Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

That's interesting. But wouldn't it be better to pass a law to do this, rather than relying an executive agency's regulations, which may change at their will and be interpreted as they please each time the government changes hands?


sort by: page size:

That's true - these things might be better implemented as regulations out of the Executive branch - but that would still require legislation authorizing somebody to implement the regulations.

Sure, but that usually requires an act of Congress. You can’t just pass it as an administrative rule.

If the government could do that it would mean that legislators were elected that passed such a law. It's not a credible hypothetical, IMO. And even if it were, there would be recourse in the form of electing different legislators at the next opportunity.

This would not be a law, and an agency cannot issue laws as it goes directly against the constitution. This would be a regulation, which is specifically the purpose of Federal Agencies. It is onerous, slow, and ineffective to have congress pass small laws for every little thing that needs to be regulated. Instead Congress creates agencies with a charter defining the scope of what they have purview over, and the agency then creates regulations on what it deems fit. These can be challenged in federal court, which is specifically what I've been mentioning

Perhaps it could be mandated by legislation or executive order.

I think executive orders could fit the bill. Also, there's existing legislation which already covers that matter. Plus, you can add a limit to the delay of a bill if it's for the necessity of govt operations like appropriation bills.

They already do that now, there's even a defined procedure for it. They just do it after the law has already passed.

Seems like it would be a way to make such regulation work if so.

Are you envisioning Congress doing this? (Seems unlikely.) Or how else would it be implemented?

A quick google suggests the government has done this before, (Executive Orders 10479, 11246). Admittedly I've done very little reading around the subject, so I'm unsure if it's relevant in this context or not, but figure it's worth adding to the conversation in case it is. Please shoot it down if it's not!

I'm surprised this isn't codified in the law instead of left up for administrative regulation.

What I find fascinating is why government should have such an authority to be able to mandate this.

If there are gov. regulations to enforce it...

Might as well formalize it by enacting it into law. Wouldn't want to have conflicting regulatory regimes decreasing business confidence.

While I'm not in favour of legislating something like that, because I think it would be extreme government overreach, if that were to just happen magically I would be hard pressed to find the problem.

Right, and they might switch the law to allow that at some point.

Like by the govt? Hadn't thought about that, good thing to think about

I'm not sure. Every large enough system ends up needing a lot of boilerplate to tune it to work correctly. I think if such a law existed most decisions would go through the (non-elected) supreme court or some independent autarchys than through congress, and what would be sunseted each four years would be the statements creating such institutions.

Yes, put this in the hands of the same bureaucrats that allow this sort of thing to happen without penalty in the first place. That sounds like a fantastic idea.
next

Legal | privacy