Hacker News Reader

Comment by anigbrowl | Hacker News Reader

Odd that the article doesn't mention parties at all, although perhaps this was in an attempt to avoid accusations of partisanship that might ensue from stating facts.

Anyway, a quick look at https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/6028... indicates that all 4 sponsors of the bill are Republicans. The Actions tab seems to indicated that the bill got only 12 minutes of debate before being passed,; I hope this is an artifact of how the page is updated rather than the actual time spent on considering it.

View on HN

The article doesn't mention parties because it's irrelevant. A bad bill is bad on its merits, not because of who has brought it about.

For those of us at home who need to decide which team to root for its very much relevant when and what bills a party sponsors.

their point was that both parties pass those laws. TPP and first-to-file passed under Obama.

it's so tiring.

Is there truly that much remaining to consider before marking your next ballot?

Ignoring power politics doesn't make them go away

But calling them out in a partisan may disincentivize half of the people to understand the issue.

If those people want to treat political parties like sports teams then they aren't likely going to contribute much to the discussion

A large portion of that half will continue to want the wrong thing anyway.

Parties were not called out and a large amount of ensuing Othering is happening anyway. Arguably, that proves that the EFF was sound in their decision to mitigate that by not calling out the parties/politicians in hopes to keep the focus on the bill itself, doesn't it? I've long suspected that we humans tend to lose the plot so often because we want to immediately sort everyone into buckets as though compartmentalizing them brings about complete understanding of the issue on the table.

I love not informing the electorate!

The identity of the people who crafted the bill is the second most relevant thing besides the bill itself.

Agreed, it's a signal of intention based on past behaviors of the "authors" (quoted because it's often lobbyists who write the bill).

It’s relevant, because you shouldn’t vote for politicians who make bad policies, and most party members tend to vote with their party.

Unfortunately, the Democrats haven’t demonstrated themselves to be much better (at least, I’m not aware of them opposing copyright).

> the Democrats haven’t demonstrated themselves to be much better

Some introduce awful stuff, but the party isn't run like the mafia, so they fail to pass nearly as much. Republicans are handed down orders and they follow. No attempt to represent the people that elected them. Vassals to the end.

In 2026, a discussion of a bill proposing to make an existing position into a presidential appointee is very different if that bill was proposed by Democrats or Republicans. To pretend otherwise is to ignore virtually all of the current administrations actions.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com