"Mission Creep" in law -- can it be prevented?

[Farin]

@Deeg

And that right there is the crux of the matter. Creep usually happens because a group of people think that something can be improved by expanding the mission of the law. What HurricaneDitka thinks is creep Evil Captor thinks is good policy, and vice versa. There is no practical way to avoid creep because we largely want it.

That’s why I think that before any aspect of the executive branch can simply move the bar, we need some Congressional action. While it’s not perfect, it at least provides a check and balance against over-reach.

[Evil_Captor]

@HurricaneDitka

I’m certainly no fan of rivers catching fire, and I don’t want Grizzly bears to go extinct. That being said, the EPA is NOT a successful, well-run organization in my eyes:

I knew about Beale before I wrote my post on the EPA. I don’t have any illusions, there’s a lot of crookedness and corruption in Washington and the EPA is not magically exempt from it. That said, the issue in Beale’s case does not seem to be mission creep, but individual corruption, something ELSE I would be glad to see eliminated, but perhaps a topic for another thread.

[HurricaneDitka]

@Evil_Captor

I knew about Beale before I wrote my post on the EPA. I don’t have any illusions, there’s a lot of crookedness and corruption in Washington and the EPA is not magically exempt from it. That said, the issue in Beale’s case does not seem to be mission creep, but individual corruption, something ELSE I would be glad to see eliminated, but perhaps a topic for another thread.

True and I agree. Individual corruption at an extremely high level. As for the EPA and “mission creep”, here are some examples of EPA actions that I don’t think people wanting to save Grizzly Bears in the 70’s ever planned on happening:

EPA Rules Force Lead Smelter Closure

VA farm family battles EPA attempt to seize control of their land

[Evil_Captor]

@Deeg

And that right there is the crux of the matter. Creep usually happens because a group of people think that something can be improved by expanding the mission of the law. What HurricaneDitka thinks is creep Evil Captor thinks is good policy, and vice versa. There is no practical way to avoid creep because we largely want it.

I would be OK with limitations on how the EPA can expand it’s mission, you can’t exempt some agencies from mission creep. That said, EPA is the second most disliked agency by businesses because they resent ANY limitation on their ability to make money by polluting. Gasoline manufacturers didn’t like having to take lead out of gasoline. Energy firms are STILL resisting reducing CO2 in the atmosphere. They all want to profit from harming the environment. It’s purely money against human beings, and as usual, money wins. Which highlights another concern with mission creep, as you point out … it can be used as a stalking horse for anyone who wants to cripple a law or an agency.

My hope is that the harm of mission creep can unite disparate groups like libertarians (who see almost all government as one form or another of mission creep) gun advocates and progressives seeking freedom of speech, in fighting mission creep in the areas they are united on. Which the EPA would not be one of.

[Czarcasm]

@HurricaneDitka

True and I agree. Individual corruption at an extremely high level. As for the EPA and “mission creep”, here are some examples of EPA actions that I don’t think people wanting to save Grizzly Bears in the 70’s ever planned on happening:

EPA Rules Force Lead Smelter Closure

VA farm family battles EPA attempt to seize control of their land

What was wrong with the former, and could you please provide a news release(not a one-sided press release from their legal counsel) for the latter?

[Bricker]

@HurricaneDitka

I’m certainly no fan of rivers catching fire, and I don’t want Grizzly bears to go extinct. That being said, the EPA is NOT a successful, well-run organization in my eyes:

@Czarcasm

And the Wall Street Journal Opinion section is not an unbiased source of news in my eyes.

Ooookay.

How about the EPA itself (warning: PDF) then?

@the EPA OIG

The EPA Needs to Improve Timeliness and
Documentation of Workforce and Workload
Management Corrective Actions
.
.
.
The EPA did not complete the majority of the corrective actions relating to
workload and workforce management within planned timeframes. Further, some
corrective actions were delayed by more than 6 months and the EPA did not
notify the OIG of those delays, as required by EPA Manual 2750. The Office of
Management and Budget Circular A-50 requires agencies to establish systems to
assure the timely implementation of corrective actions. Complex corrective action
plans and implementing new workload and workforce management initiatives
contributed to delays in completing the corrective actions. Program staff and
managers from the Office of Administration and Resources Management and the
Office of the Chief Financial Officer informed us they were not aware of the
Manual 2750 requirement to notify the OIG if actions are delayed 6 months or
more. Delaying corrective actions relating to workforce and workload
management resulted in unfinished improvements to the EPA’s management of
its limited resources.

