Lessig For Congress?

luge writes "With the unfortunate passing of Congressman Tom Lantos, parts of Silicon Valley and San Francisco will be holding a special election in June to send a replacement to Congress. Given the area, it would be great to have someone who is both tech- and policy-aware fill the seat — and it looks like that just might happen. Lawrence Lessig has apparently bought 'change-congress.com.' A 'Draft Lessig' group is forming on Facebook, featuring some of Lessig's old co-workers at Harvard and Jimmy Wales, among others. No word from Lessig himself yet, but he's been increasingly vocal about politics of late. If it happens, it would be a huge step forward for the representation of technology in Washington."

Copyright or corruption as his platform?

IIRC, Lessig recently made anti-corruption be his struggle, rather than restoring copyright to something reasonable. On which goal(s) would he focus? I think legislators are often forced to sacrifice one ideal for another during the legislative process.

Re:Copyright or corruption as his platform?

Unreasonable copyright and denial of intellectual freedom for the sake of corporate profit is a form of corruption in my book.

Founder of Creative Commons

and board member at EFF apparently.

I'd never heard of him. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Lessig [wikipedia.org]

Re:Founder of Creative Commons

Lessig comes up all the time here - or at least, he did until he switched "causes" away from copyrights.

Not so. He was pretty clear about the fact that he feels copyright is a symptom, and the corruption disease must be tackled in order to advance rational copyright law which balances the needs of creators and consumers. He has not turned his back on copyright reform, but taken what he sees as the only viable path to the goal.

Obama + Lessig = Win

I'm leaning toward Obama a bit for President. This is mostly because when he drafted his tech policy, instead of talking to some exec at AT&T, he talked to Lessig[1]. I find this admirable.

In the potential future where Lessig runs and wins, and Obama wins, we'd have two more Slashdot Moral Values-friendly politicians in office. Of course, there's already people like Dick Boucher of Virginia.

[1] Of course, who knows how committed Obama is to his tech platform, and/or how much he'd have to compromise to appease the Congresscritters who've been bought by the telecom and copyright cartels.

Re:Obama + Lessig = Win

At least he has a tech platform. Every other candidate I've come across who's still in the race doesn't seem to have anything planned for the digital realm, other than the standard "no wiretapping without a warrant" promise of some candidates.

Obama Supporter

FEC.gov shows he donated the maximum allowance to Barack Obama's campaign. Just FYI :) .

Intellectuals in politics

Let me preface this comment by saying I am not an American, but an observer of American politics and culture. It is a sad testament to the strength of anti-intellectualist tendencies in American culture that American politicians tend to have little academic expertise on the issues pertaining to the policies they espouse (e.g. Ted Stevens' "internet = series of tubes"). The benefit provided by academic expertise is not simply the number of degrees one acquires, but dialogical engagement with other experts who dedicate themselves to finding fault in arguments (via journals, conferences, etc). Thus, the arguments presented by an academic to the general public may well be bastardized (because simplified) versions of the arguments they would present within academia, but we (the public) can assure ourselves that those arguments could be elucidated in ways that stand up to some level of harsh criticism. To put one's faith in the honesty of a politician whose views and arguments arose in an academic setting, then, is a better bet than putting one's faith in the honesty of a politician who may only be concerned with rhetorically covering up his/her true influences (e.g. pressure by lobbyists or campaign contributions). Lessig for congress is, in my eyes, a good move regardless of how much/little I may agree with him politically. This is simply because the development of his views and arguments is well documented in his books and articles, and with reference to an academic context which is accessible to anyone interested in putting the time into investigating it. As I see it, this would be a move towards transparency in government, which is a prerequisite for true democracy.

Re:Intellectuals in politics

Well, behind all the used-car salesmen and small-town accident attorneys is a fairly capable and educated bureaucracy. The fact is that if the people doing the driving are incompetent enough to only do what's most popular, you are getting the will of the people. The problem is that the PEOPLE are stupid. So, in times when the political institution is particularly weak, the bureaucracy takes over (such as after 9/11), and they have all sorts of plans to control the media, and vicariously the politicians (since they only do what's most popular).

Proof of this is readily available when you look at documentation of the CIA's activities in the early 60's. That is what happens when you give a bureaucracy carte blanc and no oversight. They invaded a country. Of course, 9/11 had some of the same effects as nuclear cold war--it instilled fear in the public, which means they are apt to press their politicians to give up power in favor of the bureaucracy. Thus we have wiretapping, prison camps, torture, etc, all existing outside of the normal decision-making process. The worst part is that the bureaucracy is run by the president. He's the chief executive and the president of all the departments and sub-departments of the bureaucracy. Congress can only make the laws that govern this body, and the judicial can only rule when a suit is brought. Thus, they have unlimited power until they get caught.

Heady stuff, no wonder people want to be president so badly.

