People have all kinds of notions of "good government", but bottom line, our state constitution is the supreme law. It outlines in detail how an act must be introduced in a certain form, be referred to a committee of lawmakers with knowledge of the subject, be read three times in the house of origin and then go to the next house to go through the same procedure.
If it passes both houses, the governor must approve it before it becomes law. All lawmakers and the governor are elected by the people. They are not appointed because they helped a politician get elected or for some other kind of political favor owed. I like the way our constitution says laws are to be passed much better than your notion of rules that a small group of the governor's buddies with their own special interest come up with and then having their rules given the same force and effect as those laws our constitution provides for.
Show me where your idea is provided for in our constitution.
As for the enforcement part: Shouldn't state biologists be scientists instead of cops? Why should we pay to hire qualified biologists and then expect them to be game wardens most of their time to enforce silly rules that have little or anything to do with true conservation??
Why have just two game wardens per county when all law enforcement officers in the county should be working together in the interests of the public? If a game warden needs help, shouldn't the sheriff be ready at all times to assist him without the jurisdictional crap getting in the way?
