Comments on: Dark Chambers

By: Phil Eckelkamp

Phil Eckelkamp — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 21:51:08 +0000

Vroman,
I’m not sure I could point to someone specific now. I would have been able to point to Onder or Jackson when they were in the house but that is only because I knew them and was very familiar with their voting records. This may be a case of where lack of evidence does not mean lack of proof. I simply don’t know that many legislators anymore. I’m sure that there are some though.

By: vroman

vroman — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 22:20:53 +0000

I am not universally anti-politician (only nearly so). Id clearly excuse Ron Paul from any purges. If there are more guys like him in elected office I’d like to know about it. So, can you show me MO-level specific pols with comparable philosophical consistency and voting records? I am skeptical such people exist, but I’d be happy to be proven wrong.

By: Phil Eckelkamp

Phil Eckelkamp — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 19:02:04 +0000

vroman,
I’m sorry that you seem to have such a negative view of our legislators. I don’t think i’ll engage in a full debate about why our laws are the way they are but I can say that for a long time I believe things were done in a way that was not productive and expanded the state power. There have been a lot of good things done recently that have given power back to the citizens. I think there are some people that don’t really understand the traditional role of government but at the same time there are a few who do. It is those few that I had the privilege of being surrounded by. I was not a young ignorant page either, I was right down in the muck with the rest of them trying to get laws passed and shrink the size of government.

By: vroman

vroman — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 17:00:36 +0000

if our state representation is so noble, then explain how 99% of our laws are counter-productive, unconstitutional, self-serving, or just ridiculous. Are they stupid? despite their good intentions they just can’t figure it out? Or are they evil, and put on a good face of statesmanship for the benefit of their young pages?

By: Phil Eckelkamp

Phil Eckelkamp — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 16:30:49 +0000

vroman,
I do have a lot of faith in legislators because i’ve been privileged to work with a number of them personally. They are not ALL as selfish and power hungry as you might believe. A lot of them, Reps, senators and statewide really do have a good heart and are willing to make sacrifices to serve.

By: vroman

vroman — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 02:33:10 +0000

you guys really have commendable faith in the good intentions of politicians.

laws are passed bc they are in the best interest of law-passers, regardless if a logical argument can be expediently presented against them, at the time of voting or ever.

By: Clovis Ouangraoua

Clovis Ouangraoua — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 21:29:29 +0000

To reply to your comment, a very short time ago, Dave walked to my desk and asked me if I knew that in fact, legislators barely pay attention to a peer, when he’s on the tribune speaking to them at the house… They keep conversing with each other, discussing topics that range from the issue being addressed by the speaker, to areas that have nothing to do with the current debate. To tell you that they keep themselves pretty busy. Now, give them computers and a World Wide Web, and expect them to dive in this virtual world, a sure way to keep them busier, and like I said, get ready to extend your deadlines.

By: Phil Eckelkamp

Phil Eckelkamp — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 20:49:57 +0000

Clovis,
I have to disagree with you on your point. I understand that the internet can be a distraction but that is no reason for the senate to remain in the dark ages. Surem you might have some people on facebook or looking at espn.com but is that really a reason not to have the proper tools at your disposal when you need them.

Wilson,
I know the Senate has it’s traditions and that they are proud (to a fault) of them. I think my rebuttal to your point that information is hard hard to access is no reason for there not to have tools available. “Pure Debate” should involve all three elements of debate (logos, pathos, and ethos) Now I’m sure that there is a full supply of ethos and Pathos, so why would you then limit the logos? Additionally pure debate should be a free flowing of all information not one that has to rely on improperly recalled information. Nor should “pure debate” be scripted.
I realize the chances of actually coming out of the dark ages is slim but at least I can hope that the Missouri senate will understand that we are in a very wired age and they should utilize it as a resource.

By: Wilson

Wilson — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 15:46:07 +0000

Phil, the Senate is much different from the House. The Senate values history and tradition as opposed to logic and as you probably know has hundreds of unwritten rules. It’s unlikely for the Senate to break tradition and allow anyone to use a laptop.

The Senate holds “pure debate” in highest regard… Not researching rebuttals in the endless maze of information. Right or wrong, facts aren’t always available, and that knowledge goes into your routine and preparation.

By: Clovis Ouangraoua

Clovis Ouangraoua — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 09:32:50 +0000

Not that I’m attempting an explanation, but you seem to minimize all the implications that should arise from the use of the said device. I m not saying that a laptop won’t rush the process nor give you a break from running through stairs trying to reach out to your policy maker with your info, but the question is: Can you maintain a focus in the debate when you have 400 computers with people allowed to browse the whole web, eager to land on the right article..? How much work can you really accomplish, and not divert the attention, in such an environment? Would you still be meeting your deadlines, waiting on people to explore all the search engines that the web could design, just to pull the right document or page?
Not quite evident. Great improvements require consequent solutions to address the shortcomes. With proper usage procedures,and website content restrictions, it could be a great tool for improvement and excellence.