I am still waiting for my new microphone to arrive, and the music at the end seems a little loud. I hope you get the idea. Give me feedback if you wish.

For further reading, see the following links:

Why we should obey God, and not the state and why Romans 13 is not absolute

Fixing What’s Not Broken in Georgia

An Illegal Dentist Operating from a Trailer Park

Florida Teen Poses as Physician’s Assitant

Midwife Arrested in Indiana

It Takes 10 Times More Educational Hours to Cut Hair Than to Be an EMT*, and Other Horrifying Truths About Occupational Licensing

All of my posts labeled as “professional regulation”

Professional Regulation Rant

The law fixes a problem that never existed — at least not among doctors. “We’re not aware of any undocumented immigrants that are physicians,” Palmisano said.

Isn’t that the case for many new laws? They purport to fix a problem that doesn’t exist. In many cases, the problem wouldn’t even exist without government involvement in the first place.

The quote above comes from NPR and is referring to the law that now requires medical professionals in Georgia (doctors, nurses, pharmacists, etc.) to file paperwork that proves their citizenship or legal residency in order to renew their professional licenses. Long time readers will know how I feel about professional licensure in the first place.

Phones go unanswered. Paperwork piles up. And processing delays, coupled with confusion over the new rules, mean lots of expired licenses.

Hughes estimates about 1,300 doctors and other medical practitioners have lost their legal ability to work. Some didn’t submit the required paperwork. Others are stuck in the backlog of applications that haven’t been processed yet.

Pretty soon their economy will take a hit because people who aren’t making money, aren’t spending money. Then people will wonder what happened. I’ll tell you what happened…the government got involved.

The crazy thing about all of this is that they aren’t even checking whether the submitted documents are genuine. So, the office workers spend tons of time checking passports and other acceptable documents against the names and addresses on the submitted paperwork and don’t even make sure they’re genuine. So, if there was a problem with illegal workers, this law isn’t even fixing it. And, this whole process has not yet revealed a single undocumented immigrant worker in the system.

Do you really need to arrest someone for violating a professional licensure law when all of the clients of said operation obviously knew that the person wasn’t actually a trying to fool anyone?

Presumably, all of the clients of such a facility would enter into the agreement with the knowledge that there were possible additional risks to these services.

So far, you’re with me. But, would you be with me if I told you that a woman was recently arrested for operating an illegal dentistry service FROM HER MOBILE HOME?

“We don’t have any information right now to say how many clients she had or how much she was charging or anything like that but inside the home evidence of a pretty significant business being run,” Smith said.

In Spanish, neighbor Leticia Serbin said she heard about a dental practice but was too scared to ever go.

Although Serbin said she did not see many people at Ramirez’s home, she said friends informed her about visits conducted there.

As a result, police charged Ramirez with conducting dentistry without a license.

Did you catch that? One neighbor had heard about the services, but chose not to go because she was scared. This implies the principle that I am espousing — that willing persons whom enter into contracts for services and exchange of goods with full disclosure by both parties, should not be subject to government backlash simply for engaging in the act. Nobody was forced to visit this “dentist.” In my opinion, you probably should be afraid to visit a dentist without a license. I would not do such a thing. We don’t know what this woman’s training was, but, evidently, some other people were not scared.

Also, the article mentions nothing about people being injured by her unlicensed practice. We will certainly never get the story from her (or her patients’) point of view. For all we know, she could have been a licensed dentist in another country that was doing this as an outreach to the poor in her community. Who knows?

All I know is that I don’t think anyone should have to pay taxes for her to be housed in the county jail and undergo trail for what amounted to no harm, no foul. Since the government cannot actually protect everyone from every potential harm, maybe they should stop trying. At that point, our communities would stop being snitch factories and get back to being communities.

Correction: The AP got the original story wrong, and the city would allow the trademark jingles if this ban is lifted.

The city of Scottsdale, Arizona is considering lifting its ban on ice cream trucks. The ban has been in place since the 1970s.

Residents also were concerned for children’s safety, said Sonnie Kirtley, a longtime resident who chairs the Coalition of Greater Scottsdale. The advocacy group focuses on land-use policies and quality of life in Scottsdale.

“It wasn’t just the drugs being sold in high schools from the vendors, but it was because of the safety,” Kirtley said at Tuesday’s meeting. “We were talking about the safety of the children running across the street to go to the ice-cream trucks.”

First of all, not many children are running with free abandon across streets these days. They’re in strollers, holding their parents’ hands, or inside playing video games.

Secondly, are we really concerned about ice cream trucks being a haven for drug deals? According to this proposal, each vendor would need to get a permit, fingerprints, and a background check. I suppose we can’t be sure that they’re not selling drugs, but

Thirdly, many citizens’ objection to possibly lifting this ban would be because it would open the gates for all kinds of street vendors. The horror!  You, see, there are implications:

“The guy driving an ice-cream truck is probably not the best-quality person,” Lorenzen said. “I think that’s one of my concerns, this guy driving slowly down the street, maybe not the first day or second day, but the third day, when they (residents) are on vacation.”

The person that made that comment has already installed  a security system in his house after a recent rash of crimes in his neighborhood, and that is without the dreaded street vendors. How could bringing residents outside for a little old-fashioned food and fellowship make things worse? Only in today’s paranoid would this be seen as a factor. What about the garbage collector? Is he or she scoping out the houses as well?

Of course, I think they should lift the ban. But, unfortunately, even if they do, the trucks will not be allowed to play their “trademark jingles.” How will the kids be roused from their electronic stupor?

Now, here’s something you don’t hear about every day: A stupid law has been repealed in Rhode Island. A 1989 law made it illegal to give any sort of false information online. Here’s a quote from the article regarding why the law was stricken recently:

Legislators said it made no sense to keep a law on the books that is violated so often by so many people.

Legislators also use this reasoning to increase speed limits in some areas. It’s awesome. I wonder why they don’t use this reasoning more often to strike laws from the books. Plenty of people go to jail senselessly for drug use, municipal code violations, practicing a career without a license (even though nobody was injured). Like other crimes, telling white lies on the internet almost always victimless. I’m glad that the legislators had some sense this time. It’s high time we started seeing a few other things in this light, too.

Of course, Rhode Island’s tiny effort to legalize something won’t mean anything if the federal government decides to make lying on the internet illegal (as I reported last fall). As you are probably aware, the federal government uses force to assert its self-perceived dominance over the states all the time.

In St. Louis, there is a long tradition of making beer. For St. Louis brewers and fans, there is a Heritage Festival to celebrate the beer of the city. Unfortunately, this year, the homebrewers will have to sit out. Even though they’ve given away samples of their beer at past festivals, the city has now determined that it is illegal. Why? Because they charge admission to the festival. You can click the above link for more details about similar battles in other states.  The workaround for this is, evidently, to have a separate festival where there is no admission fee. How does that make sense? Letting everyone in to taste free beer is somehow safer?

Chatter on homebrew forums and Twitter indicated that a free event for the brewers would take place sometime next month.

St. Louis Brews Secretary Tim Cochran, who brewed 5 gallons each of pale and blonde ale, said such an event would be a welcome “consolation prize.” But the main goal, he said, would be for homebrewers to regain their spot at Heritage Festival next year.

“All the clubs work hard to showcase our talents and hobby,” Cochran said. “This is considered a premier event to do just that. Time and time again a comment is made that the homebrew beers are every bit as good as or better than the professional-brewed beers.

“It sounds like we have some work to do in getting an old, outdated law changed. I certainly hope things can get corrected so the homebrewers can return to the festival.”

Good luck with that. In the meantime, I will be lamenting another way in which the government stymies small businesses and the free market.

If you’ve stuck with me for a while, you know that this blog started off documenting stupid laws that get regular people in trouble. From there, I decided it was a good forum to gripe about almost all government involvement. I try to do this from a layperson’s standpoint because that is what I am. I don’t really know law, I just look into the unintended consequences of new and newly proposed legislation. One area that has been particularly relevant for me is the whole arena of professional regulation. I’ve been in that world. I’ve been licensed as a clinical professional counselor in the state of Illinois. Professional licensure is the way that states make sure that people doing certain jobs meet certain requirements. What could be wrong with that? I’ve ranted about this before, so I won’t get into my perspective, but I will direct you to read this very fascinating article (with video).

