Connect with us

Politics

Digital liberty at what cost? Unpacking the right-to-repair crusade

Published

on


A misguided rebellion is sweeping through state legislatures across America, masquerading as consumer advocacy while threatening the very innovation it claims to protect.

The “right-to-repair” movement — championed by well-intentioned but shortsighted lawmakers — has planted its flag in just four states: California, Colorado, Minnesota and New York, where legislators have succumbed to simplistic narratives about corporate villains and consumer victimhood.

The movement’s grievances rest on a populist foundation: Technology giants have erected an impenetrable fortress around repair services, artificially inflating costs and restricting consumer choice. Their prescription — mandating manufacturers surrender proprietary information, specialized tools and internal schematics — exemplifies the left’s reflexive impulse to solve perceived market failures with the blunt instrument of government intervention.

These crusaders conveniently ignore the profound cybersecurity implications of their crusade. In their haste to democratize repair, they would unwittingly create vulnerabilities exploitable by malicious actors, both foreign and domestic.

More tellingly, they fail to acknowledge how market forces have already addressed many of their concerns, with companies independently expanding repair options in response to consumer demand — a triumph of free enterprise that right-to-repair advocates seem determined to undermine through unnecessary regulation.

Like so many progressive causes, this movement mistakenly misrepresents a complex ecosystem as a simplistic morality play. In doing so, it risks sacrificing genuine innovation on the altar of misplaced consumer activism.

Today’s device owners enjoy a veritable buffet of repair options, which exposes the right-to-repair movement as a solution desperately in search of a problem.

The free market—not heavy-handed government mandates—has delivered precisely what consumers demand: choice. Device owners can certainly patronize manufacturer-authorized repair centers, but increasingly, they can access official components, detailed documentation, and specialized tools through manufacturer-sponsored self-repair initiatives that slash costs dramatically.

This quiet revolution in repair accessibility has occurred not through legislative coercion but through the invisible hand guiding companies — a testament to the market’s inherent wisdom and adaptability that renders the progressive regulatory impulse not merely unnecessary but actively harmful to the innovation ecosystem that produced these advances in the first place.

The crusade for “right-to-repair” legislation not only betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of free markets but recklessly endangers the very consumers it purports to champion. The movement’s advocates deliberately obscure the stark reality that our devices have evolved beyond mere tools into repositories of our most intimate data — banking credentials, irreplaceable family memories, and sensitive medical records now rest in these digital vaults.

The progressive push to open the repair ecosystem to all comers, qualified or not, creates a veritable Trojan horse for counterfeit components engineered by adversarial foreign entities and criminal syndicates. Once installed by well-meaning but unwitting repair shops, such compromised parts transform privacy-protecting devices into a surveillance apparatus with direct pipelines to our most confidential information.

This is the predictable consequence of the reflexive urge to impose regulatory solutions where market prudence is required. They demonstrate yet again their willingness to sacrifice genuine security concerns on the altar of populist talking points about corporate power—a dangerous gambit that puts American privacy at risk not through corporate malfeasance but through governmental overreach.

The right-to-repair movement exemplifies the fundamental problem with regulatory overreach, addressing problems the market has already solved. This crusade rests on outdated complaints that ignore today’s vibrant tech sector with its diverse repair options.

Upon closer examination, this movement appears less concerned with consumer benefits than with targeting innovative companies for political gain. The cybersecurity implications — endangering Americans’ sensitive data — should alarm any lawmaker genuinely concerned with digital privacy, yet these considerations remain secondary to the regulatory agenda.

The free-market solution is clear: let markets operate freely. Innovation thrives absent government mandates. Expanding self-repair programs demonstrate that consumers already benefit from competitive repair solutions.

This market-driven approach simultaneously protects property rights and encourages technological advancement.

As lawmakers consider following California, Minnesota, Colorado and New York’s misguided lead, those who stand for free-market principles must resist this regulatory assault. America’s digital sovereignty depends not on government intervention but on free enterprise developing secure solutions that serve consumers while maintaining our technological leadership in an increasingly competitive global landscape.

___

Dr. Edward Longe is the director of national strategy and the Center for Technology and Innovation at The James Madison Institute.


