noteworthy wrote:
I am unconvinced that meaningful progress can be made by replacing every old hand who knows all the angles with a bunch of political novices. The newbies might be less consciously corrupt, but their naïveté would expose them to manipulation from all sides.

I agree with you. I think thats just tea party sloganeering that was relevant to their (successful) 2010 election strategy. I don't think its the substantive point that is being made here (anymore that the paragraph about Palin's success fighting special interests in Alaska).

There is this perennial debate about professional versus nonprofessional politicians. Its an even bigger deal in the state level. States that have part time legislatures have groups trying to make them full time because the part timers are often directly employed the rest of the year by the special interests that they represent. States that have full time legislatures have groups trying to make them part time because they think idle hands are the devil's plaything.

Its not clear to me that either approach is preferable ... solving the wrong problem.

RE: Sarah Palin: How Congress Occupied Wall Street - WSJ.com