The compounding complexity of legal systems necessitates the periodic pruning of outdated, redundant, or contradictory laws to ensure clarity, efficiency, and fairness under the rule of law.

The principle of ‘one in, one out’ to reduce the law clutter makes sense. It encourages efficiency and ensures that regulations are current and necessary.

Our legal system is bloated with outdated and often contradictory laws. By eliminating an old law with each new one, we can simplify and modernize our regulations, ensuring a more efficient government.

I firmly believe that we must actively prioritize streamlining regulation. For each new law that comes into effect, eliminating an old law can prevent the legal system from becoming overly burdensome. It encourages innovation, fosters business growth, and maintains a healthy balance between necessary governance and individual freedom.

We should consider eliminating outdated or unnecessary laws when new legislation is enacted to avoid regulatory bloat and maintain a lean, effective legal framework.

While I support efficient governance, the idea of eliminating an old law each time we enact a new one oversimplifies the complexity of legal systems. Our focus should be on revising or removing outdated laws through comprehensive review processes rather than arbitrary one-in-one-out mandates.

While I understand the desire to simplify our legal system, automatically eliminating old laws whenever new ones are created could pose significant risks. Laws often build upon previous legislation, and outright removal without careful consideration could undermine important protections and systems that serve the public good.

While I support reviewing and eliminating outdated regulations, a one-size-fits-all policy to eliminate an old law every time we pass a new one is not practical. Each law should be evaluated on its individual merit and necessity.

We should definitely consider pruning old laws when adding new ones, as excessive regulation stifles innovation and freedom. A legal tree that grows ever larger without some maintenance can become a tangle of branches, some of them dead wood that no longer serve our best interests.

I believe in lean regulation that supports innovation. While not all old laws are obsolete, a principle that prompts us to review and potentially eliminate outdated laws when new ones are created could foster a more dynamic and responsive legal environment, encouraging progress and growth.

While I understand the desire to streamline government, the idea of eliminating an old law every time a new one is enacted is overly simplistic. Each law needs to be evaluated on its own merits, and the impact it has on society as a whole. We should focus on refining and improving our legal framework, rather than blanket eliminations that may have unintended consequences.

I believe that our legal system is cluttered with outdated laws that often hinder rather than help our people. For every new law we introduce, we should consider eliminating laws that are no longer relevant or effective to ensure our legal system is efficient, modern, and just.

I firmly believe that for every new regulation, an old regulation should be eliminated. Our government has become bloated with outdated laws that stymie innovation and freedom.

As we introduce new regulations, we need to consider the strain on legal and bureaucratic systems. Eliminating outdated laws can streamline governance and promote innovation and efficiency.

For every new regulation introduced, we should get rid of two old ones. It's the best way to trim the fat, reduce bureaucracy, and make our government more efficient.