# Is it okay for government to decieve the public to get laws passed? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 13, 2014, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548 "2014-11-13T18:13:27Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![sleestak](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/919ad9/32.png) [@sleestak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sleestak)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2014, 10:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548/21 "2014-11-13T22:33:31Z")
I have a very simple idea on how to deal with ‘stupid’ voters. Stop assuming they are stupid and that, if they disagree with you, they are doing so only because they are stupid. Sounds crazy, huh? Of course it will never fly. It seems a lot of folks on this board assume that all voters are stupid (liberal Dopers excluded) and anyone who disagrees with them is even stupider than the voters. Guess what? It is not true. Additionally, if politicians have to resort to lies to sell a policy, there is a very good chance that there is something wrong with the policy. Yet, in the crazy world of the ‘Dope, lying is just fine so long as it is for the good of dem ol’ poor stupid folk. But remember, according to Gruber, _ **you** _ are the stupid folk. Yes, you. Gruber is happy that you, those who bought Obamacare hook, line and sinker, are stupid. You see, you couldn’t understand what it was actually going to do and even if you did, you are too stupid to appreciate it. Luckily for you, those honest and trustworthy politicians are there to do what is best for you. Slee ---
**Author:** ![even\_sven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/dfb087/32.png) [@even\_sven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/even_sven)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2014, 10:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548/22 "2014-11-13T22:47:16Z")
Following the letter of the law (or, in this case, the letter of CBO interpretation guidelines) is a legal tradition since forever. This is very much the way things work and have always worked. It happens in private industry as well-- I’ve spent a lot of time working on “initiative” that are not “projects” because projects are subject to extra oversight per corporate guidelines. Besides, whatever potentially flawed messages people may get from the CBO is surely immediately outweighed by the “Obamacare is going to provide free abortions and sex change operations to Mexicans and terrorists while everyone else gets death panels until the death spiral!!!” hysteria. Truth has not been a very closely held value for either side of this debate. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2014, 10:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548/23 "2014-11-13T22:48:36Z")
> [@sleestak](#): > > I have a very simple idea on how to deal with ‘stupid’ voters. Stop assuming they are stupid and that, if they disagree with you, they are doing so only because they are stupid. > > Sounds crazy, huh? Of course it will never fly. > > It seems a lot of folks on this board assume that all voters are stupid (liberal Dopers excluded) and anyone who disagrees with them is even stupider than the voters. Guess what? It is not true. > > Additionally, if politicians have to resort to lies to sell a policy, there is a very good chance that there is something wrong with the policy. > > Yet, in the crazy world of the ‘Dope, lying is just fine so long as it is for the good of dem ol’ poor stupid folk. > > But remember, according to Gruber, _ **you** _ are the stupid folk. Yes, you. > > Gruber is happy that you, those who bought Obamacare hook, line and sinker, are stupid. You see, you couldn’t understand what it was actually going to do and even if you did, you are too stupid to appreciate it. > > Luckily for you, those honest and trustworthy politicians are there to do what is best for you. > > Slee I’m pretty sure you’re mistaken about what he said. He isn’t saying the people who support Obamacare are stupid, he’s saying that the people who are insanely repulsed by the word “tax” are stupid. See my post above. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2014, 10:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548/24 "2014-11-13T22:57:31Z")
> [@sleestak](#): > > It seems a lot of folks on this board assume that all voters are stupid (liberal Dopers excluded) and anyone who disagrees with them is even stupider than the voters. Guess what? It is not true. It’s not? Well [this guy](http://www.amazon.com/Idiot-America-Stupidity-Became-Virtue/dp/0767926153) and [this guy](http://www.amazon.com/Republican-Brain-Science-Science--Reality/dp/1118094514) would certainly disagree, and they seem to know their subject pretty well. You also seem to believe that voters _ **never** _ vote for idiotic policies or idiot politicians based on things like irrational fear, ignorance, or misinformation – very often misinformation that’s been planted in their fertile brains by a flood of well-financed advocacy propaganda created by those pursuing self-serving agendas. You appear to inhabit a world where government is always evil, and private enterprise is always good, honest, and generous. An interesting “bizarro world” indeed – one could write a fantasy sci-fi story about it, but we certainly don’t live in it. ---
