Hacker News Reader

Comment by thephyber | Hacker News Reader

I would argue the end-users (voters) mostly consider this a bug while the developers (majority party legislators at the state level) consider it a feature.

Also, the founding fathers famously made it difficult for Congress to change anything, so dysfunction was definitely a feature.

View on HN

> I would argue the end-users (voters) mostly consider this a bug while the developers (majority party legislators at the state level) consider it a feature.

Voters consider the paralysis a feature when it is presenting a hostile legislative majority or executive from realizing their agenda, and a bug when it is preventing a friendly one.

> Voters consider the paralysis a feature when it is presenting a hostile legislative majority or executive from realizing their agenda, and a bug when it is preventing a friendly one.

Yes, that's what they said: paralysis is always a feature, because the legislative majority is always hostile to the people.

I think your parent was describing the nuance between "voters" and "voters who are aligned with the legislative majority", which is fair.

Not so sure about that. I suppose the original intent was to have a healthy debate around major policy decisions. It's a check against wanton liberalism or conservatism. Congress seems eager to pass spending bills and take away our privacy. They move at light speed when doing that.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com