Regulatory Reform...Maybe Not Done Right. But Done.

[Bailey Guns]

Idaho's legislature is overwhelmingly controlled by republicans. That doesn't stop infighting and gridlock. But infighting and gridlock have led to an interesting situation in Idaho.

Under ID law, all state regulations have a yearly sunset provision. Renewal has, in the past, been a mostly automatic procedure. The rule was justification was needed to actually remove a rule/regulation. No longer. The new procedure is any state rule/regulation must be justified to continue it's existence. And the gridlock over how to do this resulted in the ID legislature adjourning for the year without renewing anything. That means the entire ID administrative code will expire this year. A dysfunctional legislature may be the cause but the outcome is still fantastic. This is a "smaller government" advocate's dream.

Bill Whittle's commentary and analysis are, as usual, refreshing:

https://www.mercatus.org/bridge/commentary/idaho-repeals-its-regulatory-code


HQ5gPPzh1mA

[newracer]

I love it. I think all legislation should have a sunset. Some could be many years and others a year or two. IMO it would solve two things, get rid of useless outdated legislation and keep the legislature busy so they cannot introduce a ridiculous amount of new legislation.

[Zundfolge]

I saw Whittle's video on this and even though I suspect ID is already a ways down the road to Californication, this is a huge setback for the forces of evil so maybe I should put ID back on my list of potential escape routes.

[Bailey Guns]

I saw Whittle's video on this and even though I suspect ID is already a ways down the road to Californication...

Curious why you'd think that?

[Zundfolge]

Curious why you'd think that?

Because Idaho is one of the states with the greatest influx of Californians.

https://www.idahostatesman.com/news/local/article164420672.html

[BladesNBarrels]

Actually, Colorado was an early adopter of the Sunset Review process:

The Colorado General Assembly created the sunset process in 1976 as a way to improve state regulation by streamlining existing programs, enhancing consumer protection and repealing unnecessary programs and functions of government. Since that time, Colorado’s sunset process has gained national recognition and is routinely highlighted as a best practice as states seek to create more efficient and effective regulation.

[Bailey Guns]

Because Idaho is one of the states with the greatest influx of Californians.

https://www.idahostatesman.com/news/local/article164420672.html

Well, that article is 2 years old. And, yes, there is a high percentage of new residents from CA. But, they don't appear to be Obama-worshiping liberals.

From your link:


From a political standpoint, Idaho?s ?ex-Cals? are ?actually very similar to the natives here,? Moncrief said. They?re not changing the political landscape much. Like most Idahoans, they tend to be conservative. In some cases, they?re more conservative than Idahoans.

A 2013 article in High Country News, ?How right-wing emigrants conquered North Idaho,? (http://www.hcn.org/issues/45.8/how-right-wing-emigrants-conquered-north-idaho)noted how newcomers, mostly from Southern California, transformed North Idaho from politically moderate to strongly conservative.

That's reflected by the subject study of this article:

https://www.idahostatesman.com/entertainment/ent-columns-blogs/words-deeds/article224536105.html

It's also not showing up in voter registrations. At least not in alarming numbers. And it sure as hell isn't reflected in the election outcomes. It appears that some, maybe even a majority of, Californians moving here are registering as Rs.

[Bailey Guns]

Actually, Colorado was an early adopter of the Sunset Review process:

The Colorado General Assembly created the sunset process in 1976 as a way to improve state regulation by streamlining existing programs, enhancing consumer protection and repealing unnecessary programs and functions of government. Since that time, Colorado’s sunset process has gained national recognition and is routinely highlighted as a best practice as states seek to create more efficient and effective regulation.

It's not the fact that Idaho has sunset laws. It's what's happened with those sunset laws that's so fascinating.

[DOC]

Why do we not have this in Colorado? We need it for gun laws.

[FoxtArt]

Maybe Idaho can sunset recognition of it's borders too... I think they could deliberate next session and extend those borders at least as far as Montrose without too much agreement. Maybe snake a pocket over into co springs too. We can all be in Idaho's tail. What's Colorado going to do about it anyway, declare another "Colorado loves California" day?

[Zundfolge]

Well, that article is 2 years old. And, yes, there is a high percentage of new residents from CA. But, they don't appear to be Obama-worshiping liberals.

It's also not showing up in voter registrations. At least not in alarming numbers. And it sure as hell isn't reflected in the election outcomes. It appears that some, maybe even a majority of, Californians moving here are registering as Rs.

So other than Ashton Kutcher and Demi Moore that's good news (I'd make fun of them for the whole "young dude, old chick thing ... but my wife is almost 9 years older than me so...). While Rapid City is still #1 on our list, I happen to think that Coeur d'Alene is one of the most beautiful places on God's green earth so we'll see what happens. My inability to find a good job here in CS is definitely lighting the fire under the relocation bug as well (you can't swing a dead cat without hitting and unemployed graphic designer in The Springs ... sheesh).


Why do we not have this in Colorado? We need it for gun laws.

Jeebus, they're trying so hard to undermine TABOR and you want to add yet another layer of logic and reason? You tryin' to kill these idiots?

[iego]

Some laws we want/need to last a long time, and not be subject to the flavor of the day.

That's the same argument that my Dad gave me when I argued Term Limits with him back in the day.

That's the same argument that our Representative Government is based on, is that we elect smart people to run our Government, so we don't have to deal with it or the minutia day by day.

It's also a basis for the Bill of Rights, and the Amendments to the Constitution, that some Laws, or Ideas, are just too important to say but just once.

-John

[Irving]

I agree, but haven't put any thought to where to draw the line.

[Gman]

I love this idea. The government should focus only on what is important and this forces them to prioritize. They should also have to regularly justify what they're doing and the tax dollars being spent to do it.

[Bailey Guns]

Some laws we want/need to last a long time, and not be subject to the flavor of the day.

That's the same argument that my Dad gave me when I argued Term Limits with him back in the day.

That's the same argument that our Representative Government is based on, is that we elect smart people to run our Government, so we don't have to deal with it or the minutia day by day.

It's also a basis for the Bill of Rights, and the Amendments to the Constitution, that some Laws, or Ideas, are just too important to say but just once.

-John

We're not talking about state laws like murder, assault, etc... We're talking about state rules and regulations. Yes...some need to be kept and enforced, no doubt. But there are almost 10,000. I'm sure there's plenty of fat to be trimmed without any harm whatsoever to the well being of the state.

[Eric P]

No, all laws passed by the legislature need to be sunset. 20 year max for safety stuff, 10 for all others, and should be set at time of legislation debate.

Constitutional amendments would not expire, but should be able to be changed, added, deleted by super majority in both the legislature and general vote. 66 to 75%

If a law is so important to the general populace, it could become permanent through a constitutional change vote.

This should also apply to the US laws, but without a general populace vote. Permanent laws requiring a super majority to pass, change, delete, along with presidential signature.

[FoxtArt]

In all reality, sunset provisions are not flawless. In situations like Colorado's, they would let long standing conservative laws by native Coloradans be wiped clean for a sudden California-esque progressive takeover, ala. 2018's election.

What is truly missing is the 4th branch of a long term, successful republic: The janitorial. A branch that is incapable of the passage of anything; but checks the other three by the power of removal of precedence, regulation, and law. There is currently no substantive check on precedence which is why we have a judicial oligarchy, where appointed judges individually decide more about policy and law than any elected representative. A janitorial branch is the real solution. Everything doesn't need to sunset. Nor should some things wait a decade to do so.