Mandatory sunset provisions under the law

Liberty
1

Mandatory sunset provisions under the law

What the public refers to as the “law” is in fact composed of three parts:

  1. natural law [nature; reality; unchanging];

  2. common law [man; courts; evolving]; and

  3. positiva legislation, mandates, etc. [governance; markets; rapid change]

Natural law is unchanging, even if our knowledge and understanding of it is growing over time as we discover in greater detail the underlying principles of reality.

Common law in the English-speaking world has for the most part been stable for centuries, slowly evolving to meet new demands. Laws against theft, murder, assault, rape, etc. are ancient and commonly accepted as necessary for a functioning society. We should approach any changes to these laws with reverence and careful consideration of their long-term effects on society.

Conversely, positiva legislation cannot endure over time due to the constant fluctuations in markets and societal needs.

Therefore, I propose that all existing positiva legislation be sunset over the next 4 years (starting in 2025) and that all new positiva legislation be automatically sunset 10 years or less after it first goes into law.

Leglisators can choose to vote on renewing (perhaps with adjustments) any positiva legislation at the end of its active period after a full accounting of the law’s effects has been made public for 90 days.

Positiva legislation that has not been proven to be in the best interests of the public should not even be considered for renewal. Perhaps it would be useful to have the proofs argued before a judge with public stakeholders given a chance to argue for or against the legislation in question.

Noah Revoy
Senior Fellow at The Natural Law Institute

7 Likes
2

I agree with this. I would add that Federal agencies and offices should be regularly reviewed for renewal; else, they be automatically closed and defunded. We create programs and agencies for problems that may not exist in the future.

In the 80s, we were educated about the dangers of the ozone hole. CFCs were destroying a protective layer of gases in the upper atmosphere. The EPA still has programs almost 50 years later to address the ozone hole problem. [Basic Ozone Layer Science | US EPA ]Do these programs ever end?

1 Like
3

Sunset everything! I love it.

Every business department is constantly having to prove its value, why not put the government departments in the same position.

4

Agreed. However, should we not institute only negative law as discussed by Bastiat? Negative law is “proper law” and accomplishes the point of government, ie. “protect the rights of men.” Negative law bars other Citizens and the government from taking away or violating my natural rights. An example of “positive law” is federal income tax which by its very nature, violates the principle of government to “protect the rights of men” among which is the “right to property.” The positive law of personal income tax is using the power of government to forcibly take away my property. As for other “positive laws”, they should NOT be allowed.