Post Views: 0



Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Florida thoroughbred industry supporters keep saying ‘business is great,’ but data shows otherwise

Published

on


Thoroughbred horse breeding is in decline in Florida.

That much was already known, but new data shows the problem worsening, and it raises new questions about legislation moving through the Legislature that would decouple live racing at Florida tracks from slot machine and card room operations.

Namely, if horse racing is so prominent to Florida’s economy, why do races need to be tethered to other wagering activities?

Senate Democratic Leader Jason Pizzo laid out the dilemma perfectly during debate on the decoupling measure (SB 408) in a recent committee hearing on the issue. He asked for clarification about claims “that business is going great,” specifically whether the Jockey Club, which has released troubling data for the horse breeding industry in Florida, is a reputable publication.

“Certainly it is,” responded Tod Wojciechowski, Director of Sales for the Ocala Breeders’ Sales Company and an opponent of the bill.

“Mares bred of Florida Stallions have drastically declined 60% over the last decade,” Pizzo noted. “A raw number standing alone at 3,057 in 2014 down to 1,316 in 2024. Florida’s foal crop has decreased 51% over the last decade, and in 2014 the foal crop was at 2,214, and at the end of 2023, only 1,089.’ Is Jockey Club wrong on those numbers?”

“No, those stats are accurate,” Wojciechowski answered.

And the declines are ongoing. From 2022 to 2023, the share of the North American foal crop fell from 6.4% to 6%, and the number of Florida registered foals dropped by 7.3%. The number of Florida-bred stallions dropped from 72 in 2023 to just 60 in 2024, a nearly 17% reduction. That’s after the number of Florida-bred stallions dropped by a staggering 76% from 2004, when 259 were bred in the state.

Auction results for Florida-bred thoroughbreds is also in decline, with 434 weanlings sold in 2004, but just 10 in 2024. And the average price paid for the weanlings dropped nearly 24% over that period.

So too are racing performance and participation trends on the decline, with 10,331 Florida-bred starters in 2004 and just 3,273 in 2024.

Opponents to decoupling legislation, including veterinarians, breeders and trainers, argue it would devastate the breeding and horse racing industry. But given the ongoing decline that is already in place, it might be more accurate to argue that the decoupling would devastate the subsidies that are keeping the industry afloat amid the devastation that has already occurred.

“The statistics in every category is alarming,” said Republican Rep. Adam Anderson, who is sponsoring the House version of the bill (HB 105).

“As I have been discussing throughout committee weeks and Session, there is a staggering decline in our Florida-bred thoroughbred industry. Considering the amount of funds the breeders receive in state and private subsidies, it is clear that something has to change. My bill seeks to do just that and, without question, is needed more now than ever.”

Last year, the Governor signed legislation establishing permanent yearly distributions of $27.5 million “to promote breeding and racing horses.”

“That’s not sustainable,” Pizzo said during a committee hearing on the Senate bill.

Both measures would allow thoroughbred horse racing tracks to maintain licenses for slot machines and card rooms without requiring them to also host live racing.

In response to concerns from the breeding and racing industry, Sen. Danny Burgess, the bill sponsor, offered a strike-all amendment providing concessions to the thoroughbred horse racing industry and affiliated partners, which was adopted. The House also adopted a committee substitute to its bill offering a similar compromise.

It adds language confirming that a track cannot stop racing unless they provide a three-year notice to the thoroughbred industry. It further states that such notice cannot be given until 2027. The revision is meant to ensure the state’s two existing thoroughbred tracks, Tampa Bay Downs and Gulfstream Park, continue racing into the future.

The Senate amendment that was adopted provides an even longer window for thoroughbred racing, with at least seven years before decoupling can happen.

But time is running out for the measure. The Senate bill is still awaiting a hearing in the Appropriations Committee on Agriculture, Environment, and General Government, which is currently scheduled for Tuesday. The House version is further along, awaiting activity on the House floor. But it’s been waiting since late March.

With time ticking on the 2025 Legislative Session, which is expected to end May 2, there is only one thing that is clear: The thoroughbred industry will continue to push back on decoupling in an industry they describe as vital to Florida’s economy and culture.

