I hate the title "Lawmaker." The word connotes that there is a reason to continue to make laws. To which I disagree. There is no reason for continuing to "make" new laws but every need to revise or revoke old ones. We've assumed lawmakers know what they're doing because we put them there based on their "desire" to serve and how many babies they're holding in their TV ads. Representative Chris Cannon in his recent re-election bid implemented this pathetic "I love babies, so vote for me" scheme in his TV ads. He and others must think we're stupid. Which is one likely reason he lost to Jason Chaffetz.

Contrary to popular belief, you will never know how well a lawmaker performs their responsibilities until its too late. They're already there. And since most average citizens won't take action until a law directly affects personal economies or properties, they put the issue on the back burner and go on with life. Damn that's frustrating.

Every year media reports highlight the numerous changes or additions to laws within Utah. This year there were 300 or so new laws enacted by our Legislature. Thankfully, a lot of those new laws were actually changes to old laws. Hmmm... progress.

Sometimes I ask myself, "How many more laws are necessary?" If legislators continue to make laws to enact consequences on lawbreakers, when does it become so burdensome that the populous must fight back? We could be "lawed into lawlessness."

Now, not all laws provide punishments, some provide additional rights to citizens (either by revoking or adjusting old laws or, rarely, new laws). I'm thinking those type of laws are not very common. But then I'm no law expert...

Just a random thought.