Love the use of game trees to think through this. Since Congress may not currently have the capacity to be more specific in legislation, I suppose other branches may be taken in the interim while the new incentives play out. Say, new legislation continues to be less specific, but rule-making changes to be restrained, resulting in fewer policy changes than lawmakers desired. That would spur Congress to develop the needed capacity for making specific legislation.
The biggest problem is that agencies are changing their interpretation of ambiguous legislation. Yeah, fine, legislation isn't going to be perfect, and the agencies can interpret it, but .... they can't re-interpret it years later without a change in the legislation.
I noticed on my phone and iPad that the game trees weren't rendering perfectly, so if it's unclear, for the legislature the bottom branch is "less specific" and the top branch is "more specific".
The leftists who are complaining about this are thinking that "the agencies are the experts and the courts aren't elected either". Yet, as the SCOTUS says, the agencies are not the experts at judging the correct interpretation of the law when ambiguous. Judges are. Even if the Constitution didn't require that judges judge, it only makes sense. Founders were not idiots.
Lynne, a “pause-inspiring” analysis worthy of the many kudos!!
The work of our Judiciary is created by the failings of the Legislature to adequately think through and detail their work product. The Founders gave the ultimate authority to the Legislature assuming the scope of their mandates would yield the informed and best leaders, judgement and values consistent with the success of the Union. As technology brought immediacy to social issues and a torrent of public sentiment rising or falling with a “news-cycle”, legislative wisdom has withered to ”sound-bite” fueled tropes ensuring Congressional job security for self-centered wags lacking in virtue, measured altruism and a pluralistic worldview. A “Republic, if you can keep it”.
Love the use of game trees to think through this. Since Congress may not currently have the capacity to be more specific in legislation, I suppose other branches may be taken in the interim while the new incentives play out. Say, new legislation continues to be less specific, but rule-making changes to be restrained, resulting in fewer policy changes than lawmakers desired. That would spur Congress to develop the needed capacity for making specific legislation.
The biggest problem is that agencies are changing their interpretation of ambiguous legislation. Yeah, fine, legislation isn't going to be perfect, and the agencies can interpret it, but .... they can't re-interpret it years later without a change in the legislation.
I noticed on my phone and iPad that the game trees weren't rendering perfectly, so if it's unclear, for the legislature the bottom branch is "less specific" and the top branch is "more specific".
The leftists who are complaining about this are thinking that "the agencies are the experts and the courts aren't elected either". Yet, as the SCOTUS says, the agencies are not the experts at judging the correct interpretation of the law when ambiguous. Judges are. Even if the Constitution didn't require that judges judge, it only makes sense. Founders were not idiots.
Lynne, a “pause-inspiring” analysis worthy of the many kudos!!
The work of our Judiciary is created by the failings of the Legislature to adequately think through and detail their work product. The Founders gave the ultimate authority to the Legislature assuming the scope of their mandates would yield the informed and best leaders, judgement and values consistent with the success of the Union. As technology brought immediacy to social issues and a torrent of public sentiment rising or falling with a “news-cycle”, legislative wisdom has withered to ”sound-bite” fueled tropes ensuring Congressional job security for self-centered wags lacking in virtue, measured altruism and a pluralistic worldview. A “Republic, if you can keep it”.
Fascinating read
Thanks Jon! This analysis does seem like it would be right up your alley 😀.