The House voted to lift the 40-year-old ban on oil exports, giving the oil industry one of its top congressional priorities, but fueling a clash with the president.

Source: House Votes to Lift Oil-Export Ban

I was pleased to have the news that the House had voted 261-159 to lift the ban on oil exports pop up on my smart watch today. Even with the maritime provisions, this appears to be legislation that will increase free trade in oil. The ban was ill-advised when it was first passed in the 1970’s and even more so today.

What I found particularly interesting in the Wall Street Journal’s initial report on the vote was the reasoning behind the White House’s opposition to the lifting of the ban.

The White House has threatened to veto the bill, saying in a statement Wednesday that the it “is not needed at this time” in part because some studies project the impact of lifting the ban to be limited, Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz told Congress earlier this week.

If the impact for lifting the ban would be limited and therefor not worth doing, the logical assumption is that any benefits from the ban are also limited and not worth maintaining. In other words, the government is restricting the freedom of Americans to think, act, produce and trade as they see fit for minimal benefit. In fact there are no benefits to the ban as any impediment to free trade is detrimental to everyone.