Here are some highlights:

1. Some of the laws don’t make sense and are inconsistent. It takes 10 times as many hours of training to be a barber than an EMT.  Should you really need a license to be a “shampooer?”
2. 1/3 Americans needs a license to work now.  In the 1950s, it was 1 in 20.  This is expensive and time consuming to obtain and bad for the economy.
3. The average license for a low to moderate income job (not doctors or lawyers) requires about $209, 9 months of training and experience, and the ability to pass an exam. As they say in the video, that’s a lot of time and effort spent getting permission to work, rather than just working.
4. These licenses end up raising the cost for consumers and reducing opportunities for workers, while not being proven as beneficial for the quality of service received.
5. These things have little to do with safety. The hardest occupation to enter in this article’s study was interior design, yet this is a harmless occupation.  However, the EMTs who hold lives in their hands are less regulated than 66 other professions.

The only people that are being protected by professional licensure are those that already hold the license.  It protects them from any kind of competition.  It’s time to rethink the whole system.

When he was hospitalized with diabetes in February 2009, he decided to avoid the fate of his grandmother, who eventually died of the disease. He embraced the low-carb, high-protein Paleo diet, also known as the “caveman” or “hunter-gatherer” diet. The diet, he said, made him drug- and insulin-free within 30 days. By May of that year, he had lost 45 pounds and decided to start a blog about his success.  source

However, he found out in short order, that his blog is illegal. At his blog, www.diabetes-warrior.net, he documented his entire journey and offered advice to people who were looking for answers and solutions to their condition. Since it worked for him, he obviously advocates for it on his blog. But, the The North Carolina Board of Dietetics/Nutrition threatened to send him to jail. Evidently, they believe, like many in government, that they have a monopoly on truth. The concern here should not be that some rogue person was practicing nutrition without a license, but that anyone with a different opinion is somehow silenced.

Jan. 12, Cooksey attended a nutrition seminar at a church in Charlotte. The speaker was the director of diabetes services for a local hospital.

“She was giving all the wrong information, just like everyone always does — carbs are OK to eat, we must eat carbs to live, promoting low-fat, etc.,” Cooksey said. “So I spoke up.”

After the meeting he handed out a couple of business cards pointing people to his website.

Three days later, he got a call from the director of the nutrition board.

So, that’s how it starts. Competition and differing opinion.  We can’t handle that in the home of the brave. We also think citizens can’t handle information that might not be orthodox. That’s why we search for these things on the internet. We already know what our doctors are going to tell us (Regardless of what you think about the diet he is advocating, we are talking about his freedom to dispense information here).

I know plenty of people who have started fitness blogs and advocated one or the other method for getting into shape. I wonder if they know they’re walking on thin ice? I also remember when the FDA made General Mills change the wording on Cheerios boxes because otherwise,  Cheerios was violating the law by claiming certain health benefits.

Anyway, it turns out that Mr. Cooksey is allowed to keep his blog and stay out of jail.  So, what did he have to do? (emphasis in the original source)

In response to this investigation, I did three things:

1) stopped doing my published advice column.

2) took down my diabetes support package links.

3) and made my disclaimer more prominent. Additionally, I added a disclaimer at the bottom of every page.

Because I complied with their order to stop speaking and to change what I say and what I publish, the board concluded that I am in substantial compliance and closed the investigation.

All this means is that the board has violated my First Amendment rights by silencing me and altering how I express my opinions.

My compliance is compliance with their violation of my rights, not an agreement between us that I was wrong and they were right.

The letter actually threatens to keep monitoring me.

I have absolutely no intention of complying with the board’s violation of my free speech rights. I intend to defend those rights, not only for myself, but for everyone.

This is America and in America people should be free to give each other advice about things like diet.

