Office of the Repealer

[Anti Federalist]

One Candidate’s Idea: Office of the Repealer

By MONICA DAVEY
Published: June 12, 2010

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/13/us/politics/13repealer.html?hpw

KANSAS CITY, Mo. — In some corners of the country, people seem to have grown so grumpy about the tangle of government rules and regulations that it may be easier for politicians to promise not what they will do, but what they will undo.

Take Senator Sam Brownback, the Republican from Kansas who is hoping to become governor. In his journeys in this region lately, he has proposed a new Kansas entity, the State Office of the Repealer, whose job it would be to start disposing of all the silly, needless, over-the-top regulations that state officials have dreamed up.

“People just love this idea,” Mr. Brownback said here the other day, smiling broadly. “They feel like they’re getting their brains regulated out of them.”

Case in point, in Mr. Brownback’s telling: the rejoicing of residents in Saline County, Kan., when a strict fireworks ban was lifted there. Mr. Brownback recalled the mood: “It was kind of like, ‘I got a little piece of liberty back!’ ”

The idea of shedding archaic or dopey laws is not new, but there seems now to be a flurry of such efforts — one more sign, perhaps, of the wave of grumpiness.

In Missouri, lawmakers passed legislation this spring that repealed more than 200 sections of statutes, including some dusty ones pertaining to the regulation of steamboats, steam engines, pool halls and margarine. In Michigan, lawmakers did likewise, agreeing, for instance, to repeal statutes that had designated as crimes prizefighting and dueling.

The thought of an official designated repealer draws nods (if mildly puzzled ones) from Kansans, but aides to Tom Holland, a Democratic state senator who is also running for governor this year, sound dismissive.

“This is the same empty sloganeering Sam Brownback and Newt Gingrich did 16 years ago,” said Dana Houle, Mr. Holland’s campaign manager. “But instead of fixing Washington, Brownback’s run up deficits and doled out earmarks that benefit his financial backers.”

The political season is in full swing here, clearly. Still, details of this new Kansas Office of the Repealer remain a bit murky.

Mr. Brownback, who said he came up with the idea after traveling around Kansas with a former state lawmaker, said he had grown increasingly frustrated with the sense, in government, that “it’s always, ‘Well, we need this, we need that, we need this.’ Nothing is ever subtracted in the system.”

The repealer, he said, would not mean yet another government salary, but would come from an existing state position, reassigned to the task of elimination. Still uncertain, he acknowledged, is what the new position might cost or where it would fit, exactly, into the existing layers of government in Topeka, the state capital.

[LittleLightShining]

Read about this in the paper yesterday. It's a great idea.

[TCE]

While that is nice, ironically, it is just opening up a new government agency. Why not just go through laws yourself or have someone in the staff do it and repeal those? Another government agency is needed to shrink government...uh...what?

[LittleLightShining]

While that is nice, ironically, it is just opening up a new government agency. Why not just go through laws yourself or have someone in the staff do it and repeal those? Another government agency is needed to shrink government...uh...what?


"The repealer, he said, would not mean yet another government salary, but would come from an existing state position, reassigned to the task of elimination. Still uncertain, he acknowledged, is what the new position might cost or where it would fit, exactly, into the existing layers of government in Topeka, the state capital."

[georgiaboy]

Now there's a Czar I could support.

[jake]

Ron Paul for Federal Repealer!

[brandon]

While that is nice, ironically, it is just opening up a new government agency. Why not just go through laws yourself or have someone in the staff do it and repeal those? Another government agency is needed to shrink government...uh...what?

my thoughts exactly. wtf are they thinking?

[rancher89]

ron paul for federal repealer!

qft

[Dr.3D]

Does this mean it might someday be legal to ride a bicycle on the sidewalk again?

[erowe1]

Wow. I have to admit, I'm surprised to see this idea being touted by Sam Brownback. But, give credit where credit's due, I like it a lot. This seems like a good thing to start trying to push in our state governments.

[Cowlesy]

Does this mean it might someday be legal to ride a bicycle on the sidewalk again?

whoa whoa, slow down there, Dr. 3D. One step at a time.

