Pete Ashdown on his Run at the Hill

adamdrayer writes "Wired recently conducted an interview with Pete Ashdown, the tech-minded ISP owner who is hoping for a major upset in the race for Utah's Senate seat against long-time incumbent Orin Hatch. Ashdown hopes to help pave the way for better decision-making on the Hill regarding technology. Hatch is among the more conservative politicians on the issues of 'digital privacy' and 'fair use,' while one of Ashdown's main objectives is to reform the Digital Millennium Copyright Act."

He's the perfect candidate - for 2026

[Salvance]

Given the tech savvyness of the younger generations, Politicians like Pete Ashdown are sure to become more commonplace over the next 10-20 years. Unfortunately, the vast majority of voters and capital hill aren't ready for the reform. Remember Ross Perot's "revolutionary" voting ideas? He wanted to enable people to vote in elections (and even on every congressional act) from their computers or at government kiosks. Everyone laughed at the idea, but his kooky vision is getting closer to reality.

In politics, it never seems to pay to be a visionary ... while they may eventually effect great change in how our government functions, their lack of mainstream appeal never gets them very far in the election.

Re:Polls don't look so good for Ashdown

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, it IS Utah afterall... Highest Bush/war approval ratings, etc, etc. DNC prolly figures their money is better spent in a battleground state.

That said, I'm voting for Pete.

Re:Polls don't look so good for Ashdown

[Bios_Hakr]

The reason States keep electing jackasses like Hatch and Stevens is simple: Power.

If your state has a powerful incumbent, it is in your best interest to keep him/her. Sure, you get fucked over and party-line voting, but that would happen no matter what. Dems and Repubs will *always* vote the party line on things like DMCA, USAPATRIOT, Mickey Mouse Copyright, etc. Just because you hire somebody new does not mean he'll abandon the line.

Powerful incumbents are good for your state. They have a name and can work the game in DC to get things done. Hatch and Stevens (and Kennedy and Clinton) may seem like jackasses to the other 49 States. But they bring home a lot of pork. And that means money and jobs for their State.

One way or another, your Senator *will* fuck you over. Even if the new guy promises blowjobs, hookers, and beer for everyone, does not mean he can deliver. DC will corrupt him within a few months. If they can't corrupt him, then they will turn powerful lobbyists (AARP, NRA, **AA, etc) against him; He'll soon be jobless or embroiled in a scandal.

Stop thinking you can actually change anything under the current system; you can't. How can you really push for change?

1. Term limits for House and Senate.
2. Force reps to disclose *everything* they do on a daily basis under the penalty of perjury if they lie. Meeting attendees and minutes should be published within 24 hours of a meeting on a web site available to all registered voters.
3. Force people to vote. Make voting days a Federal holiday and force employers to pay employees for that day. Count it as the cost of doing business in the USA.
4. Force campaign promises to be carried out. If a politician promises to repeal/enact $LAW, hold him to it as an impeachable offense.

Just wond'ring...

[Black Parrot]

> Hatch is among the more conservative politicians on the issues of 'digital privacy' and 'fair use'

Is that good or bad? I.e., what is the writer's notion of what makes a 'conservative' position on those policies? (Is protecting fair use conservative or progressive?)

Re:He already lost my vote

[pashdown]

You never gave an effective argument as to how the average American voter could ever hope to understand it. Voting is already pretty simple, and we're lucky to get a 25%. You want to enforce a system that most people can't pronounce, let alone understand?

Re:Polls don't look so good for Ashdown

[Shihar]

I think it is pointless to argue if the US is the "best" country in the world to live in. I am sure by some standards it is the best and by others it is not. A lot of it is simply taste. If you want to be an artist, you might find France with public funding of the arts to be a nicer place. If are into the highest tech gadgets and food in a pretty package, cost be damned, Japan might seem like a paradise.

You also need to realize that simply by living a place you taint your ability to enjoy other places. It is found that some traditional tribal folks living in a stone age culture in the middle of nowhere tend rate themselves as happier then your average cosmopolitan Joe. That might be true, but I can promise you that your average cosmopolitan Joe would be murderous to get back to his "hellish" city after spending a couple of weeks without toilet paper, Starbucks, and dentist. So, maybe the people of Norway are happy being in Norway, but that doesn't mean that you would be.

I think the larger point is this; if you live in the US, you live in a damn good place. Maybe it is or is not the best for you, but chance are if I closed my eyes and pointed to another spot and sent you there, you would be miserable. Further, a lot of human misery comes from a loss of perspective. Nothing sends me into a murderous rage more then someone wallowing in their own self pity over the trite challenges that they face in their life. Yeah, your six grade girlfriend dumping you was traumatic and all, but get a grip and stop listening to whinny music reminding you of that black day. Better one girl in 3 billion dump you then living your life in what Americans would consider a glorified sewer, suffering war, experiencing violent cultural and political oppression, or any of the other horrors regularly visited upon many people in this world.

There is nothing wrong with wanting to change the place you live in for the better and looking to other cultures for examples of how to do this, but don't lose perspective. If you are reading this post, chances are you are living in some place that isn't so bad. The challenges and the trails that you face are unlikely to kill you, and even if they are (who knows, maybe you have cancer) you are probably in one of the better places of this world to face them.

Make the world a better place, but remember that the place you currently have is well worth appreciating despite whatever faults it might have.

Re:Interesting...

[pashdown]

Nobody wants to see base closures in their home state. The question is who can best handle the economic redevelopment if the government closes the base anyway?