Thursday, December 04, 2014

DOJ Issues Executive Order to Control Movie Theaters : What's the Problem?

Why is it that whenever the Department of Justice (DOJ) is involved in any proposal, it's easy to understand that their is a motive to subvert that proposal to their personal ideology and the ideology of the progressive liberal democrat party.

The rule of law means nothing. Getting and keeping power is all that matters and by any means necessary. As this new (Executive Order) from the DOJ is useless to any problem that 'might' exist, given that there are so many inconsistencies in the Executive order, explains the motives of those that inhibit the DOJ. There here just to extract as much freedom from as many people as they can while the government is controlled by socialist democrats.

What other reason can there be for the attacks on things that are purely non problems?

DOJ Looks to Regulate Movie Theaters
Source: Christopher Koopman and Scott Eastman, "Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability by Public Accommodations-Movie Theaters; Movie Captioning and Audio Description," Mercatus Center, November 26, 2014.

December 3, 2014

The Department of Justice is proposing to amend the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) to require movie theaters to offer closed captioning services for the deaf. Submitting comments on the proposal, Christopher Koopman and Scott Eastman of the Mercatus Center argue the agency's rule needs some work.

The ADA limits the ability of public accommodations to deny services to the disabled or treat them differently. The DOJ has proposed to require movie theaters to play movies with closed captioning and audio descriptions at all times, for all showings, unless to do so would be an undue burden. The DOJ's proposal, however, is problematic, as it's expensive and missing key data.

When issuing regulations, Koopman and Eastman note that Executive Order 12866 requires all agencies to identify a problem, explain its significance and identify the existing market failures that justify regulatory action on the problem. But in pushing for closed captioning services at movie theaters, the DOJ did not provide numbers on how many theaters were currently providing, or not providing, captioning services, nor did it identify how many individuals were demanding but being denied captioning services. In fact, one estimate from the National Association of Theater Owners suggests that 53 percent of digital movie screens already have closed captioning technology.

Moreover, Koopman and Eastman write that the agency did not look at the many closed captioning offerings available from other forms of entertainment (such as streaming video services like Netflix). And while the DOJ contends that the benefits of the rule outweigh its costs, it does not actually monetize the benefits of the proposed regulation.
 

No comments: