From the FCC to SEC to CDC lobbying and rotating door hiring practices, is it possible to engineer a legal framework to ensure public trust in our institutions?
I like the point that you make that stopping corruption isn't just import to stop corruption, but by stopping corruption you bolster institutional legitimacy, which is necessary for the government to get people to do things they might not want to do.<p>(It's hard to get anybody in government to take the legitimacy problem seriously, however, because they don't get it that people legitimately think there is a legitimacy problem.)
So long as the government can basically pick the winners/losers in the marketplace, there's an incentive for corruption. Whatever checks and balances and regulations are instituted to defend against this just serve as a feedback mechanism to increase the price for crooked behavior.<p>The only solution to this are systems like free markets, or as close to this as you can get. Winners and losers have to be freely chosen by quality and price in the marketplace. Corruption can't exist if there's no ability to buy anything of value.
I don't think it is possible to fix corporate capture in a capitalist nation.<p>Let's take a look at IRS, IRS could bring in a lot more money, however, they simply do not have the funds to go after the big fish. Seems like its been getting gutted for a reason. While, politicians can continue screaming TAXES BAD, rich give you jobs.
Article about the problem:
<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/03/sunday-review/tax-rich-irs.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/03/sunday-review/tax-rich-ir...</a><p>FDA has its own problems. There have been a lot of issues with drugs making it the market with poor research and/or results.
Article from PBS: <a href="https://www.pbs.org/newshour/health/fda-increasingly-approves-drugs-without-conclusive-proof-they-work" rel="nofollow">https://www.pbs.org/newshour/health/fda-increasingly-approve...</a><p>Drug companies even have their hands in education. Here is an article about a lecture which discusses some of the issues: <a href="https://ethics.harvard.edu/event/drug-companies-and-medicine-what-money-can-buy" rel="nofollow">https://ethics.harvard.edu/event/drug-companies-and-medicine...</a><p>Money gives an individual/corporation power. If you are extremely wealthy individual you are a lot more likely to avoid punishment for doing things, which are illegal. Some large companies have more cash than whole countries. It is mind boggling.<p>We as individuals are generally NOT FREE at all. Doctors? Surgeons? Engineers? Youtubers? Researchers? We are just slaves of the system and we generally cannot express ourselves completely because making $200k doesn't mean we have financial freedom. It means we have a decent existence and nice things, then maybe one day we reach financial freedom. Therefore, people who write the checks have influence and that may affect our judgment.<p>I recently read about a physician that was reporting a drug was causing heart attacks. First he contacted the drug manufacturer, then the FDA, then the news because nobody cared. The drug maker funded a discrediting campaign. His bosses were having talks with him. He was concerned he would lose everything he has worked for.<p>I believe until we are truly free we will never be able to be completely honest. At that point money can just fund discredit campaigns and our voice wont matter to the general public.
It seems to me that to do something like this, you'd need the people who stand to benefit most financially to regulate against their own financial interests. The public interest <i>should</i> come first, but it rarely seems to.