But, this America is not how it is portrayed in folklore — the land of the free and the home of the brave. We’re so free, that we can’t give birth at home or give nutrition advice.  And we’re so brave that we can’t handle dissenting opinion.

Since I have a hip replacement and significant scar tissue as a result of various hip fixations over the years, I was advised to have scheduled Cesarean sections with both of my kids.  I was comfortable with that decision — more comfortable with it than most after my many, many surgeries.  It also seemed to beat the prospect of the baby not having enough room in the birth canal or my fake hip becoming dislocated and requiring further surgery.  However, I am not the norm.  Many people prefer natural birth and don’t even seen an obstetrician in the process.  Two of my close friends have even decided to have babies at home.  Both of them were evidently breaking the law.

Several states make restrictions on midwives.  Some do not allow them to practice in hospitals.  Some do not allow them to practice outside of hospitals.  A midwife in my current state of Indiana was recently arrested and released on $10,000 bail for practicing her profession.

Keeslar was a nurse and worked in obstetrics before deciding to become a midwife.

She has participated in over 1,700 births, about 400 of which have been babies born at home.

Homebirth midwives in Michiana, the area of northwest Indiana and south central Michigan, charge between $900 and $3,500 per birth, which includes prenatal care.

Nationally, the average hospital birth costs between $5,000 (for an uncomplicated hospital birth) to $20,000 (for a C-section with complications). This does not include the price of prenatal care.

Keeslar’s arrest was not associated with any bad outcome. But she is the second professional midwife to be arrested in the past two months.

Like most laws, this is probably supposed to be about safety, but it turns out to be about money.  Just one more thing you can’t do in the land of the free.  To read an entertaining blog post about one woman’s illegal home birth, click here.

Not too long ago, I discussed a petition going around in Indiana that asked for people to come out in opposition to Indiana House Bill 1006.  This bill would lead to the de-regulation of some industries by the state, including beauticians, security guards, and private investigators.  The bill, which I supported, has been withdrawn.  I won’t go over my reasons for supporting the bill here since I already did that, but it leaves me wondering whether we would really be so bad off without government rules.

Today I read  piece about piercing artists in Iowa.  According to the article, there are no rules for the industry.  The article points out the discrepancy in training required for barbers in the state (2,100 hours) with that required of piercers (zero hours) as evidence that the piercers need to be regulated.  I take it differently.  I think that it is a sign that the system is actually unfair to barbers.

The article mentions that the industry needs to be regulated because it is dangerous.  I agree that it is dangerous.  I think a person should probably be aware of that before volunteering to get their body impaled.  We should probably do our homework before undergoing such a procedure — getting references, asking about sanitation procedures, etc. We can’t assume that the state is going to do all of our homework for us if the person has a magic license on their wall.  The point I am trying to make is that professional regulation won’t make us safe.  How many times have you heard of people getting sick from restaurants that own food permits?

One interesting thing about the article is that it states that the legislation to regulate the industry will probably come after someone gets sick or dies as a result of poor hygienic practice in a piercing studio.

“What it’s going to take is someone getting very sick or dying,” said Donn Dierks, director of public health in Council Bluffs, which has one of the few local piercing ordinances in the state.

To me this is interesting because we can assume from that quote that this dangerous, unregulated industry has not yet resulted in any deaths. However, even with when a death is reported, it is usually followed by a report that the place in question was using safe practices.  The fact is that these modifications can be dangerous with any amount of caution being exercised.

I’m all for education.  I think every good businessperson should set themselves apart from the competition by going to conferences and training sessions.  They will naturally do this if their customers feel it is important — and they seem to always value safety.  There is even an Association of Professional Piercers to which professionals can voluntarily belong.  This association has membership requirements, including a video submission of their entire studio and training in CPR, First Aid, and bloodborne pathogens.  If I were to ever get a piercing, I would make sure to visit a reputable establishment that was a member of this organization or another professional agency.  The state licensure and regulation is not necessary in a society where people are responsible for themselves.

A society without professional regulation would not descend into chaos.  I used to have an article linked here where a friend made a video about this, but it is no longer online.