5 ms·

All laws, rules, and regulations should be available free to download from the issuing government agency. I don't see a valid argument for any other policy rega

All laws, rules, and regulations should be available free to download from the issuing government agency. I don't see a valid argument for any other policy regarding this.

lisper 10y ago
Then you haven't been paying attention. What is at issue here is highly technical rules and regulations like building codes that cannot be written directly by elected officials because they do not have the expertise. That kind of work has to be contracted out to specialists who are not lawmakers, and those people have to be compensated somehow for their work. They could be paid with tax dollars, but tax dollars are scarce, and why should every tax payer foot the bill for the cost of writing a regulation that is only of use to a very small special interest group? Why not let the market take care of it instead? I'm not saying I necessarily agree with this argument, but I think it's defensible.
- walterbell 10y ago
  Do tax payers benefit from the protections (e.g. safety) specified in the laws?
  - lisper 10y ago
    That question is hotly debated. Liberals tend to say yes, and conservatives tend to say no.
    - randallsquared 10y ago
      If 'no', then get rid of it. If 'yes', then the full ruleset should be made available. Even among those who disagree on the utility of the law, there doesn't seem to be any need for a compromise position of "possibly 'yes' so let's keep it, but possibly 'no' so let's hide the rules from the public".
  - criddell 10y ago
    There are codes that govern the safety of elevators. If you are designing elevators, you are going to need a copy and it's pretty expensive. They are very technical and not terribly useful to average citizens. On the other hand, the building and electrical codes are useful to many homeowners. I can understand the arguments for both the user-fee model and the publicly-funded model and I'm not sure there's a one-size-fits-all model. If it came down to a vote, I'm guessing the public would vote for a user-pays model rather than a tax increase.
- dragonwriter 10y ago
  > They could be paid with tax dollars, but tax dollars are scarce, and why should every tax payer foot the bill for the cost of writing a regulation that is only of use to a very small special interest group? If its not a public benefit, it shouldn't be a public rule or regulation. If it is a public rule or regulation, it should be freely available to the public. This includes third-party standards, etc., made mandatory for an industry, etc., by a public rule or regulation -- such as the various X12 and other transaction standards mandated under HIPAA.
  - lisper 10y ago
    OK, but you still have to tell me how you are going to pay the technical experts who write the rules. Note that my intent in writing the original comment was not to engage in this debate, but rather simply to point out that there is a legitimate debate here with defensible arguments on both sides.
    - dragonwriter 10y ago
      > OK, but you still have to tell me how you are going to pay the technical experts who write the rules. In the case of many of the industry standards incorporated into laws (this is certainly the case of the transaction standards under HIPAA), the payment doesn't actually go to the people writing the rules, who are largely industry employees (both public and private sector) paid by their employers to work on standards, because the employers have an interest in the standards reflecting their concerns. It goes to standards bodies who don't actually employ the technical experts writing the rules. And only some of those standards are from standards bodies that charge for them (e.g., X12 charges for its transaction standards, but CAQH CORE doesn't charge for its standard operating rules (it does offer compliance certification, for which it does charge, but certification by CAQH CORE isn't a HIPAA mandate.)
- 24gttghh 10y ago
  Any idea how much it presently costs to access codes such as these? Do the codes explicitly apply to large construction projects, or are they across the board (single-family dwelling <-> 50-story high-rise)?
  - lisper 10y ago
    I have no idea, sorry.

All laws, rules, and regulations should be available free to download from the issuing government agency. I don't see a valid argument for any other policy regarding this.

lisper 10y ago

Then you haven't been paying attention. What is at issue here is highly technical rules and regulations like building codes that cannot be written directly by elected officials because they do not have the expertise. That kind of work has to be contracted out to specialists who are not lawmakers, and those people have to be compensated somehow for their work. They could be paid with tax dollars, but tax dollars are scarce, and why should every tax payer foot the bill for the cost of writing a regulation that is only of use to a very small special interest group? Why not let the market take care of it instead? I'm not saying I necessarily agree with this argument, but I think it's defensible.

walterbell 10y ago
Do tax payers benefit from the protections (e.g. safety) specified in the laws?
- lisper 10y ago
  That question is hotly debated. Liberals tend to say yes, and conservatives tend to say no.
  - randallsquared 10y ago
    If 'no', then get rid of it. If 'yes', then the full ruleset should be made available. Even among those who disagree on the utility of the law, there doesn't seem to be any need for a compromise position of "possibly 'yes' so let's keep it, but possibly 'no' so let's hide the rules from the public".
- criddell 10y ago
  There are codes that govern the safety of elevators. If you are designing elevators, you are going to need a copy and it's pretty expensive. They are very technical and not terribly useful to average citizens. On the other hand, the building and electrical codes are useful to many homeowners. I can understand the arguments for both the user-fee model and the publicly-funded model and I'm not sure there's a one-size-fits-all model. If it came down to a vote, I'm guessing the public would vote for a user-pays model rather than a tax increase.
dragonwriter 10y ago
> They could be paid with tax dollars, but tax dollars are scarce, and why should every tax payer foot the bill for the cost of writing a regulation that is only of use to a very small special interest group? If its not a public benefit, it shouldn't be a public rule or regulation. If it is a public rule or regulation, it should be freely available to the public. This includes third-party standards, etc., made mandatory for an industry, etc., by a public rule or regulation -- such as the various X12 and other transaction standards mandated under HIPAA.
- lisper 10y ago
  OK, but you still have to tell me how you are going to pay the technical experts who write the rules. Note that my intent in writing the original comment was not to engage in this debate, but rather simply to point out that there is a legitimate debate here with defensible arguments on both sides.
  - dragonwriter 10y ago
    > OK, but you still have to tell me how you are going to pay the technical experts who write the rules. In the case of many of the industry standards incorporated into laws (this is certainly the case of the transaction standards under HIPAA), the payment doesn't actually go to the people writing the rules, who are largely industry employees (both public and private sector) paid by their employers to work on standards, because the employers have an interest in the standards reflecting their concerns. It goes to standards bodies who don't actually employ the technical experts writing the rules. And only some of those standards are from standards bodies that charge for them (e.g., X12 charges for its transaction standards, but CAQH CORE doesn't charge for its standard operating rules (it does offer compliance certification, for which it does charge, but certification by CAQH CORE isn't a HIPAA mandate.)
24gttghh 10y ago
Any idea how much it presently costs to access codes such as these? Do the codes explicitly apply to large construction projects, or are they across the board (single-family dwelling <-> 50-story high-rise)?
- lisper 10y ago
  I have no idea, sorry.