We also found that the EPA did not update the status for several of the corrective
actions we reviewed. EPA Manual 2750 requires audit follow-up coordinators to
manage audit data in the agency’s Management Audit Tracking System. This
includes entering and updating corrective actions and their associated due dates
for each corrective action. However, the AFCs and other program staff did not
believe it was necessary to update the status for completed actions since the
completion date had been added in a separate field. There were some instances
where the AFC could not update the status field because program staff had not
provided certification that it was complete or had not provided a new planned
date. If the EPA does not update MATS with current information, the OIG and
other stakeholders do not have accurate information available regarding the
status of corrective actions.

They also a bad, biased source?

[Ravenman]

Are you implying that if an inspector general or GAO report can be found on any government agency, that they are “NOT a successful, well-run organization”?

[kaylasdad99]

ISTM that the problem with setting a goal of eliminating “mission creep” in law is that, because it will necessarily be tackled incrementally, how will you know when to stop?

[robert_columbia]

@HurricaneDitka

There isn’t a federal “murder statute” that I’m aware of. I’m pretty sure that’s an issue for the states, as most things ought to be…

However, DC itself is not a state and its local law derives from the authority of Congress, not any specific state. The local DC Government exists because Congress says it should, and Congress could abolish it at any time, unlike the governments of the states who are partially sovereign. The same principle applies to the offshore territories - Congress could abolish the legislature and legal code of Puerto Rico or Guam and pass a law making murdering registered sex offenders legal on Tuesdays or something else weird.

[Ludovic]

@kaylasdad99

ISTM that the problem with setting a goal of eliminating “mission creep” in law is that, because it will necessarily be tackled incrementally, how will you know when to stop?

You could create another law to tell you when to stop the mission creep.

[kaylasdad99]

That would work, I gue – hey, WAITAMINUTE!

[Zeke_N.Destroi]

@BrainGlutton

Well, I know this is my answer for everything, but if we had a proportional representation system, then the Libertarian Party would have a few seats in every legislature – not enough to enact their full agenda, but perhaps enough to have a Libertarian or two on every committee, and never failing to speak up and object to any instance of “mission creep” in law or in anything else public, just on general principles, it’s what they do. Of course, to effectively block such, they would have to come up with some non-Libertarian arguments to persuade a sufficient number non-Libertarian legislators; and sometimes they might, or at least get some concessions or amendments. But, at any rate, anything that passes will have gone through a mild acid bath of Libertarian scrutiny and criticism on the public record.

You show me a legislator, Libertarian or otherwise, who calls for or openly supports a loosening of laws pertaining to sex offenders and I’ll show you a former legislator.

I don’t know what the solution would be. I know that it is used in both directions (SSM for instance if men can marry men, then why not donkeys?)

It would require one of two things to happen. Either the general public would have to respond less emotionally and do some actual thinking (maybe even research) on issues thus allowing for a rational discussion and hopefully reasonable answer or the majority of politicians would have to stop caring about re-election.

Until one (or both) of those things happen the song will remain the same.

[Evil_Captor]

@Zeke_N.Destroi

You show me a legislator, Libertarian or otherwise, who calls for or openly supports a loosening of laws pertaining to sex offenders and I’ll show you a former legislator.

Actually, such laws have already passed. The Romeo and Juliet exceptions for juvenile sex offenders (so 18 year olds didn’t get jailed for consensual sexual relations with 17 year old girlfriends) constitutes a loosening of the statutes, based on a clear injustice in the system. Nobody that sponsored such laws was dumb enough to say they were “supporting a loosening of laws pertaining to sex offenders” though their opponents might have. Didn’t matter, the law was clearly unjust, and it got changed. When you go with specifics and you have a good case, the generalities do not tend to work.

[Hershele_Ostropoler]

@HurricaneDitka

That’s one of the biggest reasons I’m interested in it. A whole bunch of laws wouldn’t be re-upped. Congress would start with the important / absolutely necessary ones, work their way down to the good ideas, but they’d have to start over again before they go to waste too much time on idiotic laws.

Yeah, but think of all the courthouses and post offices that would suddenly be nameless.

Also, this whole EPA discussion is really underscoring that one person’s mission creep is someone else’s reasonable and necessary exertion of authority.

