An investigation into nearly 1 million bills across all 50 US states showed a high proportion of proposed US laws being written by lobbyists. The investigation was based on computer analysis of the similarities in language used in the bills. Additionally, copycat legislation is a problem. That is where states copy-paste key parts of proposed legislation from each other, and often the original is can be traced back to lobbyists. Many tricks are used to increase acceptance of these bills such as use of deceptive titles, misleading endorsements, copied bills to override locally sourced bills, and more. The article includes several graphics showing the distribution of bad practices across the states.
A two-year investigation by USA TODAY, The Arizona Republic and the Center for Public Integrity reveals for the first time the extent to which special interests have infiltrated state legislatures using model legislation.
USA TODAY and the Republic found at least 10,000 bills almost entirely copied from model legislation were introduced nationwide in the past eight years, and more than 2,100 of those bills were signed into law.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by JoeMerchant on Sunday April 14 2019, @09:59PM (18 children)
Outsourcing the legislative drafting work, what could be more American?
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 3, Informative) by PartTimeZombie on Sunday April 14 2019, @11:07PM (2 children)
These guys seem to agree. [northwestern.edu]
So not a new thing, and I suspect the people who run America are quite happy about that.
(Score: 3, Funny) by realDonaldTrump on Sunday April 14 2019, @11:46PM (1 child)
Somebody said, "oh, why’d you appoint a Rich Person to be in charge of the Economy?" I said, because that’s the kind of thinking we want. Winning!!!!
(Score: 0, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @01:03AM
Why do you hate America?
(Score: 5, Informative) by driverless on Sunday April 14 2019, @11:18PM (1 child)
It's not just US law they're writing for themselves, they're doing the same with international treaties [theintercept.com].
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @02:40AM
the people that's not really from davos welcome you to global capitalism and encourage you to just call this democracy. also you better be at your desk tommorrow at 9 sharp to produce money for you exploiter
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 14 2019, @11:20PM (5 children)
This outsourcing doesn't really bother me, as technically I could write the laws too and the legislature can't be experts on everything. However, I also am a firm believer in government transparency, which means that in the bill information, there needs to be disclosure as to the source of the text. Of course, unless all legislatures do the same, they will just get around that by passing it in one state and then having the disclosure in the other states read "based on the $such_and_such_law of $other_state."
(Score: 4, Interesting) by JoeMerchant on Monday April 15 2019, @01:35AM
In the end, it doesn't really matter who wrote it. What matters is: what it says, how much money flows from where to where as a result, and who voted for it.
Put together the money flows and the votes and a clear pattern should emerge of representatives acting to benefit their constituents. What we really need for transparency are red flags that go up when representatives do things that hurt their constituents.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 3, Interesting) by krishnoid on Monday April 15 2019, @04:41AM (1 child)
Washington D.C. [arstechnica.com] and Germany [wired.com] make their laws available under publicly accessible revision control, maybe more U.S. states could start doing this too.
(Score: 3, Informative) by maxwell demon on Monday April 15 2019, @07:11AM
The German one is not an official government site, but the work of a single activist (and has had no updates since many years).
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @05:20AM (1 child)
So let's see you write a law. First publish the text and then tell us who adopted it.... I won't be holding my breath btw.
“The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread.” ― Anatole France
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @07:40PM
Funny thing is, you are probably talking to one of the handful of people in my state who has done so. The State of Iowa uses the language I sent to my state senator and representative after the Equifax breach that makes credit freezes free for everyone. I also had a hand at writing legislation and administrative rules while working at the state affiliate of the ACLU.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @12:14AM
Back when the net neutrality BS started in North Carolina. You could call the DNC rep who "wrote" the law (yes you read that right). They let a Time Warner rep answer the phone and answer your questions.
Once the RNC suddenly loved the bill after spending 2 years hating on it and the DNC suddenly hated it. That nailed it home so hard for me. We are getting played.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by bussdriver on Monday April 15 2019, @01:10AM (3 children)
You can tell somebody is extremely corrupt when they budget for NO STAFF necessary to create the laws or review them. The senate, house leadership that cuts budgets for their people do be able to do their job are always corrupt when they cut those staff budgets. Then you have each rep which can budget their money to hire a couple interns then misappropriate that money or they can pay actual decent staff the best wage they can afford. They should be able to hire well qualified staff but they are not able to do what they should because that can be called government waste! Despite the reality that so much waste and corruption happens as a result of poor staffing.
