Chris Christie’s presidential hopes may be dashed due to Bridghazi, but he hasn’t been doing himself any favors in getting my vote if things do turn around for him. Or rather, that would be the case if it weren’t for the fact that in both cases his actions are at least mildly defensible. The bigger item is that they’ve announced that New Jersey will be blocking direct car sales, most notably affecting Tesla.

The fascinating thing about the direct sales Tesla debate is the amount of anger directed towards the same sort of “consumer protection” licensure agreements that they defend to the hilt elsewhere. Here’s a video “debate” and the defender of the decision sounds quite a bit like defenders of licensure for just about every other occupation.

The best argument the dealers’ advocate makes is for recalls, but that’s not sufficient justification to draft an entire law around it. Alex Taborrak writes more.

I side with Tesla on this one. And it should be said that agreement for licensure restrictions over here do not necessitate agreement over there. It’s mostly just amusing to watch the shoe on the other foot.

I call the Christie administrations’ decision here defensible because it does very much appear to be the enforcement of the law as written, as opposed to enforcement of the law as people would like it to be.

The next involves a subject more pertinent to me, which is a tax on ecigarettes. The health angle is unproven at best and counterproductive at worst, but I call this one “defensible” insofar as New Jersey has the highest taxes in the country and has to find some way to pay the bills. A higher gas tax would be more preferable, but whatever.