[TCE]

"The repealer, he said, would not mean yet another government salary, but would come from an existing state position, reassigned to the task of elimination. Still uncertain, he acknowledged, is what the new position might cost or where it would fit, exactly, into the existing layers of government in Topeka, the state capital."

That sounds like political BS to me. You don't think the official stuck with that job is going to want more money or another couple people on his staff?

[awake]

The power of undo.

[justinc.1089]

Uhm isn't the Supreme Court supposed to act as a repealer of unconstitutional laws lol???

:confused:


Sure it has been neglecting its responsibility because since the New Deal it has come up with excuses as to how and why unconstitutional laws are constitutional, but it is supposed to actually declare those unconstitutional laws unconstitutional.

We don't need an agency or department or whatever to repeal government acts because it would further strip the Supreme Court of that responsibility.

[TCE]

Uhm isn't the Supreme Court supposed to act as a repealer of unconstitutional laws lol???

:confused:


Sure it has been neglecting its responsibility because since the New Deal it has come up with excuses as to how and why unconstitutional laws are constitutional, but it is supposed to actually declare those unconstitutional laws unconstitutional.

We don't need an agency or department or whatever to repeal government acts because it would further strip the Supreme Court of that responsibility.

This would be a state repealing its own laws. Besides, the Supreme Court was never meant to be all-powerful, the states were supposed to nullify unconstitutional laws.

[GunnyFreedom]

Well, if I could wave my magic wand and do anything I wanted to, I'd set up 3 committees, one stocked with hardcore Constitutional originalists, one stocked with Napolitano-molded justices, and one stocked with Rep & Dem moderates and radicals. Each of the three separately will be tasked with poring over every page of US Code and determining what is and is not Constitutional, each committee gets one vote per section, and once the three decide what is and what is not Constitutional, the three committees will get together and draft a set of bills to restore the Constitutional Order, which will then go to Congress for passage.

Why that composition? well, first, the constitutionalists and Napolitano-type justices would comprise a majority every time, thus making the establishment committee irrelevant, and by including an establishment committee in the process they'd be unable to accuse us of incorporating heavy bias into the process. :D

But I don't have such a magic wand, I have ZERO desire to ever run for President, and for now at least that dream will have to remain a dream LOL

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

That sounds like political BS to me. You don't think the official stuck with that job is going to want more money or another couple people on his staff?

I'll take him up on his offer if he is serious. I'm dead serious I'll go AWOL and come to Kansas and axe the entire State :p :D

PS: And I'll do it for free too!

[phill4paul]

I have ZERO desire to ever run for President, and for now at least that dream will have to remain a dream LOL

Keep it up and we'll damn well recruit you. Kicking and screaming be damned!

[Anti Federalist]

Keep it up and we'll damn well recruit you. Kicking and screaming be damned!

Seconded.

None of this, "If nominated I will not run, if elected I will not serve" crap.

[GunnyFreedom]

Keep it up and we'll damn well recruit you. Kicking and screaming be damned!


Seconded.

None of this, "If nominated I will not run, if elected I will not serve" crap.

LOL -- if it turns out that we are ever that dam desperate and we all agree that that is the best course of action, then I'd take a page out of RP's book and do it not because I wanted the job, but because I was needed to serve for the best interest of our nation and countrymen. I'm just hoping it never comes to that. My 20 year plan to restore the Constitutional order actually ends up with me in the US Senate, not the oval office. :eek:

(and yes, I actually have a full-on 20 year plan to completely fix America. My reach extending beyond my grasp much? LMAO! I'm counting on the fact that it's better to reach for Mars and end up on the moon than it is to reach for the moon and just end up falling out of the sky...)

My hope is that the 2026 Presidential election will be won by a fellow traveler... perhaps Rand Paul? Deb Medina?

[Vessol]

Why can't legislators do this already?

It kinda seems counter-productive to get rid of wasteful laws by employing someone to go over them.

What happens when there are no more wasteful laws? He's out of the job.