Hell, we couldn't even out lawyer the banks when they destroyed the economy. Just like the elite want.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by JoeMerchant on Monday April 15 2019, @01:37AM (2 children)
I watched a crack dealer's lawyer run circles around the city attorneys for 10 years. He ran drugs and prostitutes out of his house all that time, 25 arrests a month, and they never managed to shut him down.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Monday April 15 2019, @04:42AM (1 child)
Do you have some case numbers for this?
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday April 15 2019, @05:18PM
Smatt vs City of Miami - 1990 through 2000.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @01:12AM
More importantly, is anybody surprised by this? Anybody????
(Score: 3, Interesting) by captain normal on Monday April 15 2019, @04:23AM
Well we do have the best government that money can buy. Unfortunately that may not necessarily be the best government for all of us.
When life isn't going right, go left.
(Score: 1) by I'mNotAnAlienISwear Who'sYourLeader on Sunday April 14 2019, @10:15PM (34 children)
Most places charge extra for that service. Why are those orderlies low-paid?
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 14 2019, @11:58PM (30 children)
Because sometimes trickledown economics don't trickle until the upstream coffers runneth over.
(Score: 4, Informative) by c0lo on Monday April 15 2019, @12:06AM (29 children)
So many words for saying "never"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @01:51AM (28 children)
You do realize that trickle down economics the the entire basis for the world monetary system? The fed gives loans to the government and a few large banks, then hopes it trickles down to everyone else.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday April 15 2019, @02:11AM (27 children)
This is from the same extraction as the 'World series', right?
Like, a thing that is American, but is presented as 'world' level.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @03:00AM (26 children)
You don't believe the dollar is the current world reserve currency? I didn't realize this was controversial.
(Score: 4, Touché) by c0lo on Monday April 15 2019, @03:41AM (25 children)
1. how's that an argument supporting the "trickle down is a world wide economic rule"?
2. for*1 [scmp.com] now*2 [reuters.com]. But*3 [scmp.com] watch*4 [newsweek.com] out*5 [almasdarnews.com]
---
*1 "China’s petroyuan is going global, and gunning for the US dollar" - Dec 2018
*2 "Exclusive: Saudi Arabia threatens to ditch dollar oil trades to stop 'NOPEC'" - sources - Apr 2019
*3 "China’s Xi Jinping, Russia’s Vladimir Putin agree to boost ties amid growing US unilateralism" - Sep 2018
*1 "Venezuela Says More Russian Troops May Arrive to Face U.S. as Syria Offers Support" - Apr 2019
*5 "Chinese army arrives in Venezuela just days after the Russian military" - Apr 2019
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @03:51AM (24 children)
I'm not sure what you are having difficulty following. The USD is the world's reserve currency, therefore whatever applies to the USD applies to the world economy. I described why the USD works according to trickle down economics in the previous post. The federal reserve loans money only to a select few very large and rich organizations (primary dealers and the USG) and hopes it trickles down to everyone else.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday April 15 2019, @04:23AM (4 children)
"Reserve currency" does not mean "national currency".
A national economy (other than the US) does not absolutely depend on USD to function - if the US feds stop issuing new money, the economy of France/Germany/Norway/China (among many others) will continue to function, thanks for asking.
Also, the wealth distribution policy does not necessary depend on whatever US fed bank does (see the Nordic model [wikipedia.org]).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @04:29AM (3 children)
You seem unfamiliar with the importance of the reserve currency, the values of all other currencies depend on it:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reserve_currency [wikipedia.org]
And anyway, all the central banks do what the BIS says they should do, so would do the same thing.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday April 15 2019, @04:54AM (2 children)
Explain to yourself how a Norse or a Chinese waits for her/his money to trickle down by US fed bank, I'm no longer interested [xkcd.com].
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @05:18AM (1 child)
It isn't at all confusing. It is very straight forward.
Fed loans to us gov, gov uses funds as collateral one way or the other for treasuries, china buys US treasuries, Chinese reserves increase, china central bank can loan out more money in its own way without losing value vs the dollar.
Did you not look at what reserve currencies are used for?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @06:44PM
All until BRICS moves away from the US dollar. Make sure you have a spare gas can. Long way from here until the next gas station.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday April 15 2019, @04:26AM
Except when it doesn't, of course, like for the people using rival reserve currencies like euros or yuan. And currency != economy.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @05:26AM (17 children)
No. You made assertions unsupported by any facts or evidence. That may be enough for you, but if you want to convince others, you need to back up your assertions with actual facts/data and reasonable, logical arguments.
