I don't disagree that you're not all alike. Why, some of my best friends are lawyers. However, the overwhelming preponderance of lawyers at all levels of government has got to create a bias toward lawmaking and legalese. Personally, I think government would be a lot more representative if no particular profession could make up more than a very limited percentage of the total population of any law-giving body. I'd say 5% off the top of my head. That assures at least 20 different worldviews trying to hash out the problems they face, instead of "we need to make a law" being predominant.I don't think I agree with that, Don. Some lawyers are like that, sure. But so are a lot of non-lawyers.
I spend a lot of time arguing on the side of fewer, better laws and fewer lawsuits, both here and in real life. I feel like my legal experience has given me a better view than i once had of unintended consequences, the importance of crafting laws carefully and well, and the downsides of lawsuits (I can't tell you how many acquaintances I've talked out of suing someone for something frivolous or hopeless.)
So. We are not all alike.
Frex, imagine a U.S. Senate with no more than 5 lawyers, or a House with no more than 21, the other 414 being butchers, bakers, and candlestick makers, all of whom have to go back to their careers for at least five years after a max of two six-year terms, or return a sizeable portion of their legislative salary to the treasury. A legislature aware that they're going to have to actually live under the laws they created while they were in office.
The legal landscape would be far, far different than the one we have today.
Last edited: