Keep porn USG-free

There is a fascinating debate going on in California about if and how to regulate the pornography industry. Ostensibly the argument is about making porn stars wear condoms, but in reality it is dispute about morality and government's role in enforcing moral standards.

A recent technique of porn opponents has been to argue for greater regulation of the industry under the theory that sexually transmitted diseases make it a high risk business worthy of public health oversight.

I happen to agree with that idea.  The states and localities have always been the repositories of health regulations.  It seems perfectly proper to me that California, or Los Angeles or some other municipality, might insist porn stars use condoms to prevent a public pandemic.  Where I object is when the USG wants to get involved.  This is clearly a state and local concern and the federal government has no business inserting itself here.

But there are tremendous political pressures at play here.  They are a curious fusion between the left and the right but they are not unprecedented.  Another area where this is observed is in the USG's obsession with ending "sex trafficking," a peculiarity I cannot delve too deeply into because it touches upon foreign affairs- which I refuse to opine upon.  But it is enough to say that when sex is at issue (or imagined to be at issue, as is often the case with trafficking in persons) the Bible thumpers and the feminists form one powerful and expensive coalition.

If any industry has undergone a revolution since the Internet Age exploded, it has been pornography.  Massive concerns adapted or collapsed as the business model of porn morphed from print to digital.  But with that change, almost entirely unregulated by government at all levels, has come profound improvements for the consumer.  Leave aside the moral objections for a moment and it is impossible to ignore that someone who wants porn today can get it cheaper, easier, and in more varieties than ever before.

Sensible regulation should accompany that development, but it should be at the state or local level.  If Oakland has a concern about the health of porn stars, pass an ordinance and make them wear condoms.  If Sacramento is worried about underage actors being used in such films, enforce the state laws which make such action illegal.  If Orange County dislikes the fact that porn shoots can spread the flu, tax them and hire nurses to be on site to inspect each set.  Maybe they can be used as extras, depending on the genre.

A pragmatist might argue that there are sufficient abilities to regulate porn properly at the state and local level.  I suggest that the greater argument against USG intervention in this area though, is that there simply is no federal authority to regulate porn.  Like schools and old folks homes, porn is best regulated at the local level- although maybe from a separate office.