Even Laws That Haven't Passed Can Have Unintended Consequences

The article centers business and investor concerns as the primary lens for evaluating legislative proposals, using cautionary language ('should be wary') to frame regulatory action as inherently risky. The framing privileges economic risk over public interest rationales for legislation, and proposes no countervailing analysis of harms from inaction or regulatory delays. This reflects Reason's libertarian editorial stance skeptical of government intervention.

Primary voices: media outlet

• This article does not address potential benefits of proposed legislation or how regulatory uncertainty might affect workers, consumers, or public health
• This article does not examine whether business 'risk calculus' shifts are proportional to actual regulatory threats or represent strategic preemption of rule-making