Occupational Licensing, Wed at Heritage

I will be speaking on occupational licensing on Wed. July 26, 2017, 11:00 am – 12:30 pm at Heritage. You can RSVP here and there will also be a livestream.


If you cannot eliminate some licensing, look at the creation of an interstate license with a national licensing authority. So, for example, an interstate license for Physician Assistants.

+1, one of the key advantages of Federalism is standardization.

And physicians. Physicians are now licensed by the states, which prevents widespread use of telemedicine (because it's considered the practice of medicine in the state where the patient is located). Some professionas really are national. Others, by contrast, aren't, such as law (laws differ by state), but most are national. Is hair any different in Florida than in California?

"Is hair any different in Florida than in California?"

It's a lot grayer.

Damn dan1111 you are killing it today. Post more.

A total big government takeover of the entire health care sectors one-sixth of the economy dictated by Washington elites without any input from the people and stifling the laboratory of the States?

I note that in New Hampshire, the State created a medical malpractice insurer in conjunction with medical tort reform, and this State chartered insurer settled disputes and errors with plaintiffs fairly based on the lack of cases hitting the press since, and the rates have been forced down by the courts because the insurer got too much "profit" from its initial rates. Still conservatives call for a total Federal government takeover tort reform to solve some none existent problem.

Thanks for the pointer. I'm jammed up tomorrow but will try to catch the livestream. Will this event be aired on C-Span by any chance?

One problem with excessive barriers (rather than minimal) to a license, is that it leaves us with too few providers based on a fairly weak correlation and so some people have to settle for providers who are much less good at what they do than some who could not get licensed but who have talent.

Since I mentioned law in my earlier comment, I should point out that different states take very different approaches to licensing lawyers. I believe all states have some form of testing (Bar exam), but the degree of difficulty varies widely. For example, some states limit the number of law schools and, hence, the number of applicants, the weeding out taking place at the law school level. California has been at the other extreme, with law schools almost as ubiquitous as gas stations so most anybody can go to law school, the weeding out taking place at the Bar exam level with a very difficult exam. Recently, the California Bar has been under pressure to make the exam less difficult so that there is less weeding out. One can see what's happening here: all those less than qualified people going to a less than stellar law schools and spending all that money with the expectation they will become licensed lawyers. One might see a similar phenomenon if medical licensing takes the same road as California. I suppose Tabarrok's solution is to eliminate licensing altogether and allow anyone who isn't certifiably insane to practice law or medicine and let the market weed them out.

Too little money is spent paying lawyers?

Well, yes, too little money is spent paying lawyers providing the constitutional representation, so millions of poor people sit in jail waiting until too few low pay, or no pay, lawyers get to their cases. But doubling the number of lawyers licensed would not eliminate the lawyer shortage defending the poor unless the extra lawyers are required to work for free.

Maybe the bar exam can be waived if an applicant agrees to work defending the poor for free for a year after becoming a partner in a law firm?

Will the livestream be available later as a recordedstream? Would like to watch, but can't tomorrow, so I hope so.

I read "Wed at Heritage" as a surprise wedding. I guess I'm wrong. It can't be a surprise now. But we'll see....

Comments for this post are closed