PF
    4. Re:Not news by Idiomatick · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ahahaha. Sometimes libertarians crack me up.

      Corporations are too powerful and our government gets controlled by them. To counteract this we should allow companies to become more powerful, less restricted and take powers away from the government, reel it in.

      Almost as good as the teapartiers. "Can you believe the government is in so much debt??? Obama needs to cut taxes across the board NOW!"

      Completely 100% not based in reality.

    5. Re:Not news by JesseMcDonald · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Corporations are too powerful and our government gets controlled by them. To counteract this we should allow companies to become more powerful, less restricted and take powers away from the government, reel it in.

      The corporations aren't "too powerful" in their own right; they simply have too much influence over the government, given the amount of power the government has over everyone else (which is another problem quite apart from corporate influence). There are two aspects to solving this issue. One is to reduce the power of governments, which simultaneously limits the power available for corporations to influence. The other is to reduce the influence corporations have over the government. Both are worthwhile goals.

      Almost as good as the teapartiers. "Can you believe the government is in so much debt??? Obama needs to cut taxes across the board NOW!"

      You missed an "..." in your "quote". Public debt and high taxes are both very real problems, a fact acknowledged (to varying degrees) by both major political parties. Obviously the only way to solve either problem without making the other worse is to spend less, which is also a goal of the "Tea Party".

      Basic financial management for governments is no different from financial management for individuals: first, earn a productive income (i.e. not stolen from others); second, maintain your capital investments (needs); third, plan for the future (pay down debts, save & invest); fourth, consume (satisfy wants). Taxes are a symptom of failing the first step. Debt and degrading infrastructure are symptoms of erroneously prioritizing consumption.

      --
      "The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." - Bastiat
  2. Yes, and? by kurokame · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Yeah, we know this already. There just isn't much to do about it short of:
    • Emigrating to another nation which likely has similar or worse problems.
    • Overthrowing the government, causing much misery and chaos, only to see it replaced with a similar or worse system.
    • Becoming a lobbyist.
    • Playing a very long game and hoping to change civilization for the better by altering the public's consensus worldview.
    1. Re:Yes, and? by catbutt · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And point 4 is exactly what Schmidt is doing.

      Which would probably work, except for one thing standing in the way: people with attitudes just like yours.

      Instead of saying "yes we already know this", we should be saying "yes this is true, and we should be talking about it every day." Because it isn't going to be fixed unless people talk about it, and care about it....rather than just saying that we are effectively helpless to do anything about it.

  3. +5 Interesting, despite other comments by openfrog · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Despite comments to the effect that this is not news, these comments are quite interesting. Google has a capitalization comparable to the lobbyists of the kind of ATT and others, but here as well, they play differently, and more transparently. Mr. Schmidt's comments here reflect this difference.

    This is why this company still has the sympathy of slashdotters. Google's effort to advance Net neutrality and other issues pertaining to civil liberties and the Internet are to be appreciated, not derided cynically like I am reading here.

  4. Corporations should have zero Free Speech by commodore64_love · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And this ("laws written by lobbyists") is why I don't think corporations should have free speech rights. They can have revocable *privileges* to run ads but should never have the right to hire, for example, a Microsoft lobbyists or RIAA lobbyists to block-out the voice of the people in the halls of Congress. Or to run ads to support their favorite puppet for Congress. The corporations have no more rights than a building.

    If Bill Gates or the RIAA CEO wants to lobby, let them hire the lobbyist from his personal salary, rather than using the corporation's billon-dollar treasury.

    --
    "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
  5. Re:I agree by click2005 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The public will never spend as much as frequently on buying politicians as companies do.

    --
    I am a free slashdotter. I will not be modded, blogged, DRM'd, patented, podcasted or RFID'd. My life is my own.
  6. His first line from TFA sums it by stimpleton · · Score: 4, Insightful

    From the first line he refers to "average Americans" who do not realize the process.

    This applies to most societies, and is a euphemism for uneducated people(without a tertiary qualification).

    Or to quote a line from Blazing Saddles "...the common man. You know....Morons."

    "You know....Morons" will find the clip on You Tube I believe.

    --

    In post Patriot Act America, the library books scan you.
  7. Re:I agree by postbigbang · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When an individual does it, it's called bribery.

    When a lobbyist does it, it's great legislation.

    Flame or reality? Pick one.