What idiot would want to take a job and just lose it like that? Any job is about self-preservation and keeping your job. Thus why politicians give off the illusion of "solving the problem" while they need that problem to still be there in order to justify their job.

Jus' sayin'.

[Dr.3D]

Why can't legislators do this already?

It kinda seems counter-productive to get rid of wasteful laws by employing someone to go over them.

What happens when there are no more wasteful laws? He's out of the job.

What idiot would want to take a job and just lose it like that? Any job is about self-preservation and keeping your job. Thus why politicians give off the illusion of "solving the problem" while they need that problem to still be there in order to justify their job.

Jus' sayin'.

Don't worry, they will just make up more faster than he can get rid of them.

[Icymudpuppy]

Does this mean it might someday be legal to ride a bicycle on the sidewalk again?

My letter to a city councilman on this very matter:

Hello Mr. tttttttt,

As a councilman I know will actually listen to his constituents, I would like to recommend an ordinance change.

Currently, in xxxxxx, it is illegal to ride a bicycle on the sidewalk. A friend of mine was cited just the other day by a City of xxxxxx Police Patrolman.

Besides the freedom issues here, a bigger picture on safety is more critical.

Q: What do you think happens if a bicyclist weighing 200lbs going 15mph and a pedestrian weighing 175lbs going 3 mph collide on a sidewalk?
A: A few bumps and bruises for both the cyclist and the pedestrian, maybe a few choice words, maybe a broken bone usually for the bicyclist from falling off the bike if it’s severe?

Q: What do you think happens if a car weighing 4000lbs going 30mph and a bicyclist weighing 200 lbs going 15mph collide?
A: It’s a good bet the bicyclist will be severely injured or killed, the car may have a few scratches in its paint.

Logically, do you think bicycles are more like pedestrians, or more like cars considering that our town has very few bicycle lanes?

Thank you for your attention on this matter.

[tangent4ronpaul]

I love the idea! - maybe Paul would introduce a bill to do that on the federal level.

I'd personally like to see Congress having to repeal 2 pages of legislation for every page of new law they pass. That could work out well.

Better yet, repeal it all and make Congress review every law and regulation they want back. Have a strict limit on how many laws they can bring back in a given period of time. Like one per day they work. They only work 4 days a week.

Stossel recently had a show where he was talking about how the Congressional Record was growing. It started out at one volume a year, and we now produce something like 67,000 pages a year. No wonder our lawmakers don't read the laws they are passing.

I've always wondered about that. So much in legislation today is strike everything after X work of this law and insert Y. The changed law doesn't point to the law that changed it, it's all looking back. So how do they even know what the law is? I bet there are laws where the same original text has been modified in different ways by two or more more recent laws.

-t

[Dr.3D]

My letter to a city councilman on this very matter:

Hello Mr. tttttttt,

As a councilman I know will actually listen to his constituents, I would like to recommend an ordinance change.

Currently, in xxxxxx, it is illegal to ride a bicycle on the sidewalk. A friend of mine was cited just the other day by a City of xxxxxx Police Patrolman.

Besides the freedom issues here, a bigger picture on safety is more critical.

Q: What do you think happens if a bicyclist weighing 200lbs going 15mph and a pedestrian weighing 175lbs going 3 mph collide on a sidewalk?
A: A few bumps and bruises for both the cyclist and the pedestrian, maybe a few choice words, maybe a broken bone usually for the bicyclist from falling off the bike if it’s severe?

Q: What do you think happens if a car weighing 4000lbs going 30mph and a bicyclist weighing 200 lbs going 15mph collide?
A: It’s a good bet the bicyclist will be severely injured or killed, the car may have a few scratches in its paint.

Logically, do you think bicycles are more like pedestrians, or more like cars considering that our town has very few bicycle lanes?

Thank you for your attention on this matter.

Another point to be made, is exactly where are children supposed to ride their bicycles? Do they really want children in the streets with bicycles?

[tangent4ronpaul]

hmmm... The House is talking about HR 2142 - gvmt efficiency, performance and review act. It would make the government look at every agency and program every 5 years to determine which are a waste of money or not doing what they are supposed to do. Goal - eliminate programs.

-t