**Author:** ![Fuzzy\_wuzzy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a8b319/32.png) [@Fuzzy\_wuzzy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fuzzy_wuzzy)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2014, 11:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548/25 "2014-11-13T23:20:41Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > A subsidy isn’t a tax. A subsidy is the amount paid to low income people to help offset the cost of mandated insurance. > > The mandate penalty is what could be called a tax. I’m sure that was just a slip of the keyboard, but it’s important to be precise. > > As to what Smapti said conflicting with what I said, I didn’t consult him or her before posting what I said. I only speak for me, and my assessment. I don’t think someone else disagreeing with me is particularly surprising. I’m not sure why you are agape at the very concept. If you want a guide for future incidents, just assume I’m the one that’s right. 😃 > > It’s important in that the bill helped millions of people. So they packaged it in a manner that was palatable to the electorate. That’s politics. That’s why we have nonsense law names like, “The Stolen Valor Act” or “The Patriot Act.” It’s a candy coating. > > Calling a tax for not having insurance a mandate penalty is the same thing. In the instance of whether or not the word “tax” was important im certainly agreeing with you. That’s a 100% record so far. I dont believe that everyone has to agree on whether or not the word tax was important. It’s just both views were very much in opposition to one another. There was no compromise between your view and his. One of you had to be fundamentally wrong. Since lawmakers found the non use of the word extremely important then the chances are it’s absence _was_ extremely important. ---
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2014, 11:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548/26 "2014-11-13T23:22:23Z")
> [@Omar\_Little](#): > > Sure that many of you have seen the Jonathan Gruber (architect of the Affordable Care Act) video where he states that the law was purposefully written in a non-transparent way to better insure that it was not clearly understood and not viewed as a tax, so that it would more easily pass. The \*\*stupidity of the American voter was critical \*\*to getting the bill passed. Sure being honest and transparent would be better, but if it meant the bill not passing and becoming law they were willing to rely on deception to increase its chances of it getting passed. > > So is it okay for the government to deceive the public to get laws passed? Is lack of transparency in our political process okay if the outcome is considered important by those in power? ... I personally think that full disclosure is the best way to go. I also think that full disclosure is the best way to go. I agree with that guy in a powdered wig who wrote that governments “derive their just powers from the consent of the governed.” Also the guy in the top hat who said that America was defined by “government of the people, by the people, and for the people.” Just governments exist to serve the people. Governments which don’t, such as 18th century France or present-day North Korea, are evil. But plainly Jonathan Gruber, along with many in this thread, think otherwise. They view the people as an annoyance. They think that governments derive their just powers from somewhere else (it’s not clear where), and that the idea of lawmakers getting the support of the people is merely a pretense that must be maintained. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2014, 11:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548/27 "2014-11-13T23:36:15Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > I also think that full disclosure is the best way to go. > > I agree with that guy in a powdered wig who wrote that governments “derive their just powers from the consent of the governed.” Also the guy in the top hat who said that America was defined by “government of the people, by the people, and for the people.” Just governments exist to serve the people. Governments which don’t, such as 18th century France or present-day North Korea, are evil. > > But plainly Jonathan Gruber, along with many in this thread, think otherwise. They view the people as an annoyance. They think that governments derive their just powers from somewhere else (it’s not clear where), and that the idea of lawmakers getting the support of the people is merely a pretense that must be maintained. It’s not really plainly. It’s in fact, a tortured stretch. ---
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2014, 11:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548/28 "2014-11-13T23:59:59Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > The conundrum, as I see it, is that Gruber is fundamentally right about the bigger issue. The voters _are_ stupid. The reason political and election battles are fought over idiotic and misleading sound bites is because anything more sophisticated just goes over the head of most voters, and the only thing that actually works are these slogans and empty words. > > So what’s to be done? On the one hand, politicians should be honest with the people. But what if the people’s ignorance of things like economics and foreign policy is such that they simply cannot form intelligent opinions about these matters? To take the case at hand, suppose you believe that if the people appreciated that significantly decrease the number of uninsured people would inevitably increase spending which would have to be funded by tax increases they would support it, but that due to their ignorance they would not support it as a practical matter. Do you allow this ignorance to sink the bill, or do you take advantage of that same ignorance to slip these items past them by sleight of hand? > > There’s no doubt that both parties play these types of games, and for these reasons. But yet, once this becomes SOP, there’s no limit to how much dissembling will go on. > > Bottom line is that voter stupidity is a significant flaw in a democracy, and I can’t think of any way around it. The only thing I can think of that would ameliorate it would be civics tests for voters. But that has its own set of problems and potential for misuse. I agree with you at