cousin_it comments on Backward Reasoning Over Decision Trees - Less Wrong

60 Post author: Yvain 30 June 2012 03:17AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (57)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: komponisto 28 June 2012 09:43:12AM *  2 points [-]

Art of Strategy describes a debate from 1990s US politics revolving around so-called “line-item veto” power, the ability to veto only one part of a bill....During the '90s, President Clinton fought pretty hard for this power, which seems reasonable as it expands his options when dealing with the hostile Republican Congress.

Just for the benefit of those who don't know the history (and won't bother to click on the Wikipedia link), it should be noted that the Republican Congress happily gave Clinton this power (perhaps not so surprising after reading this post!), but it was struck down by the Supreme Court (which functions as America's House of Lords -- kind of a mirror image of how the actual House of Lords used to function as Britain's Supreme Court).

Comment author: cousin_it 28 June 2012 09:59:21AM *  2 points [-]

it should be noted that the Republican Congress happily gave Clinton this power (perhaps not so surprising after reading this post!)

Sorry, why is that not surprising? In Yvain's example, Congress ends up worse off as well.

Comment author: komponisto 28 June 2012 10:37:50AM 1 point [-]

True; I should have said "less" surprising rather than "not so". (The point being that it's not the lopsided pure transfer of power to Clinton that it naïvely seems to be at first.)