June 15, 2010: Addressing the regulatory failure that led to excessively risky offshore drilling, President Obama noted:
"Over the last decade, [the agency in charge of regulating drilling and issuing permits, known as the Minerals Management Service,] has become emblematic of a failed philosophy that views all regulation with hostility — a philosophy that says corporations should be allowed to play by their own rules and police themselves. At this agency, industry insiders were put in charge of industry oversight. Oil companies showered regulators with gifts and favors, and were essentially allowed to conduct their own safety inspections and write their own regulations."

August 30, 2010: The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) that replaced the corrupt Minerals Management Service issued anti-corruption guidelines. The guidelines provide that BOEM employees "must immediately report any situation or incident where industry personnel attempt to bribe, harass, coerce or improperly pressure or influence a [BOEM] employee with respect to the performance of the employee’s official duties, including the issuance of Incidents of Noncompliance (INCs) or any other action considered or taken by the employee in accordance with applicable regulations."

Corruption is generally illegal and, thus, the issuance of anti-corruption guidelines reaffirms the conclusion that tea drinking and other forms of anti-regulation partying may not provide good solutions to any problem.


President Obama's Speech of June 15, 2010:

August 31, 2010: NY Governor, David Paterson, signed into law the Bedbug Disclosure Act that requires building owners to disclose a one-year history of bedbug infestations to potential tenants.

The Act  responds to the national bedbug infestation of 2009-10 and its logic is the imperfect information among potential renters and assumed information among landlords. The New York Legislature provided the following justification for the Act:
Prospective tenants have a right to access relevant documentation regarding the history of bedbugs within their new living spaces. This information is essential to making an informed decision and should not be withheld from consumers. Should a prospective landlord refuse to supply this information, they should be compelled to provide it.

The Toxic Substances Control Act ("TSCA") mandates that the EPA must regulate chemical substances where there is a “reasonable basis to conclude” that such substances “present an unreasonable risk of injury to health and or the environment” (15 U.S.C. § 2605(a)).

On August 3, 2010, several groups submitted a petition to EPA under Section 21 of TSCA, asking EPA to "prohibit the manufacture, processing, and distribution in commerce of lead for shot, bullets, and fishing sinkers," arguing that "lead used in shot, bullets, and fishing sinkers is a “chemical substance” falling within the scope of TSCA." The petition pointed out that "most other uses of lead, such as lead-based paints, plumbing pipe and fixtures, and leaded gasoline, are already subject to strict regulation. ... However, there is currently no specific regulation of lead shot, bullets or fishing sinkers under TSCA."  The petition summarized the risks associated with lead and noted that "in recent decades the federal government has taken various regulatory actions to reduce the exposure of humans to lead in drinking water, paint, gasoline, toys, toxic dumps, automobile wheel balancing weights, and indoor and outdoor shooting ranges. However, other lead sources causing significant contamination are still uncontrolled, and lead exposure to wildlife has recently been widely documented and is not adequately regulated."

Nevertheless, on August, 27, 2010, EPA denied the petition, arguing that the Agency does not have the legal authority to regulate this type of product under TSCA.

The New York Times described the decision as "legally dubious."

The Great Recession made sin taxes popular and controversial.  State and municipalities like the regulatory tool that offers some relief for budget deficits and help to cope with sins lead to obesity, excessive drinking, smoking, and pollution.  Sin industry and some "sinners," however, do not welcome sin taxes. In New York, the battle over soda tax ended with a victory for supporters of sins (see RegState.net's summary). Overall, however, the anti-sin movement records many victories.

In Washington State, in February 2010, Governor Christine Gregoire proposed "a Balanced Approach for Hard Times " that included a list of sin taxes, such as tax on carbonated beverages, bottled water, candy, and gum, and increased tax on cigarettes.  In April 2010, the state legislature endorsed its proposal (SB6143).  The beverage industry quickly responded and mobilized local sinners and anti-tax forces to collect 395,000 signatures to place Initiative 1107 on the November 2010 ballot to repeal the local sin taxes.

July 21, 2010: President Obama signed into law the most sweeping overhaul of U.S. financial-market regulations since the Great Depression, marking the conclusion of an effort to craft a legislative response to the 2008 financial crisis, aka the Great Recession: The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act.

