Proof of Concept vs. Finished Design
Just for a moment, think like an inventor and then like a manufacturer. The subject is promising legislation to further good governance. Decades ago, The Saturday Evening Post had a minor feature called “There Otta Be a Law,” which offered details on where statutory law sometimes missed its mark. When we consider new political issues, we are invoking the message of that item.
When an inventor finishes the design of an invention, he must prove the concept. There must be a test of the completed project. It is during that phase that most of its faults appear. Designers will make changes until the project does what the inventor wanted. At that point, the inventor has a finished design to proceed with. It may prove to be marketable or not.
If the project is popular, other designers may look at it. They may want to exploit its usefulness and change it enough to claim new rights to produce something similar, or they will see something unique after experiencing the original. It is appropriate to view the development of our statutory law in that way.
Most laws that have ever been written attempt to control a negative situation. When a law is developed, every incidence of the action the author designs it to prevent should be spelled out. However, that is not always the case. The judicial system may identify flaws, or implementation may produce unintended negative situations. In some cases, the solution the law proposed doesn’t work at all. That proof of concept failed.
One proof of concept that has worked astonishingly well is our US Constitution. Governments have replicated its framework worldwide, but not always permanently. Many citizens don’t understand that a representative democracy started as a theoretical idea before the Constitution became its proof of concept. The Constitution was never intended to be the finished product.
The authors presented the first ten changes as a bundle; the next seventeen followed until 1992. Statutory law has filled in for various needs along the way. We should note that two amendments about alcohol production cancel each other out. The change proved unworkable.
Our Supreme Court is presently under scrutiny because, as the saying goes, “men (and women) aren’t angels”. Citizens question whether the nine justices are issuing their opinions without partisan bias or even preexisting affinity toward one side of the issue. Citizens now have to consider adjusting the Constitution and maintaining the balance of separate powers for each branch of government.
Unlike the belief of first-day students in my Nature of The Law class in college, our laws are not based on the bible. Law in the United States is whatever its citizens want it to be. However, all legal codes must conform to those that established our form of government.
Safe drinking water is an example of a practical problem where solutions have evolved and become more complex over the years. When rainwater captured and contained was insufficient, humans looked toward rivers and streams. Then, they used wells. When these extra measures became unsafe, laws controlled sewage. Then, they had to expand to control dumping sewage in running water and the oceans. Then we began to understand how nature’s balance was being harmed in other ways and had to pass more laws preventing those harms. We haven’t found perfect solutions for everyone on the planet yet.
The mission stated in our Constitution is to form a more perfect union. The statement indicates it is a work in progress. It’s a proof of concept, not a finished design. Another concept that was considered but rejected at the time was a friendly confederation. It was a loose bond between states, giving each member autonomy and allowing separation.
The idea of a union is so appealing that the world considered The League of Nations and is still working on the concept of a United Nations. At this point, the nations are more like confederations than unions. However, our United States is still the model that everyone is perfecting. We owe our descendants continued progress.