Unfortunately studies show that lawmaking in the U.S. does not reflect public opinion and interests except for the top % of richest people.<p>In the face of this reality, direct action exposing publicly funded papers to the public kind of makes sense.<p><a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.bbc.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;blogs-echochambers-27074746" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.bbc.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;blogs-echochambers-27074746</a><p>&quot;A proposed policy change with low support among economically elite Americans (one-out-of-five in favour) is adopted only about 18% of the time,&quot; they write, &quot;while a proposed change with high support (four-out-of-five in favour) is adopted about 45% of the time.&quot;
On the other hand:
When a majority of citizens disagrees with economic elites and&#x2F;or with organised interests, they generally lose. Moreover, because of the strong status quo bias built into the US political system, even when fairly large majorities of Americans favour policy change, they generally do not get it.
They conclude:
Americans do enjoy many features central to democratic governance, such as regular elections, freedom of speech and association and a widespread (if still contested) franchise. But we believe that if policymaking is dominated by powerful business organisations and a small number of affluent Americans, then America&#x27;s claims to being a democratic society are seriously threatened.