>As a practical matter, its not "citizens" in general who need to reference the building codes, it's builders. They're the ones charged with compliance, and the

>As a practical matter, its not "citizens" in general who need to reference the building codes, it's builders. They're the ones charged with compliance, and they have to buy copies of the codes as part of their business. Thus, the industry profiting from construction is the one burdened with financing the development of the codes. That's exactly the model I have a problem with. In my area, it is perfectly legal for me to remodel my house without hiring a 'builder'. But I have to comply with the building codes due to the law. But in order to know what those codes are, I have to pay a third party to access the law. And access isn't cheap. If access to the 'law' is more expensive than the remodel I want to do then I have a problem with the system. I for one believe that I should have the right to embark on things like building a house without the need to pay a third party for access to access to what amounts to the law. > It's not the model that maximizes transparency, but it has a sensible logic of its own. I suppose it comes down to the matter of what you value. I value liberty and government transparency above all special interests. The system as it stands may have some logic, but I believe it is wrong.