Friday, March 16, 2012

Pre-Thinking a Better Option

The idea of the three branches of government is that legislation is deliberated by a body of representatives. The debate discusses pros and cons, alternative policies and possible unintended consequences. Along the way research may be conducted, public input may occur and when a decision is made, it is moderate. Hopefully this leads to good policy.

The executive branch is supposed to implement the policies and enforce the legislation. That would be in an ideal world. Today we have an executive branch which has assumed huge and far-reaching regulatory power. Is this a usurpation? It might be, but if we look hard at the situation we find that it is a response to a demand by a populace that wants action now and can't tolerate being denied. We force the executive to regulate us into poverty lest we might inadvertently inconvenience one of the whiners. Ten thousand loggers out of work is not too great a price to save one spotted owl.

What is bothersome is the recent trend to regulate without consideration of outcomes. The trend is to act aggressively and then wait to see if anybody notices. Push the envelope. See how much you can get away with. Once the regulation is in place it will be too late for correction and the administration will have seized more power in the war against a republic.

I've got to ask now, how stupid are these people?

Can't they think through a policy before hand and isn't there anybody in the room with the common sense to ask a question? Wouldn't it be better to pre-think outcomes rather than flaunt a continual parade of ridiculous ideas then re-think and back-track looking like a herd of buffoons?

Pool Policy Treads Water While Costs Considered

Put yourself in the decision-making loop. Someone says, "my poor cousin is in a wheelchair and can't get in and out of the pool at the Holiday Inn." Clearly government intervention is required for all of the poor disabled in the nation to be empowered to dive right in immediately.

Solution? Every pool outside of a private home backyard must have TWO means of accessibility at least one of which must be a lift or elevator. So, a simple ramp is too...simple.

How many pools are involved? How many handicapped people want to go swimming? How much cost is involved? How many pool elevator companies are there in America? Will handicapped people gain access or will the rest of America lose pools?

Is this a proper role of a limited government?

See how easy it was to come up with a logical response and not look like an idiot?

1 comment:

Dweezil Dwarftosser said...

Since the specs on the ADA's pool elevators call for it to have a 450 lb. capacity, just think of it as a 'jobs' bill. You'll have to employ three times as many lifeguards to rescue a 450-pound invalid . . .