SAN FRANCISCO--Whether Barack Obama keeps his job after
Tuesday or Mitt Romney starts measuring for new White House drapes,
gridlock is likely to continue in Washington, according to the president
and CEO of the Semiconductor Industry Association (SIA).
Brian Toohey, in an interview just before election day, described the
divisive politics inside the Beltway and a political environment "as
dysfunctional as I've ever seen it." But, he says, technology sector
policy initiatives offer members of both political parties a rare
opportunity to find common ground.
Calling semiconductor-industry issues "non-partisan," Toohey said, "None
of our issues have a natural political edge to them, if managed
appropriately. Because we had so many new members in this Congress, we
have spent a lot of time with freshmen members explaining who we are and
what our technology represents. We've had success and there's very good
reason to be optimistic about continuing to advance our priorities
after the election."
But he added, "The system's very divisive. For our industry, what I
continue to hear from CEOs is the uncertainty created by the deadlocked
political environment-- investment is delayed, hiring is dragged down,"
The biggest issue facing every industry in some form right now is the
so-called "fiscal cliff" in which budget cuts and tax increases will be
triggered in January unless Congress acts otherwise. "It's critical
that leaders in both parties come together to address the fiscal cliff
promptly in order to ease economic uncertainty," Toohey said.
"Every new law is a lost freedom."
It's true JR, but the other extreme is anarchy. Surely, the law against knocking fellow citizens on the head and taking their belongings is probably a good one.
The problems is what you and others were implying that rather than relying on a simple set of sensible laws current governments (including mine in Australia) keep tinkering with the details and create an overly complicated and cumbersome system where the original intention is more or less lost.
If the basic principle of the law is correct and it is clearly defined, there shouldn't be a need to update laws just because a new technology came around. A good example is privacy. If privacy is breached, it shouldn't matter what technology is used effect it.
Another problem is the "law industry" where the more complicated the law system is, the better opportunities it presents for them. It's not hard to imagine (or see!) the result.
I think it's also fair to say, the implications are never easily predictable for that exact reason, so we need a system that can react and change. It's futile to think you can examine all outcomes. A gridlocked system is not productive in the long run. It will require contuned cooperation between goverment and industry leaders.
@Daryl.H, indeed you're correct. But how do we square that in a time when technology moves at a pace that far outraces the ability of the legislative and executive branches to consider its implications. Still good? (Thanks for writing, by the way!).
Grid lock is good. The founding fathers wanted the government to move slow. From my point of view, the slower the better. We have so many laws that the normal citizen cannot step out of their front door without breaking the law. These CEO’s that go to the Washington trough to get money or “special favors” is ridiculous. Lobbyists are a part of our republic but having a grid locked government prevents more stupid legislation. Sure wish we would have had grid lock when the Obamacare bill came forward, how many more jobs would have been created without that load stone around small businesses neck. Again grid lock is good… very good…..
Join our online Radio Show on Friday 11th July starting at 2:00pm Eastern, when EETimes editor of all things fun and interesting, Max Maxfield, and embedded systems expert, Jack Ganssle, will debate as to just what is, and is not, and embedded system.