They may well win the battle this year. But that win, based on data an industry insider himself has confirmed as accurate, would seem to support a status quo on an industry in decline, while offering few solutions other than continued subsidies.


Post Views: 0



Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Hillary Cassel adds $164K in Q1 with help from hemp extract companies, GOP allies

Published

on


Dania Beach Republican Rep. Hillary Cassel stacked a lot of campaign cash before Session, amassing more than $164,000 to defend her House District 101 seat.

Her Democratic challenger, Todd Delmay, was no slouch either. He raised nearly $81,000 through a flood of small donations between Jan. 1 and March 31.

At the close of the first quarter reporting period, Cassel had $183,500 remaining in her campaign account, eponymous political committee and a new one called Balanced Leadership, which took in a sizable share of her gains.

Her biggest single contribution, $25,000, came from a Daytona Beach-based hemp extract company (read: legal weed) called Nectris Labs that sells products as Outpost.

She also took a $5,000 check from POB Ventures, a Florida business that runs a medical cannabis training institute and a chain of hemp-related businesses. Last year, POB Ventures helped fund Gov. Ron DeSantis’ push to defeat a ballot measure that would have legalized recreational pot in the state.

Cassel also added funds from medical companies. That includes $5,000 from for-profit health care company Centene Corp. and the Florida Health Care Executive PAC whose Chair, Andrew Weisman, is the CEO of Fort Lauderdale-based nursing home management company NuVision Management.

Several unions — including the Teamsters, Metro-Broward Firefighters, Broward County Professional Firefighters, Teach Florida PAC and Florida Professional Firefighters gave between $1,000 and $2,000 each.

Other contributions included $5,000 from a political committee associated with the Florida Association of Public Insurance Adjusters, $4,500 from political committees linked to the Florida Association of Insurance Agents and $5,000 from the political donations arm of the Florida Justice Association.

Clay County Rep. Sam Garrison, who is slated to take the House Speaker gavel for the 2026-27 term, gave $12,000 through various political committees he controls. Cassel also banked $2,000 from Bonita Springs Rep. Adam Botana and $1,000 apiece from Reps. Tiffany Esposito, Tracy Koster, Jason Shoaf and John Snyder.

She spent just over $7,000 in Q1, not counting a $25,000 transfer she made between her Friends of Hillary Cassel and Balanced Leadership political committees. The preponderance of that, $7,000, went to Miami Beach consulting firm Polaris Public Affairs for mail media services.

She also paid $600 to Bluestream Consulting in Fort Lauderdale for compliance services. The remainder covered web costs and donation-processing fees.

Delmay, the Executive Director of LGBTQ advocacy group SAVE, launched his campaign in February to unseat Cassel, whom he criticized for switching from Democrat to Republican after she won re-election in November.

So far, he’s run an exclusively grassroots campaign.

More than 1,500 people donated to him in his first seven weeks running, with an average contribution of about $50.

After less than $2,000 worth of spending on compliance consulting and donation-processing fees, he had roughly $79,000 left between his campaign account and political committee, Delmay for Florida, by the beginning of this month.

HD 101 covers parts of Dania Beach, Hallandale Beach and Hollywood. The district leans Democratic, with nearly 42,000 registered Democrats, close to 30,300 Republicans and about 41,000 third- and no-party voters.

So far, only Cassel and Delmay are in the race.

The 2026 Primary is on Aug. 18, followed by the General Election on Nov. 3.

Candidates faced a Thursday deadline to report all campaign finance activity through March 31.


Post Views: 0



Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Michelle Salzman to offer taxation amendment on hemp as House irons out policy details on caps

Published

on


Rep. Michelle Salzman may be giving Florida a clearer picture of what hemp legislation could pass out of the Legislature this year.

The Pensacola Republican is leading the effort to craft House legislation and will likely unroll an amendment on Monday to legislation that could impose taxes on THC-infused drinks and other products.

The bill (HB 7029) would tax hemp goods similar to cigarettes and wines.

“I think we’re just going to give it a syntax on the sales so when you buy that, when you purchase a product, it’ll be a 20% markup or whatever instead of collecting the taxes in the forefront,” Salzman said. “We’re considering ways to change the collection model so we don’t have to worry about people circumventing paying the 20% of wholesale, or whatever it is for that particular product.”