least in this: both major parties do routinely view the voters as stupid and annoying, and do routinely write laws, manipulate studies, and so forth with the intention of misleading the voters. I disagree about the cause. The true problem is not voter stupidity. The true problem is voter intelligence. If every law was written in a succinct and straightforward manner so that the voters could know what was actually in it, they would rebel. Politicians would be tarred and feathered and ridden out of town on a rail. (Metaphorically, that is. I’d very much like to see a literal revival of that practice.) In order to pass a massively complicated piece of legislation like Obamacare, it’s necessary to lie. “If you like your insurance, you can keep it.” “If you like your doctor, you can keep them.” “Everybody will pay less.” etc… Why is this? Imagine if Obama and his friends had told the truth. “If you like your health insurance, tough shit. I’m taking it away from many of you.” “If you like your doctor, tough shit again.” “Many of you will pay more.” Can you imagine the law getting enough public support to pass in those circumstances? The voters are too intelligent to approve of the ACA. If they’d had an accurate picture of what was in the law, it would not have passed. That’s why the deception was necessary. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2014, 12:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548/29 "2014-11-14T00:00:45Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > Arguably it wasn’t to make the law opaque to the public, but rather opaque to the CBO who informs on the law being proposed. I don’t think the CBO is that easily fooled. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2014, 12:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548/30 "2014-11-14T00:02:12Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > It’s not really plainly. It’s in fact, a tortured stretch. No. “plainly” is accurate. “Crystal clear” would work, too. Once again I am tickled that the liberals on this board are so eager to approve of or excuse behavior that would have them marching in the streets if it were done under anRepublican administration. Made my day. Thanks for not disappointing. Don’t ever change. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2014, 12:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548/31 "2014-11-14T00:03:18Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > I agree with you at least in this: both major parties do routinely view the voters as stupid and annoying, and do routinely write laws, manipulate studies, and so forth with the intention of misleading the voters. > > I disagree about the cause. The true problem is not voter stupidity. The true problem is voter intelligence. If every law was written in a succinct and straightforward manner so that the voters could know what was actually in it, they would rebel. Politicians would be tarred and feathered and ridden out of town on a rail. (Metaphorically, that is. I’d very much like to see a literal revival of that practice.) > > In order to pass a massively complicated piece of legislation like Obamacare, it’s necessary to lie. “If you like your insurance, you can keep it.” “If you like your doctor, you can keep them.” “Everybody will pay less.” etc… Why is this? Imagine if Obama and his friends had told the truth. “If you like your health insurance, tough shit. I’m taking it away from many of you.” “If you like your doctor, tough shit again.” “Many of you will pay more.” Can you imagine the law getting enough public support to pass in those circumstances? > > The voters are too intelligent to approve of the ACA. If they’d had an accurate picture of what was in the law, it would not have passed. That’s why the deception was necessary. Well said. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2014, 12:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548/32 "2014-11-14T00:06:03Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > No. “plainly” is accurate. “Crystal clear” would work, too. > > Once again I am tickled that the liberals on this board are so eager to approve of or excuse behavior that would have them marching in the streets if it were done under anRepublican administration. Made my day. Thanks for not disappointing. Don’t ever change. What do you think he’s referring to with his comment on transparency? Specifically? Is it the fact that the mandate tax was massaged into a mandate penalty, and that a mandate necessitates that the young pay into the system, because that’s how insurance works? What do you think he was talking about with his comment on stupidity? He wasn’t talking about the fans of the ACA. He was talking about the tax-o-phobes on the right who would lose their shit. The mandate penalty had to be packaged as such because a third of our country are unable to rationally assess any tax. Even one that only hits you when you don’t have insurance. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2014, 12:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548/33 "2014-11-14T00:30:54Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > The voters are too intelligent to approve of the ACA. If they’d had an accurate picture of what was in the law, it would not have passed. That’s why the deception was necessary. And that, of course, is why the law’s opponents spent so much time talking about death panels instead of describing the law accurately. