[function_seven]

I've always wondered if we could scale the term of the law with the vote total.

For example, lets say your state legislature has 100 representatives. You could require sunset clauses as follows:

    51-55 votes:  2 years
    56-60 votes:  5 years
    61-80 votes: 10 years
    81+   votes: No expiration

Then those bills that are narrowly passed would result in a law with a limited shelf-life.

[cmurf]

This can be done voluntarily in the bill at the time it's written. If you want to make it compulsory, it'd need to be a city charter amendment, a state constitutional amendment, or a federal constitutional amendment. Doing something like this doesn't just magically happen. It's in fact a kind of law that would be much harder to pass than it just being what it is, which is sometimes used and sometimes not used, on a case by case basis.

[function_seven]

Sure. I’m not asking for magical intervention here :)

It’s a thought experiment to see how our lawmaking might change under such a regime. California’s constitution can be amended by ballot propositions, and it's not too crazy to think that such a prop might pass.

I can see a scenario where a city, state, or other political division sees volatility on the horizon, and enacts just a change as a kind of defense against future laws being ossified

[4ntonius8lock]

I love the experiment. To quote a great song:

...Some things will never change

That's just the way it is

Ah, but don't you believe them...