I agree that legislative intent is in scope on Law.SE. Your answer to that question is an excellent example of why.
However, since the inception of Law.SE I don't think I've seen more than a handful of answers that have helpfully illuminated a question of legislative intent. Meanwhile, we are constantly bombarded with questions of the form, "Why is the law this way?" Consequently, early on we developed a norm that you can see reiterated in the comments of numerous migrations to Politics.SE:
This Stack Exchange addresses what the law is. Why the law is that way is generally a political question more suitable to Politics.SE.
What the law should be is generally a matter of opinion and hence not suited to Stack Exchange.
What happened in this case?
In retrospect, given your excellent answer, I would neither migrate nor close that question.
However, the question as stated does not seem to specify an interest in legislative intent any more than it does political or administrative expedience. The latter two interests (in my mind) justify a migration to either Politics.SE or Workplace.SE respectively.
In this particular case we can only get the question back if a Workplace.SE moderator rejects the migration.
I think it would be great if we have contributors able to continue to provide legislative-intent answers of that caliber. In order to give such questions a fighting chance I just created the legislative-intent tag.