Maximum age limits, for obvious reasons compared to today. I’d suggest minimum age limits like the ones we have today as well (no younger than 30ish for Senate, 40ish for President, etc.)
Easier to repeal a law than pass one. I think this is really powerful and under-discussed. So far as I am aware, our current system treats passing laws and repealing them equally.
Particularly 2. Laws that prove to be bad should be easy to get rid of. In general we want to err towards less government, so design the system such that less government is easier to achieve than more government.
What this lacks:
Any real discussion of the federal bureaucracy and how it’s managed—is this completely up to the Senate? The President?
What powers are reserved to the states? What role do states play in the federal government (e.g. a constitutional amendment can come from 3⁄4 of the states currently, I think).
What I would add:
Mandatory 50-year sunset clause on all laws that are not constitutional amendments, with an option for the senate to renew a law with the same majority that passed it.
Permanent yearly IRS audit of legislators/executives/judges until they die; if it’s proven they benefited financially from their positions for ~20 years after they leave, they go straight to federal prison.
Mandatory 50-year sunset clause on all laws that are not constitutional amendments, with an option for the senate to renew a law with the same majority that passed it.
This might increases bureaucracy by creating must-pass laws where it’s easier to add new provisions.
Permanent yearly IRS audit of legislators/executives/judges until they die; if it’s proven they benefited financially from their positions for ~20 years after they leave, they go straight to federal prison.
What do you expect those people to do after they leave their job? If someone spends a decade in their job, in most cases you can argue that they financially benefit in the next job they take from that decade.
If your idea is basically that many politicians have to take minimum wage jobs after their government careers, that is going to reduce the quality of the people in office substantially.
This might increases bureaucracy by creating must-pass laws where it’s easier to add new provisions.
Perhaps. Without any kind of expiration date, though, laws will pile up like rotten code until the whole thing becomes unmanageable.
What do you expect those people to do after they leave their job? If someone spends a decade in their job, in most cases you can argue that they financially benefit in the next job they take from that decade.
I think there’s plenty of room between “used political power for personal financial benefit” and “learned things on the job that carry over to the next job”. I’ll admit there is plenty of subtlety here, which is why a full audit should be done—I wouldn’t trust any cursory scrutiny to be correct, either to the former politician’s benefit or to their loss.
I do also somewhat think that if, for instance, someone serves on a Committee that deals with e.g. Oil and Gas, they should probably not be allowed to work in that industry afterwards. There’s too much opportunity for politicians to favor industries or companies in exchange for jobs/careers/cushy benefits after the politician leaves office.
Two parts of this that I really like:
Maximum age limits, for obvious reasons compared to today. I’d suggest minimum age limits like the ones we have today as well (no younger than 30ish for Senate, 40ish for President, etc.)
Easier to repeal a law than pass one. I think this is really powerful and under-discussed. So far as I am aware, our current system treats passing laws and repealing them equally.
Particularly 2. Laws that prove to be bad should be easy to get rid of. In general we want to err towards less government, so design the system such that less government is easier to achieve than more government.
What this lacks:
Any real discussion of the federal bureaucracy and how it’s managed—is this completely up to the Senate? The President?
What powers are reserved to the states? What role do states play in the federal government (e.g. a constitutional amendment can come from 3⁄4 of the states currently, I think).
What I would add:
Mandatory 50-year sunset clause on all laws that are not constitutional amendments, with an option for the senate to renew a law with the same majority that passed it.
Permanent yearly IRS audit of legislators/executives/judges until they die; if it’s proven they benefited financially from their positions for ~20 years after they leave, they go straight to federal prison.
This might increases bureaucracy by creating must-pass laws where it’s easier to add new provisions.
What do you expect those people to do after they leave their job? If someone spends a decade in their job, in most cases you can argue that they financially benefit in the next job they take from that decade.
If your idea is basically that many politicians have to take minimum wage jobs after their government careers, that is going to reduce the quality of the people in office substantially.
Perhaps. Without any kind of expiration date, though, laws will pile up like rotten code until the whole thing becomes unmanageable.
I think there’s plenty of room between “used political power for personal financial benefit” and “learned things on the job that carry over to the next job”. I’ll admit there is plenty of subtlety here, which is why a full audit should be done—I wouldn’t trust any cursory scrutiny to be correct, either to the former politician’s benefit or to their loss.
I do also somewhat think that if, for instance, someone serves on a Committee that deals with e.g. Oil and Gas, they should probably not be allowed to work in that industry afterwards. There’s too much opportunity for politicians to favor industries or companies in exchange for jobs/careers/cushy benefits after the politician leaves office.