What is Hypocrisy?

Ted Frank, blogging at Overlawyered, has an interesting post on hypocrisy.  Check it out.

My take: I'm suspicious of a person whose words and actions are incongruent.  If a person claims to be a tort reformer, but himself files frivolous lawsuits, then I wonder if the person really supports tort reform.  So while the person might not be a hypocrite, his actions would make me wonder what ulterior motive he has for "supporting" tort reform.

Similarly, if someone like former Senator John Edwards claims to love the poor, I have to wonder why he devotes so much time to accumulating wealth - especially when he has made enough to retire for several lifetimes.  A person's words and deeds should generally overlap.

So while I'm not sure it's appropriate to call an alleged tort reformer who files lawsuits a hypocrite, it is appropriate to question that person's motives for "supporting" tort reform.  If a person really cared about fixing a problem, why would he work to make the same problem worse?  If John Edwards really cared about the poor, why is he spending most of his time making himself rich?

The answer, of course, is this: Most politicians "support" tort reform because they have been paid off by big companies.  Most politicians who "support" the poor do so to get elected - and thus accumulate personal power.  When a person cannot obtain more power with the tort-reform or support-the-poor gig, then he will find another way to serve his interests.  In the case of Trent Lott, he'll file lawsuits.  In the case of John Edwards, he'll "sell out" to a large consulting company.

[Ed's note: I used John Edwards and Trent Lott to keep things politically balanced.  Also, I want to be clear that I do believe people like Ted Frank and Walter Olson (unlike most politicians) actually support tort reform as an intellectual matter.]

Comments

[Aaron]

I understand where you are coming from, but the Edwards comment strikes me as a red herring - I don't see how advocating for the poor is inconsistent with seeking out highly paid work, nor do I believe that somebody who feels strongly about a particular issue needs to make it the center of his life in order to maintain credibility. The argument seems to require the assumptions that there's a limited pot of money from which to get rich, and that you can only become rich by taking from the portion otherwise reserved for the poor.

[Ted]

I agree with Aaron. By the time he dies, Bill Gates will have done more for the poor than just about any other given human being on this planet, and certainly more than John Edwards will in his lifetime, even if Edwards quit his job at an investment firm and worked on poverty policy full time. There are few better ways to help the poor on a large scale than wealth accumulation and disbursement through creation of consumer surplus.

There isn't a single reformer who argues that lawsuits should be abolished. I'm not even aware of a reformer who opposes lawsuits that efficiently deter corporate misbehavior; the argument of reformers is that the status quo litigation system does not do this. The act of filing a lawsuit isn't necessarily inconsistent with reformers' stated goals; that a reformer files a legitimate lawsuit isn't even a double standard, much less hypocrisy.

I know and have met numerous politicians who support liability reform because they recognize the system is broken and want to improve it. I know and have met numerous politicians who seek to gain power because they wish to help the poor, rather than the other way around.

This attack on motivations is pointless. If a politician propounded policies that actually helped the poor or improved the legal system, I wouldn't care what her personal motivation for doing so is. Similarly, if a politician propounds counterproductive policies that hurt the poor, and refuses to budge from those positions, it's irrelevant that his motives are pure of heart. Some of the worst policies in US history have come about because of misguided intentions.

[Mike]

Get rich and give it away. Sure, that's certainly one way of doing things. And, actually, it's what I hope to accomplish.

I doubt Edwards, unlike Bill Gates and other captains of industry, is going to give much, if anything, away.

Of course, we'll see.

[Ivan]

He could be filing frivolous lawsuits so people hear about them and are more in favor of supporting tort reform. You know, like Republicans in Congress have been pushing for higher spending and lower taxes to "starve the beast," so we run out of money and have to cut spending. All right, so maybe that's not the best example...