Power/wealth asymmetries. The incumbent organizations are powerful, have many resources and actively work to prevent other organizations from achieving the same level if competency.
The number of laws/rules added vs. removed in any given year is like 100:1.
New rules lead to profitable business opportunities (and future lobbies), incumbents get to entrench their positions using the new rules, and people get stockholm syndrome and just end up accepting the new normal.
Modern representative democracy is Parkinson's law at work. Government is the purest form of bureaucracy and monopoly. Thus, it finds ways to grow itself every year regardless of what happens.
That argument is so tiring. Yes, we know, we all understand this, that’s true of every draconian law proposal. What’s the point of repeating that over and over every time? If you want to give up, do, but let others fight without needless discouraging. If everyone thought like you, this would have passed first time.
There is also an alternative, which is the way problems with governments used to get solved in the past. Not that we should aim for that to be necessary, but it often seems that our politicians are hellbend on getting there quickly. I guess it's all "to hell with the consequences!" for them.
