Category Archives: Regulation of the Day

Regulation of the Day 115: Pancake Races

Pancake races are a Lenten tradition that date as far back as the 15th century. Contestants navigate a course as quickly as they can while holding a frying pan and flipping a delicious pancake a certain number of times.

The races are most popular in Britain. But other countries hold them, too. For over fifty years, the town of Liberal, Kansas has competed against Olney in England by setting up standardized courses in each town and comparing racing times. The Americans, despite being relatively new to the sport, actually have the all-time edge on the Brits, 33-25.

The secret to winning is to cross the finish line before your opponents do. That usually means running. The problem is that sometimes, running violates British health and safety regulations.

An official warned the racers before the St. Albans pancake race:

“Due to the wet weather conditions and health and safety regulations, in this year’s race, there will be no running allowed. Only walking is permitted. Any team that runs will be disqualified.

“It is a genuine health and safety concern. People fall over in the dry, they will certainly fall over in the wet.”

Three teams defied orders and pursued excellence as fast as they could. They were disqualified.

(Hat tip: Jonathan Moore)

Regulation of the Day 114: Unlicensed Fruit Candy

The Chicago Tribune has a jaw-dropping story of regulators gone wild:

Department of Health inspectors seized, slashed open and poured bleach over thousands of dollars of local peaches, pears, raspberry and plum purees owned by pastry chef Flora Lazar… Inspectors cited no health problems with any of the food.

And that’s just the beginning. Read the whole thing. This is a scandal. Ms. Lazar is out of business for six months and has lost about $6,000. There is no evidence of harm. This is no way to treat a small business. Especially during a recession.

(Hat tip: the ever-resourceful Brian McGraw)

Regulation of the Day 113: Throwing Snowballs

Two students at James Madison University in Virginia were charged with felonies for throwing snowballs at a snowplow and an unmarked police car. This is illegal in Harrisonburg, Virginia.

Talk about an over-reaction. Arrested and jailed. For throwing snowballs.

While being a jerk isn’t a crime, there is some safety risk when moving vehicles are involved. But this really seems like the kind of incident that is better settled with a talking-to instead of a jail cell.

Regulation of the Day 112: Importing Pork Rinds

The federal government is loosening its restrictions on importing pork rinds from Brazil. Rudolph Foods, Inc., an Ohio company, owns a factory in Brazil, and stands to benefit from the ruling.

Competitors are up in arms. Citing exotic illnesses like foot-and-mouth disease, one competitor told The Wall Street Journal, “It just takes one pig” that is infected to spread a disease… “The risk is low, but the consequences are really high.”

If that is his strongest argument, then the case against liberalization is as weak as it gets. Instead of using the power of government to hobble its rivals, this company should go out and improve its product. Make its pork rind recipe even tastier. And cheaper. Use the import liberalization to its own advantage if possible.

Regulation of the Day 111: Buying Wine in New York

It is illegal for grocery stores to sell wine in the state of New York. Only liquor stores are allowed to sell the stuff.

This regulation, a relic of Prohibition, lives on because of one of the central concepts in public choice theory: diffused costs and concentrated benefits.

The benefits are concentrated in one constituency: liquor stores. Regulations give them get millions of dollars in free business. That means they have millions of reasons to lobby to keep the status quo.

Consumers, on the other hand, are hurt by the ban by the exact amount that liquor stores benefit. But that hurt is spread far and wide. No one consumer feels enough pain to hire a high-priced lobbyist to open up the market.

That means New York’s misguided restrictions on competition are likely to continue for some time. It’s hard to imagine an aggrieved shopper suing New York’s wine cartel because she has to make an extra trip to get the wine on her grocery list. Or because she pays a bit more than if she lived in a different state.

(Hat tip: Jonathan Moore)

Regulation of the Day 110: Watching the Super Bowl

Hosting a Super Bowl party this Sunday? You might be interested to know that it is technically illegal to watch the Super Bowl on a tv larger than 55 inches under certain conditions.

Ars Technica’s Nate Anderson was kind enough to look through 17 USC 1.110 and lay out what’s legal and what isn’t.

This is serious stuff. The NFL sued a church three years ago for holding a Superbowl party… and won.

(hat tip to my fiancée)

Regulation of the Day 109: Unplanned Castles

Robert Fidler is a farmer in Salfords, England. In 2002, he built his family a house that resembles a castle. It is his dream home. Authorities want to require him to demolish it.

“This was a blatant attempt at deception to circumvent the planning process,” [chief planner Mike Miller] said, adding that Fidler now has one year to destroy the castle, remove the ruins and return the property to its original state.

Britain’s High Court agreed with Mr. Miller in a recent decision. Mr. Fidler is appealing.

It is unclear what harm Mr. Fidler’s castle home is causing to anybody. Perhaps the lawsuit is part of a make-work program for the demolition industry?

(Hat tip: Brian McGraw)

Regulation of the Day 108: Murals in Front of Houses

A Los Angeles couple recently paid an artist to paint a mural on the wall in front of their house. As you can see from the picture, it is filled with cute, cuddly forest creatures.

Now the city is threatening the couple with half a year in jail and $1,000 in fines for violating outdoor advertising regulations.

It is worth noting that the mural is clearly not an advertisement. Tacky, maybe. But definitely not an advertisement.

John Stossel has more.

Regulation of the Day 107: Blowing Your Nose While Driving

Michael Mancini was fined for blowing his nose while driving in London. Authorities claim he violated a law requiring him to be in control of his vehicle at all times. Sometimes legislating common sense doesn’t work as well as planned.

Regulation of the Day 106: Clotheslines

Some homeowners’ associations ban clotheslines. For people who would like to use clotheslines and aren’t allowed to, this presents a problem. Luckily, there are three solutions:

  1. Convince the homeowners’ association that their ban is unreasonable. Get it repealed. Or compromise. Maybe restrict clotheslines to backyards so they stay out of sight.
  2. Move somewhere else. Clotheslines are allowed in most places.
  3. Get regulators involved. Pass a law overriding any homeowners’ association clothesline bans.

Guess which option is being considered in Massachusetts? Hint: it’s not either of the first two.

(Hat tip: Amanda France)