Get weekly updates from Reason.
Today's Top Topics
Recent Research and Commentary
In a previous blog post I wrote about an effort to require every pet groomer in the State of California to obtain a state license, along with all the requisite fees, requirements, and arbitrary regulations that go along with that. The bill, SB 969, generated such a backlash from business groups and the grooming industry that it was watered down so that instead of imposing mandatory licensing it now calls for the establishment of a voluntary state certification program (which means there would still be more needless bureaucracy).
The Micke Grove Zoological Society is rightly identifying a national trend towards public-private partnerships for amenities like zoos. Issues at the Micke Grove Zoo in San Joaquin County, California are similar to those seen at many zoos across the country over the past few decades. In short, scarce taxpayer dollars have been directed towards high priority services like law enforcement and education, while amenities such as zoos have been neglected.
It appears that California truly has gone to the dogs. The state is facing a $9.2 billion budget deficit, a $10 billion unemployment insurance fund deficit, and unfunded pension obligations in the range of $400 billion to $500 billion, yet the busybodies in the state Legislature are seeking to add another occupation to the long list of those burdened by unnecessary state regulation: pet grooming.
A proposed bill in California would require state licensing for pet groomers. This will not do anything to improve the quality of pet grooming services—the supposed rationale behind the bill—but it will increase the cost of grooming services, reduce competition and consumer choice, and, because of the high costs of fees and compliance with state regulations, deny gainful employment to many who would otherwise be competent groomers and entrepreneurs.
It appears that California truly has gone to the dogs. The state is facing a $9.2 billion budget deficit, a $10 billion unemployment insurance fund deficit, and unfunded pension obligations in the range of $400 billion to $500 billion, yet the busybodies in the state legislature are seeking to add another occupation to the long list of those burdened by unnecessary state regulation: pet grooming.
The New York Taxi and Limousine Commission has manipulated the taxi market to create faux wealth of $13 billion solely because of their willingness to restrict the supply of taxis.
View Resources by Type
- Occupational Licensing: Ranking the States and Exploring Alternatives
Policy Study 361
August 1, 2007
- Is California Still Going to the Dogs on Pet Groomer Licensing? (7/10)
- Privatization Proposed for Micke Grove Zoo in San Joaquin County, CA (5/29)
- California Barking Up the Wrong Tree with Pet Groomer Licensing Bill (3/1)
- California is Barking Up the Wrong Tree with Pet Groomer Licensing Bill (2/27)
- California Bill Proposes Licensing for Pet Groomers (2/3)
Experts: Occupational Licensing
- Carl DeMaio
Chairman of Reason's California Reform Agenda
- Nick Gillespie
Editor in Chief, Reason.com and Reason TV
- Leonard Gilroy
Director of Government Reform
- Adrian Moore
Vice President, Policy
- Julian Morris
Vice President, Research
- Anthony Randazzo
Director of Economic Research
- Adam Summers
Senior Policy Analyst
RSS Feeds: Occupational Licensing
Media ContactChris Mitchell
Director of Communications
Your tax-deductible gift can help us promote individual liberty, choice, and free minds and free markets.