I agree, however, that having some intelligence in the Congress would provide some leadership to the people who need it most. The problem is, all the stupid people wouldn't like him and he'd be voted out. People seem to prefer people who think at their own level, apparently.

Fantastic!

He would make an excellent Congressman and technology advocate. Personally, I think Lawrence Lessig would make for the right template to choose Congressmen. That is, they both have general competence and area-specific knowledge. Rather than the old method of electing political cronies or party insiders or business schmucks or mercenary, power-hungry lawyers, we could elect men and women who are strong contributors to our civic life and also experts in their particular field.

For instance, I would feel much better about food safety legislation designed by a Congresswoman who was an actual FDA scientist. Then I could be reasonably sure that facts played a large role in her decisions.

 

Lessig vs. Putnam

Lessig, assuming he runs and is elected as a Democrat, would provide a massive counterweight to the Republican's Adam Putnam (R-FL) on technology issues, not to mention any other current Reps living off the largesse of the intellectual propery community (RIAA, MPAA, Business Software Alliance, etc.).

I hope he runs. We need more legislators with practical life experiences who are not only experts in particular disciplines, but know enough about legal or scientific methods to form intelligent opinion based on facts on other subjects instead of voting the way the polls or campaign contributors tell them to.

I'll vote for him!

I don't live in his district, but I sent a check to Diebold and they said they registered my vote.

Lessig for SCOTUS

Lets face it. He'd fit in a lot better in the Judicial Branch...

Lessig lives in the wrong district?

Palo Alto (and Stanford) are in California's 14th District [wikipedia.org], and Lantos is from the 12th District [wikipedia.org], representing the area from San Mateo, and Redwood City north to South San Francisco, Daly City, and the southwestern portion of San Francisco. I don't think he's eligible to represent the 12th district without moving. So this would be no small matter for him to undertake.

That said, I would fully support Lessig for congress. Hopefully he can bring some knowledge and sanity to important committees.

-molo

Re:Lessig lives in the wrong district?

He actually lives in San Francisco, in the 12th Congressional District, according to a blog post from a few years ago [lessig.org]. He does still live in San Francisco, not in Palo Alto or at Stanford.

Don't Waste Out In Congress!

I think L Lessig can have more impact from outside Congress, and concentrate on issues he cares about (copyright before, corruption now), rather than waste his time politicking about in Congress on issues he doesn't care about.

Sure, maybe he could have a little more impact working from the inside, but I'm cynically afraid that he'd soon be disgusted and burnt out against the rot in there.

Re:I'd vote against him

That was over 10 years ago. What makes you think that he didn't learn form that?

Re:I'd vote against him

I'd rather vote for a guy that stood up for what I believe in and failed rather than someone who stood up for something I'm against and succeeded.

Re:I'd vote against him

That's some good thinking there, tiger. Let's not vote for the guy who tried to change US copyright law on a shoe-string budget against the wishes of the biggest and richest corporations in America. Is it at least possible that the things he learned going through that could help him to be succesful next time? Or do you win all your SCOTUS cases first time? What's that? You've never fought a case against corruption at the level of the supreme court? You've never even fought any court cases against corruption?

I don't mean to sound like a fanboy, but Lessig has proven that he's willing to fight for the things I (and likely you, this being Slashdot and all) actually care about, and you slag him because he didn't win his supreme court case! Unbelievable.

Re:Real chance?

I doubt he'd be electable in a state which contains a large percentage (if not the largest) of content providers.

Perhaps not in the Senate, but this is the House, and he's a Bay Area resident. We have a few little companies here that are full of employees who feel pretty strongly about rational technology law; you know, Google, Apple, Yahoo, and about seventy-three thousand startups. House elections are local.

Re:Real chance?

He doesn't need to be elected by the whole state, just his district. That particular district covers a big chunk of Silicon Valley, which may be the one place a candidate like that actually could get elected.

Re:Real chance?

So then what happens when the rest of the state, or the nation for that matter, votes against what he votes for? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that Congress has a significant amount of bad apples.

Re:Real chance?

I'd say elect Bill Gates.
Just coming up with bribes large enough to get his attention would bankrupt
the RIAA, MPAA, and similar mob enterprises.

Re:Real chance?

I doubt he'd be electable in a state which contains a large percentage (if not the largest) of content providers.

I disagree. He is strongly anti-piracy, and has the support of major content providers with his Creative Commons initiative. The copyright reforms he seeks to implement are geared mainly towards removing the legal barrier towards creating fair-use derivative works of content and facilitating amateur content creation. This may not be a savory notion for the big studios, but it is not a life-or-death burden on their business models, either.

Re:ESR For Congress!

Have you seen some of ESR's antics? Kudos to him for co-founding the OSI, but he's not the kind of person I'd like to see representing my district (assuming I lived in Silicon Valley of course).