Via Geoffrey Manne, who teaches law at Lewis
& Clark University in Portland, Oregon, comes
this open letter about New Jersey’s riidiculous ban on direct
sales of Tesla cars. For more on Garden State awfulness regarding
the sale of luxury electric cars,
read Ed Krayewski.
The Motor Vehicle Commission’s regulation was aimed specifically
at stopping one company, Tesla Motors, from directly distributing
its electric cars. But the regulation would apply equally to any
other innovative manufacturer trying to bring a new automobile to
market, as well. There is no justification on any rational economic
or public policy grounds for such a restraint of commerce. Rather,
the upshot of the regulation is to reduce competition in New
Jersey’s automobile market for the benefit of its auto dealers and
to the detriment of its consumers. It is protectionism for auto
dealers, pure and simple….In sum, we have not heard a single argument for a direct
distribution ban that makes any sense. To the contrary, these
arguments simply bolster our belief that the regulations in
question are motivated by economic protectionism that favors
dealers at the expense of consumers and innovative technologies. It
is discouraging to see this ban being used to block a company that
is bringing dynamic and environmentally friendly products to
market. We strongly encourage you to repeal it, by new legislation
if necessary.
The letter is signed by more
than 70 economists and law profs (full
text and signatories here).
I wrote about attempts to ban or restrict new-model businesses
such as Tesla, Uber, and Airbnb for Time recently.
Read that here.
The move by New Jersey’s legislature to heap even more
restrictions on new ways of doing business is appalling and should
be denounced as such. The upside, though, is that such
anti-business activity forces legislators and “poltiical
entrepreneurs” (to use Burton W. Folsom’s excellent phrase) to
defend an indefensbile status quo. If the only argument you can
make against liberalizing a market (or social practice, such as gay
marriage) is essentially to say, “We’ve always done it this way,”
or “My profit will suffer,” change is on the horizon. It may take a
while – and it typically takes way too long – but such empty,
self-interested, and unpersuasive defenses of an exclusionary and
highly self-interested status quo ultimately start tumbling down
the minute they have to be articulated in public debate.
Speaking of cars and Jersey, here’s a jolt of what Garden State
DJs inevitably – and somewhat disturbingly – called “Bruce Juice”
to get your engines running this Hump Day morning:
from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/1gBqaDF
via IFTTT