What do you think of a sunset requirement for all laws and government agencies?

Question

By a sunset requirement, I mean a consitutional amendment which says each bit of legislation and administrative regulation expires some certain term after it becomes law, somewhere between 5-7 years. It can be reintroduced, but MUST be reintroduced in order to go beyond the sunset date. Similarly, all agencies cease to exist some years (5-9) after their formation and can be re-created or re-formed, but must be re-created in order to exist beyond the sunset deadline.

This seems to be a great way to shrink government and reduce the statutory and regulatory burden that citizens and businesses face, and it is way less time consuming and controversial than trying to get congress to repeal something. If the law or regulation is essential for the survival of civilization, it can be reintroduced and reauthorized. If it is no longer necessary or desireable, it dies a natural death with no fanfare, and there is less red tape for everyone.

Someone had a problem with the constitutional amendment I proposed because it was . . . unconstitutional! First, it could be done as legislation; Congress puts sunset requirements on things all the time and there is no constitutional prohibition on putting a failsafe within a piece of legislation (show me a constitutional provision that says otherwise, I double-dog dare you). Second, I proposed an amendment instead of a statute so that the requirement could not be easily undone by a repeal, it would take another amendment to undo it (like prohibition). Third, if you AMEND the constitution then the requirement as stated in the AMENDMENT would NOT be unconstitutional, would it?

Answer 1

That is a horrible idea.

1. It would not shrink government but increase it. Think about the amount of work for the judicial system involved in this.

2. It is unconstitutional. The constitution states that the only methods our laws can be revised or changed are through our legislators or if there was a flaw during the judicial process that sent it up the chain... appeals, etc...

Answer 2

I think it is a great idea,it would make congress produce less laws because if it wasn't a clearly good law it would just be a waist of time .I also feel that our constitution in it's original form was a great document.I feel that amendments should go through the same process,then their would be more weight given to the amendments,because they would have to be renewed or disappear.

Answer 3

It has become a tough issue because of the enormous volume of laws that have accumulated through the years. In one legislative cycle congress could not possibly review even 1 percent of just the IRS laws.
In case you haven't noticed most laws that are introduced each session aren't reviewed anyway .

Answer 4

Might be useful, but it would bog politicians down. Seeing as how the number of agencies and laws is increasing, you would be adding extra work for them, much of it pointless. Better to let the system function as is, so they can keep (trying to) move forward.

Answer 5

How about a mandatory sunset requirement on pretty much every government agency with no option for a vote to recreate them?

Answer 6

Sounds very interesting.

Answer 7

That idea is too smart for our corrupt system. good luck.