[pstwwl]

I don’t know who “they” is, but the Federal government should have no role in that whatsoever. If a state wants to require occupational licensing, then so be it.

Violations of free market capitalism are bad regardless of whether the policies are imposed at the federal level or the state or local level. It would be perfectly constitutional for the Feds to incentivize states to ease up on licensing requirements by making such changes conditional on continued federal funding.

[Alberta's Child]

Baloney. The Tenth Amendment gives states authority in all matters outside the powers specifically given to the Federal government under the Constitution. Whether occupational licensing is "good" or "bad" is not necessarily a matter of free market capitalism. If it was as clear an issue as you make it sound, then we'd see huge disparities in economic measures between states that require occupational licensing and those that do not.

If you live in a state where you think occupational licensing is a bad thing, then either work to change the law in your own state or move somewhere else.

[Alberta's Child]

P.S. -- I work in a profession (engineering) where occupational licensing is required in every U.S. state for projects involving public use. There's no way in hell anyone should consider eliminating these requirements.

Interestingly, there is no such thing as a Federal professional engineering license. This is now the focus of an interesting legal dispute related to the Gold King Mine spill in Colorado in 2015. A Congressman filed a formal complaint against the EPA with the Colorado Department of Regulatory Agencies because the mine reclamation project wasn't being supervised by a professional engineer licensed in the state of Colorado. It will be fascinating to see how this all plays out.