3 ms·

It seems that the only way to actually be able to give those officials any form of repercussions would be to actually sue the government for damages. I sincere

• Calamitous 16y ago
  Except what happens then? Damages are paid out of the taxpayers' wallets. It still leaves the problem of zero repercussions for the officials involved. Now, if the officials themselves could be personally sued...
  • jrockway 16y ago
    If you fuck up in a way that costs your department money, you get yelled at... even in the government. Each government department is not given full access to all of the money that the government has available; they have a budget, and that's all they get. If the budget is spent being sued for incompetence, that comes right out of your raise. In theory.
  • dpatru 16y ago
    > Now, if the officials themselves could be personally sued... I would really like to see immunity removed from government officials. The ostensible rationale for immunity is that you don't want government officials afraid that they'll be sued if the exercise discretion. But I that's exactly what you do want. If an official's actions can have a huge impact on people's lives, that official should feel that he'd better be right in his acts or that there will be repercussions for him personally -- just like in the private sector.
  • rprasad 16y ago
    Officials can be personally sued if they were exceeding the bounds of their official duties. We don't allow officials to be sued for official actions for many, many reasons, not the least of which is that it would effectively render enforcement impossible.