Tuesday, February 05, 2008

Flying J Sues Wisconsin Over Unfair Sales Act

As you may have guessed from the title, Flying J is suing Wisconsin over the Unfair Sales Act - otherwise known as the Minimum Markup Law or Mandatory Profit Law.  This is the law that mandates that wholesalers and retailers sell their products at a minimum specific profit margin that is set by the state.  The most common commodity that people bring up with this law is gasoline.  Studies estimate that the Unfair Sales Act adds about 7 cents to every gallon of gas sold in Wisconsin.

Flying J is seeking an injunction to prohibit the State of Wisconsin from enforcing the Unfair Sales Act because it is unconstitutional. 

The Federal Magistrate who will be hearing the case is William E Callahan - the same Magistrate who has already ruled once that the Unfair Sales Act is unconstitutional.  This bodes well for Flying J’s chances. 

There will be a few things to watch.  First, Wisconsin Attorney General J. B. Van Hollen is tasked with defending the government and the Unfair Sales Act.  His actions will be heavily scrutinized as this case progresses.  Second, there have been efforts in the legislature by both Republicans and Democrats to repeal all or parts of the Unfair Sales Act, but those efforts haven’t gone anywhere.  It will be telling to see how legislators react to the mounting pressure to get rid of this anti-free market law.  Third, I will personally be watching my own Senator - Senator Grothman.  He has been an impediment to repealing the Unfair Sales Act in the past. 

There will be legislative action on this issue this week.  I see that the Assembly’s Committee on Health and Healthcare Reform plans to discuss Rep. Sheldon Wasserman’s bill to repeal the part of the Unfair Sales Act that applies to prescription drugs.  I expect that to pass out of committee. 

Also still in the works is the more comprehensive bill being pushed by Representatives Vukmir and Kramer to completely repeal the Unfair Sales Act and replace it with the Competitive Marketplace Act.

Here we have a law that hurts Wisconsin’s consumers, has already been ruled unconstitutional, and is soaking up tax dollars with yet another legal challenge.  Will the legislature and Governor Doyle Act?

(11) Comments
Posted by Owen at 0738 hrs
Law + Politics + Politics - Wisconsin

  1. Will the legislature and Governor Doyle Act?

    In a word - No

    Posted by Clint on February 05, 2008 at 0857 hrs


  2. Will the legislature and Governor Doyle Act?

    Yes, they will.  As quickly and frantically as possible to stifle any dissent and ignore the Constitution.

    Posted by Amy P. on February 05, 2008 at 0949 hrs


  3. They will act like assholes. Or is it an act?

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 05, 2008 at 1007 hrs


  4. They will act like assholes. Or is it an act?

    Lets ask Scott.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 05, 2008 at 1310 hrs


  5. Within the last year, there has already been a court decision in Wisconsin that ruled the Minimum Markup Law/Unfair Sales Act is unconstitutional.  I don’t remember the specific case, but it had to do with the minimum markup on gasoline, where station owners in the Merril area were sent letters advising them of the law and it’s implications if they gave seniors discounts that would lower the price of gas to below the minimum markup equasion’s prices.

    Posted by Kerry Thomas on February 05, 2008 at 1430 hrs


  6. What you’re callling Unfair Sales Act has been supported by the GOP for years under the (inspired) name Fair Trade act. The act is business-friendly, which is a GOP value.

    Posted by Leisureguy on February 05, 2008 at 1541 hrs


  7. Um, it’s actual name is the “Unfair Sales Act.”  And yes, a bunch of anti-free market Republicans have supported it for decades.  So?

    Posted by Owen on February 05, 2008 at 1545 hrs


  8. No big deal—-it’s just interesting to watch the transformation of a party’s values. Those whom you call “anti-free market Republicans” used to be called simply “Republicans.” The problem is, I think, the association with businesses, each of which seems to strongly support strong competition and a free market for its suppliers, but for itself would rather get together and hammer out agreements with its own competitors on prices to charge and markets to corner—-something we’ve seen repeatedly. And many are the cries of “Shame!” from Republicans when the government steps in with regulatory powers to ensure that there’s no restraint of trade, etc.

    I’m all for the Unfair Sales Act, and I think that name is much more accurate than “Fair Trade Act.”

    Posted by Leisureguy on February 05, 2008 at 1555 hrs


  9. There is a big difference bewteen being pro-business and pro-free market.

    Thank God the Republicans are finally starting to understand the distinction.

    Pro free-market means being pro-consumer and pro-producer but anti-protetcionist.

    It’s about time.

    These stupid ideas like the Unfair Sales Act date back to Herbert Hoover…. if anyone thinks that is a good idea, then they don’t understand much of anything.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 05, 2008 at 2204 hrs


  10. Oops. I misspoke myself. I oppose the Unfair Sales Act, just as I opposed the Fair Trade Acts in the various states where I’ve lived. The USA, like the FTA, is a profit-protection act promoted by those who believe the government’s job is to protect businesses at all costs. (The same people, in general, who oppose mine-safety regulations and the like.)

    Sorry.

    Posted by Leisureguy on February 05, 2008 at 2238 hrs


  11. Will the legislature and Governor Doyle Act? I don’t think so.

    Posted by Carlo on February 06, 2008 at 0556 hrs


Commenting is not available in this channel entry.