According to a short discussion in FEE, a bill has been introduced in Minnesota which would restrict sale and purchase of paints (apparently both interior and exterior house paints) and create a licensing scheme for house painters. (At least we think it is just house painters: for all we know it may include car body painters, painters of pavement, and painting of plastic models.)

Minnesota economist John Phelan said the legislation is “regulation for the sake of regulation.” Various claims are being made as to how this legislation will protect the public health and safety. And the environment. And property.

Fortunately, many people have pointed out that the major protection offered by the bill is the protection of the occupation and income of “professional painters” and the bureaucrats that will do the licensing and enforcement. And of course, the bootlicking politicians in the legislature and their campaign contributions from those same “professionals.”

The FEE article is worth reading, as it addresses the entire scam called professional licensing which exists in every state and tens of thousands of counties and municipalities. Minnesota – though a completely disgusting blue state – is far from the only State that embraces (and profits from) such villainy.

The excuses are the same whether it is licensing for architects or pilots, or for hairdressers and vending machine mechanics. They constantly harp on the benefits of safety (and health, and environmental quality) to the public. The benefits to those who already have those coveted licenses are seldom discussed. Nor is the incredible financial burden laid on consumers and taxpayers by the regulations. Consider the taxi medallions of New York City, literally worth several years’ wages. Or the cost of getting a haircut in most cities, where nasty cops and “occupational enforcement specialists” will bust someone who dares to set up a chair and grab a clipper on the street or in a private house.

Professionals welcome certification – it is both a way of attracting customers/clients/patients and of ensuring that we are encouraged to stay on top of things. And it can be a matter of safety and health. But there is a huge difference between voluntary professional certifications and government-run licensing schemes.

Among other things, if you get a lousy haircut from a government-approved and licensed barber, does the government guarantee her work? Don’t laugh so loud. But it is the same thing with an architect, an engineer, a nurse or a brain surgeon. Or an attorney. Or a childcare provider.

So who benefits? Besides the existing “professionals” (including those grandfathered, assuming they can pass the tests for the new license) and those who have enough money to buy the permission slip (and pay for the mandatory and often worthless training and testing)? Politicians, of course. Because too many of us really believe that they are being caring and compassionate and looking out for us. We pay for that folly with votes and digging into our pockets to shell out campaign contributions. Then pay their salaries. And bureaucrats: not just the administrators and enforcers of the registration scheme but the support personnel, from human resources to financial management, and of course, the board members. The companies (mostly “for profit”) that provide the academies to train people. Whether barber colleges or beauty academies or CDL (commercial driver license) programs. And finally, the people who have the influence to carve out exemptions. For example, someone can be an “engineer” for the FedGov without actually being a licensed Professional Engineer.

The losers? Besides the tyrannical nature of such restrictions on the free market and being treated like infants, anyone has to pay and pay and pay for services that are far more expensive than they should be. Both because of the costs of getting licensed and the limits on the people who can provide the services.

Go over to the office of your local supermarket sometime and look at the huge bulletin board with all their required licenses. Meat departments, fruits and vegetables (produce), liquor and bakeries and even flower sections. If not more. The occupation list goes on forever.

Occupational licensing may be a “minor” facet of tyranny, but it is onerous, expensive, grants too much power to government and those sycophants who work with it, and provides little of benefit for its costs.

And it also opens the gates for prohibitions, restrictions, and monopolies.