

Why Developers Should Run for Congress - cjoh
http://infovegan.com/2010/07/19/why-developers-should-run-for-congress

======
edanm
From the article: "developers are certainly better public communicators than
lawyers are."

Really? Paul Graham certainly is, but I'm willing to bet that the average
programmer is _not_ as good a communicator as the average lawyer. At least not
to "normal" (non techie) people.

By the way, this article brings up something I've been wondering for a while:
who impacts the world more, technologists or politicians? At the edge cases, I
think (but am not sure) that it's the technologists (Bill Gates has certainly
had quite an impact, I'm guessing more than most Presidents, even). I'm
wondering about the average cases of, say, successful entrepreneurs versus
elected officials.

~~~
cjoh
Try reading a piece of legislation vs a piece of technical documentation and
see who the better communicator is.

~~~
edanm
Yes, but consider that legislation is like a piece of code going into a legacy
system that's been around for over 200 years, and is supposed to be as
accurate as computer code in what it means. It is _not_ an easy system.

------
plinkplonk
In my experience, most good devs have no head for politics. The kind of
thinking needed to thrive in politics is very different from that needed to
write good code.

The best politicians combine a cold blooded ruthlessness and extreme ambition
with some idealism. The worst don't have the idealism, or are actively evil.
Most good politicians are extroverts who love meeting people and are very good
at organizational wheeling and dealing and power plays.

Most devs are the opposite of all that, and the few who do have some political
skills end up as CEOs and such. By and large, developers can't even handle
office politics. Legislative politics is to office politics as a knife fight
in a dark alley is to a pillow fight.

~~~
jbooth
Well, in legislative politics, at least the politics are the point and to be
expected. Having served in a low-level elected role at one point, I vastly
preferred that politics to office politics, which seem to be a way of
equalizing the playing field for people who don't actually have skills.

~~~
cjoh
My old boss said something wise I reflect on often: "Clay, you're just not
political enough to work in a company. You should try politics."

2 years later I was lead programmer of the Dean campaign.

------
pg
Never. It would be like working for a big company, but more so.

~~~
tansey
Think of all the amazing campaign slogans you could have though:

* "PG - He's for me!"

* "Paul Graham - He's the man!" [sic]

* "No more DC slackers, we want YC hackers!"

* "Paul Graham: Invest in America"

* "PG: Bringing the 'start' back to Capitol Hill!"

Related note: I'm available for campaign management jobs. :)

~~~
zck
"Garbage collect Congress!"

------
schacon
I did actually run for Congress a few years ago
([http://www.politicsandtechnology.com/2005/10/scott_chacon_fo...](http://www.politicsandtechnology.com/2005/10/scott_chacon_fo.html)),
so I can tell you as a developer and having been a political candidate, that
being a developer is much, much easier.

I'm a relatively outgoing person for being a software developer - I do a lot
of public speaking and so forth, but putting yourself up as a political
candidate is incredibly stressful. You have to be an expert in everything -
tech issues, yes, but also farm issues, banking issues, environmental issues,
taxes, poverty, unemployment, zoning, etc. It involves walking door to door
and telling people face to face that they should trust you and give you their
vote and hopefully money and time. You have to ask people for money - all the
time. You are asking for a job representing everyone around you, so it's hard
to relax - you feel like you're slacking when you should be asking for votes
or money or studying the issues.

It's also helpful to be very, very partisan. If you're moderate, the people
that volunteer for causes like yours will seem extreme for you and saying that
people on the other side are not horrible people can lose you volunteers. You
have to juggle that. If you think office politics or developer cliques are bad
or distasteful, wait until you see what the political circles are like.
Everyone has an opinion (including people like us) and knows how everything
should be run. When you don't do what they suggest, they might leave.

I love the idea - obviously I invested a lot of my time in it. I think
technology can seriously improve our governance for the better and having tech
aware legislators would be a good thing. However, before you do it, know what
you're getting into. People think politicians are corrupt and stupid, but in
general I think they're mostly smart, hard working and want to honestly help.
Running for office is complex, stressful and trying. Before you throw your hat
into the ring, contact someone you like, volunteer your time, help them
understand these issues, build them these tools and convince them they are
worth it. You might be surprised how approachable many of them are. Then, if
you still feel the need to replace them, go for it. And let me know, I'd love
to hear about it.

