Dental Examiners, moreover, calls for more than a fig leaf of bureaucratic supervision. Superficial reforms will leave states open to considerable legal uncertainty, as the Supreme Court has not clearly defined the level of “active supervision” that will suffice to confer immunity from federal antitrust law. States, instead, should seek to restrict the kind of underlying anticompetitive conduct that gets boards into trouble in the first place. States can do this by taking the following concrete steps: Charge a licensing ombudsman, a disinterested state-wide official, with responsibility for reviewing actions taken by the boards; Enact a requirement that the ombudsman seek to promote competition when exercising this supervisory authority; and Require that same licensing ombudsman to conduct, over a period of 5 years, rolling sunset review of all licensing regimes and to recommend annually to state legislators changes to licensing laws that would repeal or reduce unnecessary regulatory burdens on individuals entering occupations.
Loading...