In April, the Texas House approved a bill titled the “Texas Regulatory Consistency Act.” House Bill 2127 would preempt local regulations in seven “fields,” including occupations, natural resources, and labor. The bill states that “in recent years, several local jurisdictions have sought to establish their own regulations of commerce that are different than the state ’s regulations.” This has led to a patchwork of inconsistent regulations across the state.
It is true that local regulations can be very inconsistent. Businesses that operate in more than one jurisdiction must often spend considerable time, money, and resources attempting to stay in compliance. The bill would eliminate this by giving the state exclusive regulatory power in the designated areas of commerce.
Critics claim that the bill would “undercut local democracy.” This too is true. However, it implies that the majority of voters in any local jurisdiction should be allowed to enact whatever rights-violating ordinances it chooses. That the bill would stop this is a good thing.
However, while the bill is preventing local laws that violate property rights, HB 2127 opens the door for the state government to enact rights-violating laws. And that isn’t a good thing. An executive at the University of Houston’s Hobby School of Public Affairs, said that the state will have to have to start regulating matter that it currently does not. She didn‘t explain why any such regulations are proper.
It isn’t clear whether the sponsors of the bill intend for the state to expand its regulatory powers. Whether that is their intention or not, future legislators may not be business friendly and impose more regulations.
Preempting local laws that violate rights is appropriate, but the state should not assume more powers in the process. The state should be prohibiting any laws that violate property rights, whether on the local level or the state level. This bill isn’t about protecting the moral right to produce and trade. It’s about eliminating something that the sponsors find impractical rather than immoral.
It may be easier for businesses to deal with state regulations rather than a patchwork of local regulations. However, regulating businesses is not a proper function of government at any level. The proper solution to regulatory inconsistency is not regulatory consistency. The proper solution is a separation of government and economics.