You have not done so. Your statement is therefore unpersuasive. You might want to try again, but I suspect that you'll just fall back on one or more logical fallacies (argument from authority, maybe? Possibly Ad Hominem attacks?) and then slink back under whatever rock you crawled out from.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @05:40AM (5 children)
You want facts about what the federal reserve does, look at wikipedia. I really didn't expect that to be controversial, and none of the people apparently finding it controversial have gone beyond saying "nuh-uh".
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @06:18AM (4 children)
I am aware of the functions of the Federal Reserve. However, your rant (there really is no other word for it except, possibly, screed) doesn't show a link between a bank for the banks and supply-side economics.
Supply-side economics [wikipedia.org], by the way, is a more formal term for "trickle down economics."
Neither lowering taxes or reducing regulation are functions of the Federal Reserve. Perhaps it's you who should read wikipedia instead of me.
So, you made assertions unsupported by facts, and pointed the finger at an institution (regardless of how you feel about said institution) that has no role in setting the economic policies (except quite tangentially with the setting of interest rates on the securities they sell) you referenced.
While central bankers can have a significant impact on liquidity, which definitely has an impact on economic performance, that's not "trickle down economics."
Taxation and regulation policies are generally set by legislators, not central bankers.
You're not doing yourself any favors here, friend. Perhaps you should just quite while you're behind.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @06:52AM (3 children)
Once again you haven't pointed to which step is supposedly wrong.
1) federal reserve gives loan to primary dealer or treasury
2) primary dealer or treasury uses this money to buy assets or give out further loans to businesses or higher people or as collateral for more loans, etc
3) those further businesses or people spend the money, spreading it around more
This is trickle down economics. You could easily imagine a non-trickle down version where the loans are given directly to individuals.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @07:09AM (2 children)
You keep using that term.
I do not think it means what you think it means [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @07:17AM (1 child)
> " There are those who believe that if you just legislate to make the well-to-do prosperous, that their prosperity will leak through on those below. "
The idea is that when the rich have more money they spend it and it trickles down to those below. How is this different?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @07:27AM
The Federal Reserve is a private entity. It does no legislating.
Setting interest rates on the bonds they sell and lending money to banks doesn't "make the well-to-do prosperous," it's a normal part of a central bank's function and role.
"Trickle Down Economics" has a very specific meaning what you're calling it ain't that.
If you want to be taken seriously, you might consider that words have meanings, and using words that don't represent what you're trying to express will not express those ideas.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @06:08AM (10 children)
Good simple explanation here:
http://static7.businessinsider.com/henry-blodget-how-the-fed-prints-money-2009-3 [businessinsider.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @06:20AM (9 children)
Good show. That's a simplistic explanation of the Federal Reserve's role.
However, that is completely unrelated to "trickle down economics," which is something completely different.
Sigh.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @06:47AM (8 children)
It is not unrelated. As I've explained twice the federal reserve only does that for select few organizations (primary dealers plus the gov). Those organizations are then hoped to loan out the money to businesses who are expected to hire people with it, etc. This is trickle down economics.
It is very simple and should be uncontroversial...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @07:13AM (7 children)
No.
Trickle Down Economics [wikipedia.org] is:
English motherfucker! do you speak it?!? [youtube.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @07:20AM
Sorry, but I suspect you are autistic or something. Are you focusing on the word "tax"? Making the rich have more money by lowering their taxes is the same thing as just giving them cheap loans.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @07:20AM (5 children)
Or perhaps this [youtube.com] might provide you with more understanding of my point.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @07:26AM (4 children)
This is nuts, no wonder its been so ridiculously easy for me to make money via investing. People (eg you) have no idea how the financial world works at all, and are actually incapable of learning about it beyond rote memorization.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @07:33AM (3 children)
I understand the concept you're trying to get across. I'd point out that the Federal Reserve doesn't make loans to individuals.
As such, the concept to which you refer is not a part of supply-side economics.
tl;dr: you're talking out of your ass and it smells that way too.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @07:40AM (2 children)
You would point out to me the federal reserve doesn't make loans to individuals. Holy crap man, it is clear you haven't understood a single word. I feel like the rich guy in BASEketball.
And above you think it is an important point that the fed is private, once again totally irrelevant.
