Topic: Regulation
Do You Really Need a License to Arrange Furniture? The Institute for Justice: Taking on the rent-seekers, one cartel at a time.by RS Davis
(libertarian)
Friday, August 29, 2008
Have you ever heard of the Institute for Justice (IJ)? They're like the ACLU, except they tackle those issues that the ACLU won't touch - you know, things that aren't free speech or abortion issues, like unfair licensing schemes and eminent domain abuse. This is from their Profile:
Founded in 1991, the Institute for Justice is what a civil liberties law firm should be. As our nation's only libertarian public interest law firm, we engage in cutting-edge litigation and advocacy both in the courts of law and in the court of public opinion on behalf of individuals whose most basic rights are denied by the government--like the right to earn an honest living, private property rights, and the right to free speech, especially in the areas of commercial and Internet speech. As Wired magazine said, the Institute for Justice "helps individuals subject to wacky government regulations."
Simply put, we challenge the government when it stands in the way of people trying to earn an honest living, when it unconstitutionally takes away individuals' property, when bureaucrats instead of parents dictate the education of children, and when government stifles speech. We seek a rule of law under which individuals can control their destinies as free and responsible members of society.
They're awesome - you should sign up for their newsletter. They ended the dance ban in Pinal County, AZ; they successfully defended an impoverished woman's right to braid her neighbor's hair for money without having to go through expensive and unnecessary licensing procedures; they even broke up the casket cartel in Missouri, allowing private vendors to sell caskets without a funeral director's license.
You see, most of these licensing schemes are in place to prevent new competition in a field. It is a way for rent-seeking businesses to maintain cartel prices. By making the entry cost into a market artificially high, they effectively weed out a certain percentage of their competition. As Nobel Prize-winning economist Milton Friedman famously said, "licensure almost inevitably becomes a tool in the hands of a special producer group to obtain a monopoly position at the expense of the rest of the public. There is no way to avoid this result."
These schemes often mire self-starters in unnecessary poverty, and hamper the market's ability to provide services at affordable prices. As James Harris points out, "Today, an incredible one in five Americans must secure the government's permission to pursue their occupation -- a figure that has risen from about one in 20 in the 1950s."
The IJ has currently set their sights on the Interior Design Cartels across this country. They've released a report entitled Designing Cartels: How Industry Insiders Cut Out Competition (PDF). On its face, this is already an absurd licensing scheme - why should anyone need the State's approval to arrange furniture, buy plants, and hire painters?
Twenty-two states have some kind of titling law for interior designers, and four states and the District of Columbia also require aspiring designers to acquire government licenses to practice. For decades, powerful factions within the interior design industry have lobbied for legislatures to impose increasingly stringent regulations, arguing that interior design requires a minimum amount of education, experience and examination, codified by the government, to ensure public health, safety and welfare.
The results of this case study, however, indicate that there is no threat to public health, safety or welfare requiring government regulation of the interior design industry.
I wish the Institute for Justice the best of luck in this and all future endeavors - you guys do great work, and are a refuge for those whose liberty has been violated who feel they have no advocate.
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 17 thumbs so far
The views expressed in this
article are those of RS Davis only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. RS Davis is
solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an
employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Posted By: Walt Thiessen
Date: 2008-08-31 04:30:33
I like the IJ too. You forgot one of their most important recent contributions. IJ attorneys are the ones who filed the DC vs Heller case that led to the Supreme Court's 5-4 ruling that was slightly in favor of gun rights.
Oh wow, yeah - that was an obvious example that completely slipped my mind! I always think of Bob Levy when I think of that case. I don't think he is connected with them, is he?
Want to comment on this
article? Leave your comment here. Your email address is
required to track your comment. However, we will neither
publish your email address nor distribute it to other
organizations or persons. The only reason we might use
it would be if we needed to contact you regarding your
comment. All comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
