Red Tape Watch: Help Us Eliminate Needless, Burdensome Regulation

This week, the Speaker Ralston instructed the House Special Committee on Small Business to undertake serious regulation reform in order to help spur our state economy. The project is called “Red Tape Watch.”

The Special Committee on Small Business will spend this legislative session reviewing and evaluating Georgia’s current regulatory environment. They will also be meeting with small business people at the Capitol to hear directly from them about the regulations they find most burdensome. And then the Committee will seek to eliminate these needless, burdensome regulations.

If you know of a regulation that is a needless burden on your business, visit and fill out the form.


  1. saltycracker says:

    Caveat: does the regulation prevent a material threat or harm to another or improve competition in the marketplace ?
    Not all of them are bad.

  2. chefdavid says:

    How about not having to prove I am a citizen to renew my professional license? Ah but the late fees for the unknowing last minute online re-newer will bring in some good revenue to the state.

    • cheapseats says:

      Amen! Has there been some documentation of the problem of having small business owners suddenly becoming illegal immigrants? Why should I have to prove, every single year, that I didn’t become an illegal immigrant during this past year?
      HB87 was a stupid, knee-jerk reaction to a non-problem and nothing but pandering to knuckle-draggers!
      Born in the USA, never left the country until I was over the age of 40, owner and the only full-time employee of my small business and I have to provide proof EVERY YEAR that I’m a US citizen to renew my business license?

      Tell me again how Republicans are the party of business and free enterprise?

  3. ricstewart says:

    An effort to reduce burdensome government regulations on small businesses from the same folks who brought us the unfunded E-Verify mandate.

    Who’s that yonder dressed in black?

  4. benevolus says:

    Get “”.
    Have some interns from Georgia State go through the code and highlight everything they don’t understand. Maybe have some staffers review before posting to the website.
    Start at section 2. Agriculture.
    Invite comments.

    This will take years. But that’s OK.

  5. Dave Bearse says:

    Buzz, I’ll assume this post is reflective of a limitation on the time you’ ve available to devote to PP posts.

    “They will also be meeting with small business people at the Capitol to hear directly from them about the regulations they find most burdensome. And then the Committee will seek to eliminate these needless, burdensome regulations.”

    You’re stating the Committee has already made up it’s mind that whatever regulations that business sez are most burdensome are ineffective or uneconomic, which isn’t necessarily true.

  6. greencracker says:

    Why should small biz get to have fewer regulations than big biz?
    Pleez, next thing, they’ll be arguing small income ought to be subject to less tax than big income!


    But no, actually, I really am asking the question. Why should the playing field be different for small biz than big biz? I’d be interested in knowing what people think … because that’s just the question that crossed my mind at this announcement and I have no idea what the answer might be.

  7. Dave Bearse says:

    It’s not the case all the time, but sometimes circumstances are materially different. There’s also economy of scale to consider.

    Consider FMLA. It’s indisputable that at some small number of employees that have its benefit changes to an undue burden on the business and/or other employees. 50 employees is the magic number (and whether that is truly the point of burden is a whole ‘nother debate).

    That’s my seuge into economy of scale. Good regulation is comparing the sum of the various types of advantages and benefits, and the sum of various disadvantages and costs. Given economy of scale, even the best-run small businesses are subject to the disadvantage tiny scale. There are simply fewer employees, and fewer goods and/or services, to allocate costs to, resulting in higher unit regulatory costs.

    There may be absolute floors—the standard established by the reg is so important it outweighs large or very inequally born cost, or the flipside that the nature or size of the burden imposed by this reg outweighs its broad benefits. It’s more fodder for argument.

Comments are closed.