Process vs. Results

Just want to speak a little bit about my general principles. So far in a couple of the proposed amendments, I’ve said I am for the policy it represents, but will vote against it because it is a constitutional amendment, and I believe that is the wrong way to enact such a policy. But Sam, you say, if you are for the policy, shouldn’t you vote for those items, because that will produce an end result you favor more?

Well, it would, but for one thing. One of the things that I have always based my decisions on, both in my personal life, and in public policy issues like this, is that making sure there is CORRECT PROCESS, is more important that making sure there are CORRECT RESULTS. To use the old cliche for this, “The ends do not justify the means”.

In other words, even if the end state is a desireable one, if the way used to get there is an inappropriate one, then I do not believe one should go in that direction. Examples of how this applies to my views on some policy issues:

* Past discrimination should not be “corrected” by counter balancing it with current discrimination in the opposite direction.
* Using torture on suspected terrorists is not an appropriate way of preventing future attacks.
* The death penalty is not an appropriate way to punish or deter crime.
* Taking money from the rich to give to the poor is not a proper way to address proverty.
* Using “Eminent domain” to obtain land for public works or improvements is inappropriate.
* In most cases (not all), war is not an appropriate response to international disputes.
* There are many things which are “wrong” which should NOT be illegal.
* If someone does not follow the instructions properly and does something wrong when voting, their vote should NOT be counted (if that is what the law says), regardless of their intent.
* In most (but not all) cases, a properly passed law should be followed, even if it is stupid.
* Forcing a minimum wage on employers is not a proper way of addressing poverty.
* Consititutional Amendments are not a proper way to enact policy decisions.

I put the “(not all)” cavet explicitly in a couple of those, but in general the principle is NOT an absolute one. There are undoubitdly many cases where the ends DO justify the means… generally when the benefit of the “end” is much much much greater than the injustice done by the improper “means”. So for instance, in the torture case, if it was KNOWN that via torture one could produce information that would prevent a nuclear attack and save the lives of millions, would it be appropriate? OK, maybe. Are there some cases where the danger or injustice happening is so great that war to correct whatever is wrong is appropriate? Yes, probably.

It is not that I believe that an improper method is an automatic veto of whatever is happening, it is just that I put the bar very high on how much better the results must be to justify using a process or method that is unfair or improper in any way. As an example, on the issue of the proposed constitutional amendments, I’m sure most people view the method (constitutional amendement via referendum or the normal legislative process) as almost irrelevant, and therefore will vote exclusively on the issue itself, and which vote they believe will produce a policy result they prefer.

I on the other hand, consider that the propriety of the process itself, and using a constitutional document as a vehicle for policy issues, to be just as important if not more important than the issues themselves. If I saw any of these issues as something that was vitally important, and I also felt it was for whatever reason an issue impossible to be solved by the normal legislative process, then I *might* consider this as a potential way of addressing the issue, since the seriousness of the issue would overcome my objection to using a constitution in this way… I don’t see that situation in any of the proposed amendments I have looked at so far.

Anyway, I’m sure many will disagree with my logic here, and say the end result is more important than the process. But I believe in process, and following correct process, even in cases where it ends up screwing me over in the end and resulting in policies I don’t approve of. So be it. :-)