An amendment should have details ready before the legislation is presented to the House Budget Committee on Tuesday.

Representatives on April 1 advanced two pieces of legislation out of the House Housing, Agriculture & Tourism Subcommittee with bipartisan support, with neither bill receiving a dissenting vote. Salzman hopes to keep the House unified around legislation and has reached out for input from all 120 members as the bill works its way through The Process.

She held a lengthy meeting with House Commerce Committee staff on a separate policy bill (HB 7027) that would mandate the testing of consumable and hemp products to ensure they meet specific safety standards.

As written now, the legislation would block the sale of the products at any businesses where those under 21 can enter. But before the bill lands in front of the Commerce Committee, Salzman expects to have an amendment that would ensure at least beverages infused with THC from hemp can remain on gas station and convenience store shelves. With the federal government allowing products to exist and a major sector already formed around hemp beverages, she said House legislation likely won’t try to stop the sale of drink products entirely in places where they are available now.

“I just can’t see unwinding that machine, and in the third largest economy In America,” Salzman said. “So we just have to be cognizant of the businesses as well as the will of Floridians, while keeping the safety of the citizens and protecting kids as our number one priority.”

The bill sets out several regulations on packaging, Salzman’s top priority. The bill said hemp consumables cannot be marketed with colorful labeling or cartoon mascots that would attract children’s interest. After consulting with business interests, she does say that the legislation will likely allow logos that cover no more than 20% of packaging, something she called a “huge gift” to the industry.

The Senate has already passed hemp legislation as a single bill (SB 438) that would significantly restrict signage promoting products outside the business premises. The House hasn’t focused as rigidly on that.

“We are not discussing the signage outside. We’re not discussing the signage inside,” Salzman said. “We’re only discussing the packaging and the caps and the distribution.”

But she doesn’t want to see hemp-infused gummies or brownies that children could mistake for treats and consume as such. She knows that remains controversial among retailers and manufacturers of the products, but it’s one area Salzman has been unwilling to budge.

“The moment they take that package out of the store, it is one color period, with a description, with the warnings, with all of the stuff so it doesn’t look exciting,” Salzman said. “No kid is going to go, ‘Oh, that looks like I want to do that today.’ They would have to know what it was, and they would have to intentionally be doing the drug. And that is the whole purpose of the packaging requirements to be that way.

“That’s the hardest pill for a lot of these people to swallow. But every single one of them have said, ‘We’ll make it work.’”

That legislation sets out laboratory standards and restricts the sale of THC products with a total delta-9 THC concentration greater than 0.3%. Salzman continues to examine the practicality of making the goods with manufacturers but remains concerned about how caps translate into products.

“The way that we have it written in the bill currently, it tells them how much additives they can have, and that’s really to prevent somebody from creating 100-milligram brownie that’s only a quarter of an inch thick, and then say that it’s got 50 doses in there,” she said. “So the weight limit as it pertains to THC content is critical, but the way it’s written, there are several manufacturers that are concerned with being able to sell their product with that.”

She offers an example of whether the same caps were applied to a corn chip and whether manufacturers could guarantee that the same balance in each chip meets the statutory limits in THC.

She expects conversations over the coming weeks with House leadership on how to translate the cap discussions into written policy and expects there to be further discussion with the Senate. She ultimately expects any disagreements on hemp to end up in conference, a rarity for policy as opposed to appropriations in the Legislature.

“You can conference on policy just like you conference on budget,” she said. “You just haven’t seen it in 20 years.”

Then there’s concern about where it goes once the Legislature finishes its debate. Last year, Gov. Ron DeSantis vetoed a regulation framework on hemp. But that’s why Salzman wants so much input now and why she pushed for a Committee bill instead of the House-run one of multiple pieces of competing hemp regulation filed this year.

If all concerns about hemp rules are aired in public before the bill passes, and so long as all business concerns outlined in DeSantis’ veto letter are addressed, she expects legislation to become state statutes.

Salzman stressed that if that happens, it will just be a starting point for implementing hemp regulations.

“We hope to get this across the finish line, the Governor signs it, and then next year, we reevaluate what’s next,” she said.


Post Views: 0



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Miami Select.