Columbus, OH – Greg R. Lawson, a research fellow at The Buckeye Institute, testified today (see full text below or download a PDF) before the Ohio House Government Accountability and Oversight Committee on the policies in House Bill 189, which would make Ohio more competitive, more prosperous, and more attractive to entrepreneurs and their employees.

As he did when he last testified on House Bill 189, Lawson highlighted Ohio’s “over-licensing” problem, which was revealed in Forbidden to Succeed: How Licensure Laws Hold Ohioans Back, and urged policymakers to remove onerous barriers to employment for thousands of cosmetologists across Ohio. “Ohio cosmetologists must complete 250 hours more training than their peers in Pennsylvania and 500 more hours than hairdressers in New York. The onerous training required for Ohio’s cosmetologists is even more ridiculous when compared to the 150 hours of training required to be a state certified Emergency Medical Technician.”

Lawson continued, “Nearly every Ohio license that requires training can be earned in less time in another state.” Recognizing that Ohio “needs to require appropriate training and licensing for jobs with health and safety concerns,” Lawson noted that “such concern fades dramatically when applied…to auctioneers, travel guides, and hairdressers.” He went on to say that, “onerous licensing burdens…make Ohio less competitive, less prosperous, and less attractive to entrepreneurs and their employees. 

Lawson closed saying the policies in House Bill 189 would remove some of the occupational licensing obstacles facing Ohio’s working men and women. “Every unnecessary license is a red-taped hurdle that must be cleared. Every hour of unnecessary, unpaid training needed to satisfy bureaucratic requirements is an hour not spent earning tips, impressing a boss, serving a customer, or climbing a corporate ladder. Those are hours of productivity, hours of opportunity that young, low-income workers sorely need, but that the state continues to take away.”

# # #

Interested Party Testimony on House Bill 189
Before the Ohio House Government Accountability and Oversight Committee 

Greg R. Lawson, Research Fellow
The Buckeye Institute
December 4, 2018

Thank you, Chairman Blessing, Vice Chair Reineke, Ranking Member Clyde, and members of the Committee, for the opportunity to testify regarding House Bill 189.

My name is Greg R. Lawson. I am the research fellow at The Buckeye Institute, an independent research and educational institution—a think tank—whose mission is to advance free-market public policy in the states.

House Bill 189 helps to address Ohio’s “over-licensing” problem and will continue the important work started by Senate Bill 213 in the last General Assembly that lowered barriers of entry to Ohio’s salon industry. Others have already addressed specific provisions in this bill, so let me just say that The Buckeye Institute generally supports reducing required education hours and we encourage policymakers to embrace license reciprocity with our sister states. After all, licensed cosmetologists in good standing in New York and Massachusetts should not have to clear additional hurdles to provide the same services and earn their living here in Ohio.

Unfortunately, Ohio cosmetologists must complete 250 hours more training than their peers in Pennsylvania and 500 more hours than hairdressers in New York. The onerous training required for Ohio’s cosmetologists is even more ridiculous when compared to the 150 hours of training required to be a state certified Emergency Medical Technician. With Ohio law currently requiring cosmetologists to have 10 times the training of basic EMTs, the need for licensing reform doesn’t get much clearer.

Ohio’s over-licensing problem extends well beyond the local hair salon. The Buckeye Institute’s report Forbidden to Succeed: How Licensure Laws Hold Ohioans Back revealed that Ohio’s occupational licensing burdens are well above average. Of Ohio’s 31 moderate-income occupations requiring licensure, 15 require hundreds or thousands of hours of training. Remarkably, nearly every Ohio license that requires training can be earned in less time in another state. The state certainly needs to require appropriate training and licensing for jobs with health and safety concerns, such as physicians and pilots, and no one disputes this. However, such concern fades dramatically when applied, for example, to auctioneers, travel guides, and hairdressers.

Onerous licensing burdens—essentially requiring workers to ask the government for a permission slip to earn a living—make Ohio less competitive, less prosperous, and less attractive to entrepreneurs and their employees. Licensing requirements only make finding a job more difficult. Every unnecessary license is a red-taped hurdle that must be cleared. Every hour of unnecessary, unpaid training needed to satisfy bureaucratic requirements is an hour not spent earning tips, impressing a boss, serving a customer, or climbing a corporate ladder. Those are hours of productivity, hours of opportunity that young, low-income workers sorely need, but that the state continues to take away.

Even more concerning are the daunting employment prospects faced by many in Ohio’s minority communities. Nationally, the unemployment rate among African Americans remains much higher than among other demographics. Given the relatively high number of African Americans and women in the salon industry, reforming Ohio’s cosmetology laws offers a direct response to those alarming statistics.

House Bill 189 advances the state’s anti-red-tape reform effort and will remove at least some of the occupational licensing obstacles faced by Ohio’s working men and women. Of course, much more than HB 189 is needed and I look forward to exploring additional solutions with you and continuing our conversation on this important issue.

Thank you for your time and attention. I would be happy to answer any questions that the Committee might have.

# # #