Main Page Contact Register Log In

Fair point, we're probably well past the point of diminishing returns on legislative detail; reactive approaches suit present conditions better.

There's also the option of empowering the executive branch to work out the details, which has its own issues, but at least that's kind of what the executive branch is for. If the choice is between resting discretionary power with the executive or with the judicial, the former is probably more legitimate.

Or a libertarian type might say that laws that can't be written simply and clearly shouldn't be written at all--that if 20,000 pages isn't enough to anticipate every contingency of Obamacare, that's a reason not to have Obamacare.

If quite easy to make general calls like:
"Laws should cover every case." It's harder to see how that produces increased bureaucracy.

As a result we live in an age where everybody is for reducing bureaucracy but most people advocate policies that increase it.
It's quite worthwhile to judge policy proposals by their effects instead of by their intentions.
Replies (0)