Why not to move to DC and become a lobbyist

Declan McCullagh declan at well.com
Tue Nov 13 19:21:53 PST 2001


Faustine says:
>There's no reason you can't keep your hardcore beliefs to yourself while
>doing the most rigorous and objective analysis you can. 

This is an attractive, but, alas, naive plan.

So your closeted-libertarian-analyst presents a "rigorous and objective
analysis" saying raising the minimum wage will put people out of work?
Your opponents will present someone who argues otherwise. Your analyst
says that gun control saves lives? Opponents will ring up Handgun Control.
Your analyst says that his interpretation of the Commerce Clause
is the correct one? Someone else will cite chapter and verse otherwise.

That's even assuming you get equal time, which naturally doesn't
happen. DC is a two-party town, and GOP leaders like the size of
government just about where it is now. Oh, they might argue it should
be reduced five percent at the margins, but the big-government fans
still are griping about ONE minor federal agency (OTA) getting axed
years ago, so you won't get very far. Look what happened to the 1994
"Republican revolution." Let's not even talk about what some of the
expansionist Dems (and some GOPers) would do. Paging Sen. Feinstein...

The reality is that sober arguments have little traction in DC. (If
they did, we wouldn't be where we are now.) The currencies are votes,
money, celebrity. If you can't spend any of those in massive amounts,
don't bother showing up.

> Sadly enough, you're probably right.
> But isn't it about time somebody started trying? I think so.

Again, you're naive. Cato, CEI, IHS, IJ, have tried. Victory is
not exactly expected anytime soon.

Might as well write code, as someone once said.

-Declan


----- End forwarded message -----





More information about the cypherpunks-legacy mailing list