Should broadcasters enforce morality or at least the morality of certain parents?  To enforce particular morality norms, the FCC employed third-party liability:  it sanctioned broadcasters for the conduct of others.  The efficiency of the method, the underlying morality, and the process of application were challenged.

January 19, 2003: At the Golden Globe Awards, U2 won the award for the Best Original Song in Motion Picture ("The Hands That Built America" from The Gangs of New York). After receiving the award, on a live broadcast, Bono, blurted out: "This is really, really fucking brilliant!" Concerned about the souls of American children, the Parents Television Council mobilized its members to send numerous complaints to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).

October 3, 2003: The Chief of the FCC Enforcement Bureau issues a Memorandum Opinion and Order responding to the complaints, concluding that the various broadcasters that aired the Golden Globe Awards did not violate any law.

The Parents Television Council sought to reverse this decision, filed application for review and encouraged its members to send more complaints.

March 18, 2004:  The FCC issues a Memorandum Opinion and Order addressing the 2003 Golden Globe Awards, concluding that "the live broadcast of the “Golden Globe Awards” included material in violation of the applicable indecency and profanity prohibitions." Specifically, the FCC held that "given the core meaning of the “F-Word,” any use of that word or a variation, in any context, inherently has a sexual connotation. . . . The “F-Word” is one of the most vulgar, graphic and explicit descriptions of sexual activity in the English language. Its use invariably invokes a coarse sexual image. The use of the “F-Word” here, on a nationally telecast awards ceremony, was shocking and gratuitous."  Broadcasting of the phrase, therefore, was "patently offensive under contemporary community standard."

June 4, 2007: Broadcasters challenged the FCC's decision. In Fox Television Stations v. FCC, 489 F.3d. 444 (2d Cir. 2007), the Second Circuit held that the FCC's decision was "arbitrary and capricious" under the Administrative Procedure Act, vacating the decision.

April 28, 2009: The FCC appealed.  In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court held that the FCC's order was neither "arbitrary" nor "capricious." 

July 13, 2010:  The case returned to the Second Circuit on remand and yet again the Second Circuit held that the FCC's indecency policy violated the First Amendment and was unconstitutionally vague, creating a chilling effect.

In the Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith prescribed sin taxes, writing: "Sugar, rum, and tobacco are commodities which are nowhere necessaries of life, which are become objects of almost universal consumption, and which are therefore extremely proper subjects of taxation.” Free-market ideologists attribute excessive value to Smith's invisible hand metaphor but apparently never turned the pages to his reflections on sin taxes. 

During recessions, states and the federal government reconsider sin taxes as regulatory mechanisms to address deficits and shape costly preferences, such as unhealthy habits. One popular form of sin taxes during the present recession is soda tax.

The New York Governor has been trying to pass soda tax in various forms, but failed each time. In the spring of 2010, Governor David Paterson proposed tax on sugary sodas and exempted diet beverages. Two coalitions of interest groups formed: the Alliance for Healthier New York and New Yorkers Against Unfair Taxes.  The New York Times briefly documents how the New Yorkers Against Unfair Taxes derailed the proposed soda tax.  Several New York politicians, led by State Senator Diane Savino, argue that the soda tax is "regressive."  In a press release, entitled Senator Savino explained:
"The beverage tax is nothing more than a money grab. Instead of revisiting our regressive tax policies and wasteful spending, which have gotten us into the predicament we are in, this proposal is simply another way of increasing revenue on the backs of working families.” ("No to Regressive Beverage Tax," March 12, 2010).
At least one study shows that more than one in four adult New York City residents consumes one or more cans of sugar-sweetened soda per day. Consumption varies widely among demographic groups, with socially disadvantaged populations, who are most impacted by obesity, having the highest prevalence of frequent consumption. In other words, soda tax would be regressive because poor people drink more soda. See: Colin Rehm et al., Demographic and Behavioral Factors Associated with Daily Sugar-sweetened Soda Consumption in New York City Adults, Journal of Urban Health 85: 375-385 (2008).


The campaign materials of the Alliance for Healthier New York and New Yorkers Against Unfair Taxesspeak for themselves.