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2014, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548/34 "2014-11-14T00:40:20Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > And that, of course, is why the law’s opponents spent so much time talking about death panels instead of describing the law accurately. Sure. For which they were vilified on this board. And I agreed with that vilification: > [@Explain the Death Panels thing to me](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-the-death-panels-thing-to-me/526099/63): > > > [@Dan Blather](#): > > > > This is part of my recent thinking about whether US conservatives have any morals. Even if you think that UHC or the proposed bill are a bad idea, shouldn’t you be repulsed by your side using such sleazy tactics? Instead, conservative are cackling with delight that Palin found such a good way to oppose UHC and want to reward her with a chance to run for President. A news organization has hired her, knowing that she lied. > > > > What has happened to the America I grew up in? > > I agree with this sentiment. So where’s the discussion now about morals? ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2014, 12:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548/35 "2014-11-14T00:48:03Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Sure. For which they were vilified on this board. And I agreed with that vilification: > > So where’s the discussion now about morals? Are you going to say these two situations are exactly the same? I wasn’t saying they were the same, of course–I was saying that ITR’s claim that a clear picture of the law is all that would suffice to make people oppose it was nonsense. I don’t have an opinion on this, having only learned of this Gruber dude fifteen minutes ago. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2014, 12:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548/36 "2014-11-14T00:53:55Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Sure. For which they were vilified on this board. And I agreed with that vilification: > > So where’s the discussion now about morals? What he said is cynical, sure. But do you agree that he was talking about repackaging the mandate tax as a mandate penalty, and that he was calling the stupidity out on those that would lose their shit over the idea of a tax, and that the mandate would add healthy people into the healthcare pool? Because the meme on the right has decided to cleave to is that the stupidity comment is about ACA supporters that were duped somehow (which to me seems unfounded, since the mandate penalty was up front, even if it wasn’t called a tax), and that the lack of transparency somehow mislead the CBO and didn’t honestly score the bill. I don’t think that’s correct. Do you? ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2014, 1:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548/37 "2014-11-14T01:11:49Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > I don’t have an opinion on this, having only learned of this Gruber dude fifteen minutes ago. One thing to add: the same people who are trumpeting this story are the ones who, a few years ago, were shouting about death panels. I’m extremely skeptical of their take on the story, given their past record. Are you? It may turn out that the whole thing was a massive boondoggle so clever that Republicans at the time weren’t able to untwist it and instead had to make up death panel stories to have a way to oppose the law. I am, to repeat, skeptical that that’s the most objective interpretation of the story. ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2014, 2:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548/38 "2014-11-14T02:16:46Z")
> [@Omar\_Little](#): > > So is it okay for the government to deceive the public to get laws passed? Is lack of transparency in our political process okay if the outcome is considered important by those in power? Absolutely not. This is an issue I had for a long time. And I’m going further than that. I find incredible that in our democracies, it’s considered perfectly normal and accepted that politicians twist facts to gather popular support. It seems to me that in a healthy democratic system, discovering that, say, a candidate to the presidency, is less than absolutely straightforward towards the electors would be a scandal of major importance and would ruin forever any chance he could have to hold an elected position. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2014, 2:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548/39 "2014-11-14T02:19:08Z")
Since the American public have no input on the passage of the law, I don’t have a problem with it. The problems I do have is the Senate breaking its own rules to get it passed (over the advice of the parliamentarian even) and threatening to use procedure in unconventional ways. Also despite the clear intention that it was not a tax the Roberts and a few other on SCOTUS said it was because the fines are collected by the IRS and are therefore taxes. IF the Dems did that on purpose knowing that collection by the IRS and not say HHS made it a tax (and therefore constitutional) then yes it was deceitful and I would have a problem with that. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2014, 3:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548/40 "2014-11-14T03:07:44Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > One thing to add: the same people who are trumpeting this story are the ones who, a few years ago, were shouting about death panels. I’m extremely skeptical of their take on the story, given their past record. Are you? > > It may turn out that the whole thing was a massive boondoggle so clever that Republicans at the time weren’t able to untwist it and instead had to make up death panel stories to have a way to oppose the law. I am, to repeat, skeptical that that’s the most objective interpretation of the story. I thought the idea of ‘death panels’ as a criticism was quite stupid at the time. Given the sentiment expressed in this thread, people should have no objection to that lie as long as it was in an attempt to achieve a more desirable outcome. Right? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548.md?page=3)