------
stcredzero
Conspiracy:

A 2nd-tier nation wants to become a major power in the middle to late 21st
century. The real oligarchical powers that be in that nation bring about the
following:

    
    
        - substantive emphasis on education
        - sane Intellectual Property laws
        - entrepreneur-friendly tax laws somewhere on their territory 
        - lots of developer/tech-savvy legislators
    

The last point is the crucial one going forward. The first 3 points are the
advantageous policies one can foresee now. The developer/tech-savvy
legislators will know the right thing to do in the unforeseeable future.

~~~
hugh3
Ah, I am reminded of an old syllogism (stolen and modified from Cvltvre Made
Stupid, one of my favourite books growing up):

1\. Society should be run by the most qualified people

2\. I am a tech-savvy software developer

3\. Therefore, society should be run by tech-savvy software developers.

~~~
stcredzero
Shoving words into my mouth? I am not saying this nation should be entirely
run by the tech-savvy. I'm saying that there should be representation for that
sort of expertise amongst its legislators.

If the doctors of country X noted that there was a disturbing misunderstanding
of medical issues in the legislature, I don't think they'd be unreasonable to
suggest that perhaps a few representatives with medical degrees would help.

------
Jun8
Electing PG would be cool beyond words but I say "God, no!"

If he goes over there he will most likely be incapacitated by politics and
most of his time will be taken by useless committee meetings, etc. I think he
is doing _much_ more good as in his position right now. It wouldn't be too
much to say, I think, that he (with his excellent colleagues, of course)
singlehandedly changed how people thought about early stage tech funding and
incubators.

------
lionhearted
I don't vote because I think the way the system is set up with the Democrat
and Republican parties being the only legitimate candidates is corrupt, the
federal government greatly exceeds its legal and moral authority, and I don't
want to appear to grant any legitimacy or my blessing to this farce of a
process. I don't feel beholden to it, nor do I wish to control it. My personal
feelings are that I'll support the few legitimate, non-bureaucratic, non-
corrupt aspects of the system while the rest of the system can get tossed.

But I might rethink that if Paul Graham somehow got on a ticket. America needs
engineers and honest businesspeople running the show instead of lawyers and
activists.

~~~
tansey
You want non-lawyers drafting laws? There's a good reason why most congress
people are lawyers. The law is very tricky and English is an ambiguous
language that needs to be made crystal clear from a legal standpoint (which
typically becomes unreadable to laypeople).

That said, I do think there's a place for engineers that happen to be
interested in law and passionate about government. I would appreciate it if
maybe 10% of congress were former engineers/scientists/developers.

Also, not voting is what corrupt politicians want you to do. Vote for a
candidate you do support, even if you know they won't win.

~~~
zargon
"Corrupt politicians" is a tautology. I don't vote because I don't consent to
mob rule, and I refuse to participate in forcing my preferences on other
people using the violence of the state.

~~~
CapitalistCartr
That's why we don't have 'mob rule', i.e. Democracy in the USA. Instead we
have a constitutional republic.

~~~
zargon
I find it interesting that people leap to correct/redefine the usage of a word
so that they can ignore the meaning of a statement.

~~~
CapitalistCartr
No, that is the crux of his statement. Complaining about a situation as it
doesn't exist, is akin to a straw man.

~~~
zargon
I didn't know that the term was considered a synonym 'democracy', and was
using it in a more general sense. The main link between the two seems to be
usage along the lines of the Jefferson quote. Saying that a democracy is a
type of mob rule doesn't make it the only type of mob rule.

Whether the mob is every citizen or just the citizens that wear majority-
approved costumes doesn't change the meaning I was trying to convey.

------
cookiecaper
I'm pretty sure most developers would get really frustrated with the
aribtrary, corrupt, stacked system almost immediately and just quit. It's like
getting a program in VBA or something; you don't even try to support it, just
hook up something sane immediately.

