That's complicated. This isn't what lawmakers are interested in passing. Broad "get it done however" motions is how modern laws are written, with some very notable exceptions due to lobbying.
That's how most modern regulations are written.
It was not specified in the Constitution that the Congress shall delegate the finer details of lawmaking to the Executive Branch in the form of Administrative Law. It said that legislative power is wielded specifically by the Congress. Given that judicial review takes as an input the intent Oof the Congress, it seems daft to leave the intent to question by not having the details worked out by the legislature.
This has the practical upshot in disincentivizing unnecessary or frivolous lawmaking to boot. If instead of spending time trying to jam in notionary laws into an omnibus bill somewhere, a legislator had to come to terms with the how, not just the what, I'd wager we'd over time start to see a far morecohesive legal landscape begin to take shape.
Then why should I (or anybody) be expected to follow it?
And before you say "modern regulations" I'll point out that my position generally is that regulations instead of law are how we've gotten so deranged in the first place.
Also, the money is fucked.