    --
    ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
  8. So...? by Aragorn+DeLunar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Who do you want writing laws that govern complicated industries (high-tech, medical, etc.): a bunch of politicians, or people who actually work in those respective industries? Does the average congressman with a law degree understand the nuances of intertube technology (too soon? nah.), for example? I have no problem with industries proposing or even drafting legislation, provided that our elected representatives and their staffs actually read and digest the bills to ensure that the law is fair, enforceable, and beneficial.

    --
    Cynicism, like dogmatism, can be an excuse for intellectual laziness. - Susan Shirk
    1. Re:So...? by Haedrian · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I personally do believe in a Technocratic system of government - but that's beside the point.

      The problem is this:

      People start companies to earn money. They take care of their clients because it earns them more money, and they provide a quality service for the same reason.

      Now if a company decides to write the rules - without having to stick its head out - and when it already dominates the market - what do you think its going to be in aid of? Are the movie companies going to draft a law which reduces their profits?

      No way.

      Everyone pulls towards their interests. Now capitalism has the happy effect of "The needs of the rich outweigh the needs of the many", and when you give power to people who want money - they will /NOT/ produce any bills which do not suit them.

      Which is where this fails.

  9. Re:They can afford to. by Iron+Condor · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Google is doing very well these days - they can afford to be the white hat guy.

    Wait till their fortunes start to decline. Then we'll shall see what they're truly made of .

    Anybody can weather adversity. There's no strength in that, no quality of character to be discerned.

    If you truly want to see a man's character, give him power. Give him free reign. Don't try to confine or constrain him, but let him act at his every whim. That's when you learn what someone's made of.

    --
    We're all born with nothing.
    If you die in debt, you're ahead.
  10. Re:Rambling bunch of Duhs! by IICV · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Do you.. do you really think that the reason why we're not building more hydroelectric dams is because of the Greens?

    You realize that they have almost exactly zero political power, right? The reason why we're not spending money on infrastructure like green energy (or even just fixing up the energy sources we currently have) is pretty clearly explained here. And if you don't believe me, just look at our budget - actions (or in this case, budget allocations) speak louder than words.

  11. Very true by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Despite what some whiners online may say, America really is a free country both in that you can say what you want, and that the people have the power to change the government. What that means is that if you want to organize around candidates to change the current system, the government can't stop you, and that if you vote those candidates in to power, that is that.

    The only obstacle is people who are whiny and say nothing can be changed. Bullshit, it can so. Doesn't mean it is easy, doesn't mean it won't take time and effort, but it can be done. One of the first steps is just getting the message out. Let people know what is going on, and so on.

    This is precisely the same as the "third party" bullshit. "Oh voting for a third party candidate is throwing your vote away." No, that is only the case if idiots continue to believe that and not vote third party. If you look around, you find that at a state level third party candidates have won and held office. There is no evil force that keeps them out, only the force of apathy/whinyness from people who say "It can't be done."

    Americans DO have the power to change their government, however to do so they have to understand this fact, and exercise it. Bitching does no good.

    1. Re:Very true by The+Hatchet · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That is right, in America, I am free to live in debt slavery until I die from a simple medical condition I can't pay for. That is pretty much how it goes unless you are born into money, or happen to be in the 99.99th percentile of people in your city, the 1 or 2 people that actually get out and do something with their lives. You try accomplishing something when you can barely pay your bills working your ass off every single fucking night.

      When 1% of the country owns 95% of its assets, they can easily out-finance political campaigns and win any election. Just look at Fox news, successfully spouting total lies (don't believe me, just watch 10 minutes, write everything down, and painstakingly fact check it. I have spent more than 8 hours doing this, and have not found a single truth on that channel), and yet, despite the lies, a large number of people believe everything they say totally without question. You try fixing a system that fucked up, I have been trying my whole life.

      --
      Where is the mod rating for "scary"? Also, ...
  12. Re:In other news by lostmongoose · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Keep digging, Watson.

  13. The un-directed masses vs the controlled few by Haedrian · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Something to think about:

    Companies depend on selling their products to the masses. Therefore, you may not realise it, but we actually hold the key to destroying them if we wanted to. The problem is that people are undirected, they do not wish to take a stand. It is only the chosen few who actually become 'leaders' , and usually they start doing what suits THEM instead of what suits the masses.

    When the masses stop being controlled by the media, and are able to THINK - and decide that they do want change, and realise that THEY hold the power - then the world will change dramatically.

    But that's never going to happen, so I guess we're stuck in this hellhole.

  14. Re:Rambling bunch of Duhs! by shadowofwind · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Actually environmental protection, primarily in relation to salmon, has been a big issue in relation to dams. It doesn't take enormous political clout, just a few favorable regulations and court rulings. The hydroelectric companies like Idaho Power aren't tremendously strong politically either. I agree with your general pro-environmentalist sentiment though.

