Regulation of the Day 56: Kahlua in Ohio

Kahlua contains 20% alcohol in 49 states. But in Ohio, it is 21.5%. Weird, huh?

Turns out regulations are the reason. My friend Jacob Grier pointed me to an article showing that Ohio groups alcoholic beverages into two categories: wine/beer and spirits. Any beverage below 20% alcohol is in the wine/beer category and can be sold in grocery stores. Anything above 20% is classed as a spirit and can only be sold in state-run liquor stores.

Drinkers often mix Kahlua with spirits such as vodka. So the company actually changed its recipe in Ohio to ensure that Kahlua would appear in stores next to its complementary products. The benefit to consumers from this regulatory scheme is unclear.

Net Neutrality and Rent-Seeking

Here is a letter I sent recently to The Wall Street Journal:

September 22, 2009

Editor, The Wall Street Journal
200 Liberty Street
New York, NY 10281

To the Editor:

Your article “Bad News for Broadband” (editorial, Sept. 22) hints at, but does not make, a key point: net neutrality proposals are driving a wedge between service providers like AT&T and content providers like Google.

Strange, is it not? Their interests are actually closely aligned. If AT&T upgrades its network, Google benefits from the increased bandwidth. If Google improves its products, AT&T benefits from increased demand for broadband.

Net neutrality proposals give companies the incentive to seek rents at each other’s expense when they could be benefiting from each other’s innovations instead. This must be music to the ears of lobbyists, but how sad for consumers.

Ryan Young
Fellow in Regulatory Studies
Competitive Enterprise Institute
Washington, D.C.

Intel’s Human Rights

While I was away on vacation, the Detroit News ran an article by Hans Bader and me about Intel’s claim that the EU’s $1.45 billion fine against them violates its human rights.

Back from Vacation

Regular blogging will resume now that I’m back from vacation.

Also keep an eye out for some changes to this site in the next few weeks.

The Economics of Net Neutrality

Over at the Washington Examiner‘s Opinion Zone, I apply what I learned back in Economics 101 to the net neutrality debate. It’s all about scarcity.

Funny, That

An article in today’s New York Times laments the difficulty of “building momentum for an international climate treaty at a time when global temperatures have been relatively stable for a decade and may even drop in the next few years.”

Regulation of the Day 55: Home Environmental Inspections

In today’s Politico, I take a look at one of the 397 new regulations in the House version of cap and trade legislation. If the bill passes, almost all homes for sale would be required to undergo an environmental inspection. The home cannot be sold until it is up to code.

One unintended consequence could be the end of fixer-upper homes.

Another would be lower home ownership rates. Which, of course, directly contradicts of decades of federal policy.

UPDATE: A coworker informs me that Fox News is linking to the article in the opinion section of their website.

Regulation of the Day 54: Shovelnose Sturgeon

Shovelnose sturgeon population figures are healthy. Why does the Fish and Wildlife Service want to list it as a threatened species, then? Because it looks like the pallid sturgeon, which is currently listed as endangered.

Regulation of the Day 53: Y2K

The case for regulatory sunset provisions is inadvertently made by an entire chapter in the Code of Federal Regulations devoted to lawsuit rules for the Y2K computer bug from nearly a decade ago.

Regulation of the Day 52: Bar Food

This one comes courtesy of Jacob Grier, blogger extraordinaire and former colleague.

In Arlington County, Virginia, there exist twelve restaurants that are required to sell $350 of food per gallon of liquor sold.

Isn’t that weird?

Stranger still, this gang of twelve voluntarily opted in to that bizarre requirement. They think it works better than what all other Arlington restaurateurs have to deal with – sales must be no less than 45% food, and no more than 55% liquor.

Again, what a strange regulation.

The reason for the switch from a dollar to a volume ratio is that Arlingtonians are developing a taste for more sophisticated – and more expensive – cocktails. Restaurants are finding themselves pushing up against that 55% barrier even without serving more drinks.

Jacob, who has thought about opening his own establishment, adds:

“this kind of regulation is one reason among many that I can’t imagine ever opening a bar in Virginia. It would be much smarter to eliminate ratios entirely and simply require that food is available to patrons who want it.”

Way to encourage entrepreneurship, Virginia.