This is my third attempt to write this. The first time, I tried to save it to "draft" and I lost it. Did the first paragraph a second time, same thing happened. If I were paranoid, and I might be, I might believe the lawyers had something to do with it.
Since all laws are written by lawyers, even if non-lawyers propose them, it is hard to believe that they should be subject to "interpretation". If you have ever read a contract, you know the writer had anticipated every interpretation and included and excluded every legal challenge to the intended meaning. When it comes to writing laws, they are so loosely worded that everyone can jump in with their two-bits worth of interpretation. Why is that? It makes work for lawyers! Any law should state clearly the purpose, the words and the interpretation and how it may and may not be applied.
Any law creates work for lawyers. For this reason, they should not be allowed to make laws since it is a conflict of interest. It's like doctors spreading disease or a glazier breaking windows. Unfortunately, the legislatures of most states and the congress are top heavy with lawyers. When the founders envisioned citizen participation in government, I'm certain they never contemplated a single profession dominating politics.
Since there is not now some legal recourse, I think we citizens, whenever possible, should encourage and vote for non-lawyer candidates. We should acknowledge too that a college degree is not a requirement to hold any elected, public office. Anyone with normal intelligence, common sense, real life experiences and a desire to serve the public should be considered with equal seriousness. We all know college graduates who can barely tie their shoe laces and we've seen how stupidly they sometimes act when elected, even when they are not.
Career politicians should always be suspect. Either they are benefiting personally in some way or are drunk with power. Those who argue that we need experienced people forget that much of that experience has been the experience of failure. If anyone believes that all those who are "reelected" term after term are elected because of competence, think again. The incumbent always has an advantage over challengers. He has the party, the organization, money and all those for whom he has done favors working for him. The incumbent rarely loses. To discourage career politicians, they should receive neither benefits nor pensions.
Since all laws are written by lawyers, even if non-lawyers propose them, it is hard to believe that they should be subject to "interpretation". If you have ever read a contract, you know the writer had anticipated every interpretation and included and excluded every legal challenge to the intended meaning. When it comes to writing laws, they are so loosely worded that everyone can jump in with their two-bits worth of interpretation. Why is that? It makes work for lawyers! Any law should state clearly the purpose, the words and the interpretation and how it may and may not be applied.
Any law creates work for lawyers. For this reason, they should not be allowed to make laws since it is a conflict of interest. It's like doctors spreading disease or a glazier breaking windows. Unfortunately, the legislatures of most states and the congress are top heavy with lawyers. When the founders envisioned citizen participation in government, I'm certain they never contemplated a single profession dominating politics.
Since there is not now some legal recourse, I think we citizens, whenever possible, should encourage and vote for non-lawyer candidates. We should acknowledge too that a college degree is not a requirement to hold any elected, public office. Anyone with normal intelligence, common sense, real life experiences and a desire to serve the public should be considered with equal seriousness. We all know college graduates who can barely tie their shoe laces and we've seen how stupidly they sometimes act when elected, even when they are not.
Career politicians should always be suspect. Either they are benefiting personally in some way or are drunk with power. Those who argue that we need experienced people forget that much of that experience has been the experience of failure. If anyone believes that all those who are "reelected" term after term are elected because of competence, think again. The incumbent always has an advantage over challengers. He has the party, the organization, money and all those for whom he has done favors working for him. The incumbent rarely loses. To discourage career politicians, they should receive neither benefits nor pensions.
No comments:
Post a Comment