TN Lawmakers Create Office of the Repealer to Shrink Government
By Blue Collar Muse- Tennessee state GOP lawmakers Representative Glen Casada and Senator Jack Johnson, both from Franklin, announced they have filed HB 500 and SB 595 to modify the TCA and create the Office of the Repealer.My Comment: This is the kind of creative thinking we need to shrink government. Thank you to Glen Casada and Jack Johnson. This is a good start. Next, we need a process to systematically review every license or permit issued by State government to determine if they are necessary and if they are, are the requirements and cost reasonable or excessive. I would start with training for beautician. To protect me from a bad haircut why does the government require hair stylist spend thousands of dollars and two years in training. A bad haircut will grow out.
Under the direction of the Office of Tennessee’s Secretary of State, Tre Hargett, the Office of the Repealer would be tasked with “Investigating and collecting information regarding the state’s laws and rules and regulations to determine instances in which such laws and rules and regulations are unreasonable, unduly burdensome, duplicative, contradictory or unnecessary;” Casada, Johnson propose 'repealer' to cut state laws
The Tennessean - by Chas Sisk Glen Casada and state Sen. Jack Johnson, both Franklin Republicans, have filed a bill that would create an Office of the Repealer, whose job ..
The State government should also look at prohibiting local governments from passing laws that unduly regulate, license or fix prices. Metro Nashville's limo price fixing is the kind of law that the State should not allow. The Republicans have a super majority: use it.
Top Stories
Posts
Agree with cutting hair...but if they're using chemicals (dye, perm etc.) then I think a case can be made for assuring some appropriate training.
ReplyDeleteKay, It may be reasonable to require extra training for those dying hair, however the law apples to "Anyone who desires to practice or teach cosmetology, manicure, natural hair styling, shampooing, or esthetics in Tennessee." I would say that if all you are going to do is shampoo, there should be no licensing requirement. This is no more than an effort to curtail competition. It also requires "Completion of 1,500 hours in practice and theory at a school of cosmetology." This is a ridiculous. 1500 hours! Styling hair is not rocket science. Even if dying hair, you could probably learn all you need to know in 40 hours, or 80 hours. 1500 hours? This simply protects the interest of the beauty schools and those with a license it protects from competition. We should review all license requirement and drastically cut those requirements that serve no purpose except to protect the already established and curtail competition. I am for reasonable licensing for the sake of health and safety, but that is not the primary function of licensing. It is to protect established providers from competition.
ReplyDeleteMy reaction to this news: Hooray!!! I wish the Federal Government would do the same.
ReplyDeleteIt's so seldom that I hear such common sense that I must rejoice.
This also seems in line with Glen Reynolds' paper, "Ham Sandwich Nation: Due Process When Everything is a Crime."
Can be read here: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2203713
Human beings are often their own worst enemies....with the best of intentions! ;-)
KM