Against too-clever-by-half political science cynicism

There’s a long tradition in political science of skepticism regarding proposed quick fixes in politics. For example: term limits sound good but they weaken the legislature and reduce voter choice. Jungle primaries sound fair but they encourage insincere voting. Campaign finance rules sound like a good idea but donors can always get around them. Anticorruption laws might sound necessary for preserving political integrity, but ultimately politics is all about favors so why single out certain practices and label them as bribery? Gerrymandering sounds bad but it’s all part of the political process. These arguments typically follow the patterns of anti-reform arguments noted by Albert Hirschman: perversity, futility and jeopardy. From wikipedia: – According to the Perversity Thesis, any purposive action to improve some feature of the political, social, or economic status quo only serves, perversely, to exacerbate the very condition one wishes to remedy (compare: Unintended consequences). –…