Daily Caller contributor Natasha Mayer thinks the Indian Partnership model adopted by some Internet lenders should offend even “free market” types.  From the story:

Let me try to wrap my mind around this. Indian tribes, looking to clone their lucrative but controversial casino model, lend their sovereign immunity out to the highest bidder — no questions asked. The Internet lenders rent a P.O. Box based on an Indian reservation and blow off all the state attorneys general who file lawsuit after lawsuit against them. They even get to operate in the 12 states that have banned their competition — brick and mortar short-term lenders.

——————————-

So, as someone who’s always believed in the free market and feels that unregulated commerce is the key to liberty, how should I feel about this issue? Should the payday lenders who have found a way around state and federal laws by operating on Indian reservations be rewarded for their entrepreneurial ingenuity? Ultimately, I have to say no. Why? Because the free market only works when similar businesses are regulated by uniform laws, and the winners and losers are determined by the market’s decisions alone. The CFPB, by trying to regulate away free market choice, has already awarded the jackpot to the (currently legitimate) Indian tribes and online lenders and made consumers the rubes. This isn’t the free market or liberty — it’s what happens when regulators get outsmarted.