occupational licensing

The report makes it crystal clear that occupational licensing is an extreme regulation for only the most extreme risks. It's for protecting public safety.

Talking about healthy eating on Facebook and getting paid to do it, the department said, could trigger a $1,000 fine and up to six months in jail for unlicensed practice as a dietician.

As made clear in the legislative report, licensing is reserved only for those occupations posing the highest perceived risk to public health, safety, and welfare. If that sounds a little familiar, that's because the John Locke Foundation has long pointed to several less restrictive policy alternatives to licensing

The Fraser Institute’s newly released report ranking states according to economic freedom has me thinking of what could be. Mitch Kokai discusses the findings, which gives us the relatively high ranking of 14th. Thing is, a state that boasts of being “First in Freedom” can’t be satisfied with second…

Since regulation is fraught with red tape and overregulation, both of which are harmful to job creation and the state's overall economic health, we favor a menu of reforms and good-government policies.

Knowing that North Carolina law already provides a way for consumers to choose a non-licensed service professional in one area (real estate) ought to make it easier to expand that freedom in other licensed fields.

The key to the Occupational License Consumer Choice approach is something called a nonlicensed disclosure. With that, occupational licensing is no longer an entry regulation.

This is a post about an important change in state law concerning how licensing boards deal with applicants who have conviction records. Plus, it has alligators.