Case in point: CO has a lower speed limit on the stretch of I-70 from the eastern Continental Divide down to almost Denver that is very different from the speed limit on the Western side (some might say that it “defies” reason). And IIRC, they’ve implemented a variable speed limit for this section so that it’s even lower in inclement weather.
And yet, you’ll have a high concentration of accidents on this stretch during inclement weather . . . one report I’ve seen has a disproportionate number of 4WD/AWD vehicles.
[/tan]
Or maybe it was 3 days if the preparers were subject to the normal 72 hour rule. I’m not actually sure about that. I’m not the person who hits “submit” on e-filing the returns. I know normally we have 72 hours, but we were sitting on SO MANY unemployment returns that I’m not sure it would have been possible to re-review them all in 72 hours and file them that fast.
I think it WOULD be controversial if we attempted a unified federal law.
I’m sure there are lots of people who are unhappy with where their state’s murder law falls. But I think even more people would be unhappy if we regulated it federally.
I would also add that there’s far less involvement in the “political process” (most specifically, voting) at the state (and local) levels.
It also doesn’t help that there’s little “profit” in media outlets with an internet presence to focus on “local” issues–especially when the issue doesn’t fit a particular narrative that the media-powers-that-be are trying to sell.
Not sure what sort of “basic” traffic laws you’re thinking about . . . I offer a few items that come to my mind when with this term:
I would hate to have people in GA trying to determine “appropriate” speed limits for most roads in CO. I am also sure that in this sort of “law” would also rely heavily on expected traffic patterns.
A law is only as good as how it is enforced, so it seems to me that the agency that is expected to enforce the law should have representation in some manner. Here, I’m thinking of things like seatbelt laws for autos and helmet laws for motorcycles.
The body making the law would need to have some measure of ability to hold the enforcement agency accountable, how would that look given the above statement about the expected enforcement agency is the local police department but the legislative agent is US Congress?
Speed limits vary by road, not by state, so i don’t see how that’s relevant. Speed limit signs look the same throughout the country, however, and i think that’s a good thing. And it’s due to federal regulations. (Tied to highway funds, since Congress doesn’t actually have authority over roads )
In college, my gf took a course on the Art of Political Manipulation. It was practical, the book covered things like how much money you need to run for a given position. On day 1 they laid out the philosophy, which is, if you aren’t willing to fight a little dirty, you will lose, and anything you hope to accomplish will be lost as well.
I don’t know if it’s all that bad. Many politicians themselves seem to be basically okay.
Anyway, that’s all to say some level of cynicism is good. You should have low expectations. You should doubt everyone’s motives, and question your own ideals. Bothsidism isn’t about that-- rather it’s about being -so- cynical that you equate wildly different levels of evil.
Distance is a part of it, but I’ve seen plenty of corruption at state, county and city levels of government as well. It’s the money and power. It always has been. It always will be. Anytime it gets concentrated, it leads to bad results. The greater the concentration, the greater the corruption and and greed. And the federal level is the greatest concentration of money and power.
Human nature hasn’t, and won’t change. FACT.
And yet millions of voters continue to believe the siren songs from politicians who are nothing more than snake oil salesmen. (I guess I should remember, “human nature doesn’t change” - the gullible will always be here and susceptible to enchanting fables and promises told by charlatans masquerading as caring politicians).
It’s not an issue so much of providing good service as it is making efficient use of the funds available. Private firms have a strong incentive (although with a notable principal-agent problem) to use efficient use of the funds because that’s how they attract funds in the first place.
Governments don’t have this issue quite as blatantly. Taxpayers don’t really get to conclude the ROE on their tax dollars is too low so they’re going to invest in a different government (although to some degree with people moving states).
This much of your post is true. But I don’t follow your logic that the way to combat greed and corruption in the private sector is to set up a government swimming in greed and corruption.
There will be some amount of corruption in any endeavor of any substantial size. I’d prefer a government accountable to people overseeing and prosecuting the corruption when found.