The Alliance for Healthier New York


Download Ad of the Alliance








New Yorkers Against Unfair Taxes


Download Ad of the Coalition

June 10, 2010: Finding the "government agencies and scientific bodies in the European Union (EU) and Israel have recognized the potential harm of long-term exposure to radiation emitted from cell phones and, as a result, have issued warnings about their use, especially their use by children," San Francisco's Board of Supervisors adopted an ordinance that requires retailers to disclose the Specific Absorption Rate ("SAR") of cell phone devices.

The ordinance's logic is that "[t]he SAR values for different makes and models of cell phones differ widely, but consumers are not able to make informed purchasing decisions because there is no requirement that the retailer provide the applicable SAR values to the consumer at the point when the consumer is deciding between various makes and models."

Accordingly, the ordinance providces that "[n]o retailer within the City may sell or lease. or offer to sell or lease. any cell phone to the public without disclosing the SAR value for that phone."

Several food historians have been debating whether the Brunswick Stew was invented in Georgia or in Virginia, but they all agree that it is a traditional roadkill dish.  The debate exists because some developed the roadkill cuisine.  In the United States, every year, millions of animals are hit on the road by vehicles.  The carcasses could offer value but their collection may impose some cost to the state that may not be in the position to utilize them. 

June 3, 2010: Georgia Governor Sonny Perdue signed into law the Roadkill Bill that provides:

27-3-28. (a) Except as otherwise provided in this Code section, any person may lawfully possess native wildlife which has been accidentally killed by a motor vehicle. The following exceptions and conditions to this general rule shall apply: (1) Any person taking possession of a bear accidentally killed by a motor vehicle shall notify the department or a law enforcement officer of the fact and location of the taking of possession and his or her name and address within 48 hours after taking possession of the bear; and (2) This Code section shall not authorize any person to take possession of any animal of a species designated as a protected species under Article 5 of this chapter or under federal law. (b) A law enforcement officer receiving a report of a person taking possession of a bear under paragraph (1) of subsection (a) of this Code section shall in turn transmit the reported information to the department within 48 hours after receipt of such information.

Put simply, Georgia grants drivers an option to collect carcasses of accidentally killed wildlife and, in return, is asking drivers to report about certain animals, assuming that collectors identify protected animals.

Many societies have negative views toward the habit of spitting in public. Spitting on one's face is an act of insult and potentially assault.  In 1872, the Illinois Supreme Court upheld a jury judgment of punitive damages for a person who was spat upon in his face in a crowded courtroom. Alcorn v. Mitchell, 63 Ill. 553 (1872).  The court held that "[i]t is customary to instruct juries that they may give vindictive damages where there are circumstances of malice, willfulness, wantonness, outrage and indignity attending the wrong complained of. The act in question was wholly made up of such qualities. It was one of pure malignity, done for the mere purpose of insult and indignity."  Thus, courts regulated spitting as an assault and battery.

In the 1890s, scientists found out that spitting was not only offensive but was also related to tuberculosis rates.  This disturbing discovery led to the first anti-spitting law, a New York City ordinance from 1896:

Spitting upon the floors of public buildings and of railroad-cars and of ferry-boats is hereby forbidden, and officers in charge, or control of all such buildings, cars and boats shall keep posted permanently in each public building and in each railroad-car and in each ferry-boat a sufficient number of notices forbidding spitting upon the floors, and janitors of buildings, conductors of cars and employees upon ferry-boats shall call the attention of all violators of this ordinance to such notices.

 
Legislatures identified spitting in public as a costly externality that should be regulated and New York City was only the first jurisdiction to act. Other states and cities followed.  Over time, tuberculosis almost vanished in the United States and anti-spitting laws generally disappeared.  States that still have them, do not enforce their anti-spitting laws. 

Spitting, however, has remained a socially symbolic act of offense. In 2010, New York City faces a new problem: spitting upon  workers of the City's transportation system is classified as an assault under the drivers' contract.  The New York Times reports  that Passsngers' habits to spit on drivers result in significant paid leaves.  Thus, although less costly than tuberculosis, spitting has remained socially costly although perhaps for different reasons.

Another way to look at the social cost of spitting in New York City is of course to focus on the drivers as an interest group that inflates the social costs of spitting in modern times.

See:
Michael M. Grynbaum, When Passengers Spit, Bus Drivers Take Months Off, New York Times, May 25, 2010, Page A1.