>He said nothing about it then never being possible to propose a law. A reasonable cool-down period to ensure politicians can't simply exploit the fatigue of the public would be reasonable - perhaps 10 or 12 years.

So if gay marriage or weed legalization was defeated in 2015 you shouldn't be able to have a go at it until 2025? Or if YIMBY zoning reforms or AI regulation were defeated in 2025 you shouldn't be able try again until 2035?

That's not double jeopardy then

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_jeopardy

The clause in the US constitution specifically has no time limits and it looks like it's the same for all the countries listed on wiki.

>perhaps 10 or 12 years

So if party A votes down proposal X and the next election party B that publicly supports it wins they shouldn't be allowed to propose that law?

Logical conclusion would be for the governing party to get some stooge to propose all the policies they oppose, get them far enough to the voting stage and reject them. Now your opponents can't do anything even if you lose the next election...

Of course doesn't really apply to pseudo-democratic institutions like the EU..

He did make a reference to the double jeopardy law in the US though which, if I'm not mistaken, explicitly prohibits exactly that type of behaviour.

That would be a boon to the conservative movements, for sure. And also ensure that almost nothing gets done unless it is extremely populist.