Rich people have more money, they spend it, it trickles down. That is the entire idea behind trickle down economics. Where the money comes from is irrelevant. That the money isn't going to individuals is exactly what makes it trickle down.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @07:56AM (1 child)
I (and now I can't get that time back. More's the pity) paid close attention.
But you haven't said anything that was worth listening to.
You made claims that are unsupported by evidence (and you still haven't provided any) and made additional absurd statements that are false on their face.
I think I've given you enough rope. Is that noose tight enough? Ciao, Baby!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @11:54AM
You didn't comprehend anything I wrote.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday April 15 2019, @01:40AM (2 children)
Nursing home owners, including investors, are citizens too... and if you think that all citizens are created equal, you should learn the new phrase: "all lobbyists' dollars have equal value."
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 4, Insightful) by HiThere on Monday April 15 2019, @05:01AM (1 child)
Actually, I don't think that's true. I think there's a concentration effect, so that if (potentially) n dollars might come from a single source they are much more influential than that same (potentially) n dollars from a source distributed among many people.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday April 15 2019, @05:21PM
That's somewhat the bird in the hand phenomenon.
1 million dollars from 1 lobbyist might be less attractive than 900,000 dollars from 3-4 lobbyists, because of the appearance of "being owned" by the one, but 900,000 dollars from 3-4 lobbyists is far more attractive than 1.2 million dollars from 50-60 lobbyists due to the cost of herding the cats, keeping everyone happy, etc. You can associate a real dollar cost per lobbyist, just from the lunch you have to attend...
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 14 2019, @11:58PM (2 children)
Which corporation is behind all the laws that generate commemorative coins?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @12:10AM (1 child)
The company that makes the plugs. What you thought the mint made them?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @01:09AM
Evidence?
(Score: 5, Informative) by NotSanguine on Monday April 15 2019, @01:16AM
about everyone's favorite telecom shill, Ajit Pai, appointing an ALEC flunkie to the FCC's Consumer Advisory Panel. [arstechnica.com]
Which is amusing, as ALEC is just a shill for corporations and actively lobby and write model legislation that shits all over consumers. Even better, Pai's panel includes exactly zero (count 'em) consumer advocates.
I was going to submit the article as a story, but I haven't gotten around to it yet.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @03:37AM (1 child)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @05:28AM
How does the old saw go? "An honest man is one who *stays* bribed."
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday April 15 2019, @05:46AM (7 children)
This is the pure, distilled essence of regulatory capture, in fact. And a bunch of small-L (and small-brained) libertarians are inevitably going to bukkake all over this thread about how this is the Invisible Hand of The Great God Mammon--'scuse me, the Free Market--at work, that this is the natural order of things, hell, that everything including lawmaking can be done harder-faster-better-stronger by private interests than government.
I wish I were joking. That's not satire up there.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @06:12AM (6 children)
As usual we find someone blaming government activity on the "free market". Government action is the opposite of free market activity.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @06:23AM
Wow. Your reading comprehension is really poor. Does that come naturally, or do you have to work at it?
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday April 15 2019, @06:36AM (4 children)
Aaaaaaand here we have exhibit A. Jesus, that didn't take long at all, now did it?
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @04:24PM (3 children)
Exhibit A is the person pointing out that you don't know the difference between free markets and government intervention?
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @05:21PM (1 child)
Just wow.
Sometimes I think we really have been infiltrated by a swarm of bots, that would be more comforting than realizing some people can't parse "US Legislators Frequently Let Corporations Write Your Laws" to understand what part the "free market" plays in this discussion.
You libertarians and conservatives need to understand that the majority of the problems the US faces today is due to the co-opting of government by corporate interests. The "deep state" is actually made up of lobbyists, and the vast majority of government waste goes to **drum roll** CORPORATIONS!
The double-think has you all so turned around that you champion the evil bastards and decry the people trying to help the average family.
Azuma, the Cassandra of SN.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday April 15 2019, @06:20PM
I'm used to being Cassandra. It happens all the time in meatspace too, to the point that I'd predicted two peoples' deaths, gotten blown off, and they were gone within 24 hours. And of course, all I got for that was estranged from several family members (back when I had family to speak of...). I only ever seem to get "warnings" about negative phenomena, and while they've saved my life almost half a dozen times, it's really wearing after a while.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 16 2019, @01:39AM
The people in the "free market" sure don't seem to believe in the free market, that's for sure.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 15 2019, @09:54PM
The situation must be improving. It used to be "...only let corporations write you laws".