RE: The Fuzzy Criteria Problem

[Jay Oliver <jaydeeo@aol.com>]

I will confess to being a "small-L" libertarian in my politics, but resisting the temptation to go further off-topic, I'll stick to the subject at hand.

You ask, "Are human beings really inherently corrupt, and is that the essence of who we are? Is that really the animating spirit of the Declaration of Independence, or of the Constitution?"

I'll counter by suggesting that assuredly this seems to be the strong belief of many who argue the hardest FOR campaign funding reform!  Is it not they who question the motivations and demonize special interests and individuals with whom they disagree?  Is it not they who distrust their own elected politicians' ability to resist corruption by these "bad" special interests?  In the case of the politicians, do not they seem actually to distrust not only each other, but even themselves?

Indeed, it seems that most, if not all, of the reforms under consideration today, whether in the original McCain-Feingold bill, or as successful or unsuccessful amendments to it, are of the form, "Thou shalt NOT - (fill in favorite no-no here)."

Using your own words, "If we assume vice, we'll get lots of it . . . " I'll suggest that to me this does capture quite well the view held both by the original pre- and post-Watergate campaign reformers, who got us into this mess, and today's would be counterparts.

I agree that working together is desirable, but it's a lot easier to agree on positive, rather than negative formulations.

I would like to see such positive "reforms" as; making it easier for third parties to participate in elections, allowing more freedom of _expression_ during election campaigns, rather than less, making it easier for citizens to practice at least some direct democracy, via referenda and recalls, rather than less, making voter registration procedures quicker and easier.

So, maybe I'm not quite as negative in my outlook as you might suspect.

Finally, concerning your question quoted above, I can't resist adding the following.  In large measure, the Declaration of Independence is a laundry list of the depredations against liberty by the British "big government" of the time.  Also, significantly large parts of The Constitution and Bill of Rights consist of what the new Federal government is NOT permitted to do to its citizens' rights.  Perhaps part of these documents' "animating spirit" had a bit of a negative worldview too ;<)