  15. A cliche sums it up best by macraig · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Remember the old cliche, "the victors write the history books"?

    It's incomplete. The victors - both military AND economic - also draft the laws.

    Most of our legislative burden, that portion not derived directly from common law, is all about serving primarily the interests of our "captains of industry" and "pillars of society", preserving and increasing the control and material resources acquired at the expense of everyone else. Any beneficial fallout for the rest of We The People is purely accidental and not really intended.

  16. Re:See? You are part of the problem by sonicmerlin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You're a retard, you know that? He just said he barely makes enough to support himself despite working hard every day. The top 20% of the country owns 87% of the wealth. The bottom 60% owns less than 1% of the wealth. What the heck is anyone supposed to do when half of those paupers vote for politicians who want to give MORE money to the rich?

  17. Re:Rambling bunch of Duhs! by Bob9113 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I completely agree that our foreign entanglements budget and general military budget are wildly out of control, and should be vastly curtailed.

    Another two to look at are Social Security and health care.

    Social Security will eat the entire GDP in the not too distant future if the age threshold is not raised. Check out the numbers, they are as bad as the military (and rising significantly faster).

    Health care is becoming too expensive; lots of reasons for this, including a ton of protectionism, lawyerism, and corruption, but the one that cannot be fixed is this: Our technological ability to keep people alive is advancing faster than the GDP growth rate can keep up with. At some point, we will have to stop paying for everyone's maximum possible life extension (either by choice or by collapse).

    Not trying to piss in your cheerios -- you're right about the military -- just pointing out two other oncoming trains that are bigger and faster. Check the numbers for yourself -- they're scary.

  18. Re:See? You are part of the problem by The+Hatchet · · Score: 4, Insightful

    See, you not only don't know how to read, but jump up on all the typical bullshit. For starters, I am trying. I have been trying, I go to college all day, work in my spare time, and I have been working on several inventions, and trying to sell them in what time I have left. I work my ass off every day of my life, and yet have no choice but to live in debt slavery, no matter how hard I try to fix shit. And I do all of that with Cluster Headaches, the most painful medical condition known to medicine. Most of the time I am working to improve my situation, but I wasn't born into money, so I will still be living in debt slavery working at some corporate giant giving away my expertise for a tiny ass paycheck watching my ideas and ingenuity going to make the world worse instead of better.

    Also, I like what Fox says, I WISH it were true. But it is a load of bullshit that keeps hard working people like me inpoverished and overworked while getting nothing back. I am also an eagle scout and spead a good deal of time doing voluntary community service.

    At least those people can Afford to go to a 3rd world country to fix it. I could live for a month of the cost of a plane ticket, and I frequently have to. Now is it ok to whine while at the same time doing everything to get into a better situation? Yes it is you ignorant jack ass. go back to living the easy life getting mad that the poor people who work 20 hours a day are so lazy. Fuck you.

    --
    Where is the mod rating for "scary"? Also, ...
  19. Re:Rambling bunch of Duhs! by DrJimbo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Social Security will eat the entire GDP in the not too distant future if the age threshold is not raised. Check out the numbers, they are as bad as the military (and rising significantly faster).

    Bull. Shit. You seem to have fallen for the pro-corporate propaganda. There are many other ways to "fix" Social Security. For example, if people making over $100,000 per year contributed at the same rate as poorer people then the problems would be solved for the foreseeable future. In fact, this is what Obama promised to do before he got elected.

    Health care is becoming too expensive; lots of reasons for this, including a ton of protectionism, lawyerism, and corruption, but the one that cannot be fixed is this: Our technological ability to keep people alive is advancing faster than the GDP growth rate can keep up with. At some point, we will have to stop paying for everyone's maximum possible life extension (either by choice or by collapse).

    More of the same. The problem with our health care system is simple. We can basically do three things with our health care system:

    1. Provide affordable health care
    2. Provide effective health care
    3. Fund obscene corporate profits

    Pick any two. Unfortunately, both the Dems and the Repubs keep picking option (3) making it impossible for us to have the first two options together. If insurance companies are trying to maximize shareholder value then their job is to minimize the health care that is provided while maximizing the cost of that care. They are very good at their job.

    The idea of fixing the economy by increasing the income gap between the rich and the poor makes about as much sense as dousing a fire with gasoline.

    --
    We don't see the world as it is, we see it as we are.
    -- Anais Nin