[lance_strongarm]

@HurricaneDitka

I’d like to see every law automatically expire after 10 years or so. The good ones would be renewed without much controversy, but the ones that have “crept” out of control might not get renewed, or might be appropriately pared back or adjusted at that point. It would theoretically give legislators an opportunity to reflect on the wisdom of that particular law.

Many laws already expire regularly, at least on the federal level.

[lance_strongarm]

@HurricaneDitka

There isn’t a federal “murder statute” that I’m aware of.

Of course there is!

The feds prosecute for murder. They just don’t do it very often - usually in cases involving other federal crimes, on federal property, etc.

[lance_strongarm]

P.S. Any time you see a “reauthorization” bill or law, that’s renewing a law that was due to expire or already did. That includes the existence and functions of entire federal agencies. It’s common on the federal level. An expiration date in a law is called a sunset provision.

[grude]

@Bricker

Sorry for the hijack, but this little bit of hyperbole keeps coming back, no matter how many times its debunked:

The rest of the thread discusses more detail; the main point remains.

It isn’t hyperbole, they charge you as indecent exposure not public urination(at least in Texas).

Look at this article, it agrees with my experience in Texas and Louisiana where they will charge kids playing doctor, teens taking photos of themselves nude, the customers of prostitutes and prostitutes themselves, and anyone else poor and vulnerable they can snare with sex crimes and get them on the registry.

7 Surprising Things That Could Make You A Sex Offender

There have been cases in Texas where someone was threatened with having to register as a sex offender for possessing or selling SEX TOYS!

Texas obscenity statute

Prosecution under the statute was rare but had occurred on occasion. In Burleson in 2004, Joanne Webb, a mother of three and a former schoolteacher, faced up to one year in prison for selling a vibrator to two undercover police officers posing as a married couple at a private party.[1] She was later acquitted, and the undercover officers were issued reprimands. In 2007, a lingerie shop in Lubbock was raided, and items “deemed to be illegal by the Texas Penal Code” were confiscated. The clerk on duty at the time was arrested and may have to register as a sex offender.[2] In 2001, attorneys Mary and Ted Roberts used the obscenity statute in an elaborate extortion scheme against a number of men who had engaged in extramarital relations with Mary Roberts.[3]

Tony Washington

Has to register as a sex offender for having consensual sex with his sister, they are less than a year apart again in Texas. I’ve also heard of people being forced to register for false imprisonment, which can be as minor as fighting with someone and shoving them or blocking them from leaving a room. It doesn’t matter whether sex or rape was involved at all.

Basically as I see it the situation in the USA is even worse than is represented, and the sex offender registry is mainly used to harass poor defendants, or those not able to cut a deal.

[Evil_Captor]

@grude

It isn’t hyperbole, they charge you as indecent exposure not public urination(at least in Texas).

Look at this article, it agrees with my experience in Texas and Louisiana where they will charge kids playing doctor, teens taking photos of themselves nude, the customers of prostitutes and prostitutes themselves, and anyone else poor and vulnerable they can snare with sex crimes and get them on the registry.

Surprising Things That Could Make You a Sex Offender - Business Insider

There have been cases in Texas where someone was threatened with having to register as a sex offender for possessing or selling SEX TOYS!

Texas obscenity statute - Wikipedia

Tony Washington - Wikipedia

Has to register as a sex offender for having consensual sex with his sister, they are less than a year apart again in Texas. I’ve also heard of people being forced to register for false imprisonment, which can be as minor as fighting with someone and shoving them or blocking them from leaving a room. It doesn’t matter whether sex or rape was involved at all.

Basically as I see it the situation in the USA is even worse than is represented, and the sex offender registry is mainly used to harass poor defendants, or those not able to cut a deal.

And there you have the problem with mission creep. It can be used by creeps whose mission is far outside the initial scope of the law.

[lance_strongarm]

@Evil_Captor

And there you have the problem with mission creep. It can be used by creeps whose mission is far outside the initial scope of the law.

But is it outside the initial scope of the law?

It’s just as likely that the law was poorly written so as to have too broad a scope. In that case, not only are the people enforcing it not the culprits, they are obligated to follow the law.

In this case, my quick-ass review of the law in question (CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CHAPTER 62. SEX OFFENDER REGISTRATION PROGRAM) seems to indicate the selling sex toys is not an offense that would get you on the registry in Texas. And the only mention of this possibility is a reporter saying a clerk “may” have to register - not that she actually was. So there’s no evidence of overreach in the first place.