Coding Against Corruption (Lawrence Lessig) – ETech08

Introduced by Tim O’Reilly: “The skill of writing is to create a context in which other people can think… Internet architecture is a system in which we think.”

Lessig: Government engages in something called policy making. Very challenging but it works hard for the hard cases.

Unfortunately it often gets the easy cases wrong. Ex: Copyright. Gowers: never makes sense to extend the term of existing copyrights. But gov always extends it. Ex: junk food. The WHO tried to set standards. Recommended we only consume 10% sugars. Sugar industry went ballistic and lobbied WHO and FDA to give up the recommendation. FDA/FNB decided 25% is better. Gov has set public policy based on business interests. Ex: Global warming. Nobody in sci community disagreed with Al Gore. So the gov surveyed popular media and 53% disagreed. Junk science funded by oil industry resulting in a 10yr delay in policy. Now we’re pretty screwed. Why does Gov get simple policy wrong?

Founding fathers – Independence. Public policy makers should not be dependent on special interests. Governors should not be dependent on private and public money. Constitutions were to protect against dependency. Unfortunately, there was money dependence. Ex: Daniel Webster.

But this story is about good people. Integrity does not produce a world of independence. There is a system of inappropriate dependence on money. There is a core dynamic of an economy of influence. Money is playing a role where it shouldn’t be. Not just congress.

Ex: Pharmaceutical industry. Spends billions of dollars lobbying doctors to use a certain type of drug. “Detailing”. Now about 2.5 detailers for every doctor. “Bribes that aren’t considered bribes.” A job to constantly sway the doctors. A world of spinning drugs to benefit drug companies, not patients. Studies funded by drug companies and overwhelming bias towards the sponsor’s drugs is found, when it is not found in independent studies.

Ex: Lawyers acting as scholars. Net neutrality. Cable companies giving large amounts of money to lawyer/scholars to argue against net neutrality. Improper dependence upon money.

Ex: Congress. Problem isn’t quid pro quo bribery. Congress is better about this kind of corruption. Problem is institutional corruption. Money diverts access of congressman to particular problems. Donors get more access. There is an ingrained behavior of congressfolk to orient their behavior to support the money they get from donors. The system drives for an ever-expanding scope of regulation. Al Gore tried to de-regulate DSL & Cable. Congress disapproved because it limited their ability to get money from telecomms. Getting elected to Congress is a business model, a step towards making more money as a lobbyist.

This leads to a fundamental loss of faith in the system. The constant appearance of corruption and idiotic mistakes in simple cases. Can we afford this anymore? As long as there is a system of raising money to run elections, the failings will continue.

Many alternatives to campaign finance will not work if they are pushed inside the beltway. Congress is an incumbency machine. They influence the system to protect themselves. Ex: earmarks. Members of congress say how money will be spent in their district. Gives an extraordinary advantage to the incumbent. People give earmarks to protect re-election and benefit personal wealth.

System is designed to make the world safe for insiders. To reformers, insiders are the enemy. Reform only happens on the outside.

Technology can affect change. 1) Peer production of activism, ala Wikipedia. Ex: Sunlight Foundation – tracks earmarks; MapLight.org – track campaign donations; 2) Signaling: finding ways of identifying support for reform. Ex: Change Congress – like Creative Commons, provides a simple way for candidates to signal the level of reform they’re willing to commit to in their campaign. They can mark publicly (pledge) what type of reformer they are. Identify reform candidates and identify supporters who will commit money to them. Fond a way to tax people who don’t support reform. Encouraging prominent citizens to run against candidates who won’t take the pledge of reform, not to win but to cost the non-reformers more money to run (spin) their campaign. Attempt to change the inside political dynamic from the outside.

Alcoholism. Watching the alcoholic fall apart. The problems they face are extraordinarily bad. He (she) must solve the alcoholism before the rest of the problems can be solved. We must realize & solve the first and most immediate problem: the presence of money in the democratic process.

Different times require different heroes. Founding – lawyers. WW2 – soldiers. Now? Geeks. Talent to enable the balance of power. We need a commitment from the geeks to help leverage the rest of our society, to believe in a simple idea that government might work.

[Ed Note: What a cool guy! If Obama wins, there is a major opportunity to refrom the US political system both from the top-down (insiders) and bottom-up (outsiders).]

[Note from Q&A: Sunlight is the best disinfectant. 6 people in each district contributing heavily to a Wikipedia-style site tracking activity of their congresscritters.]