The more government intervenes in the financial markets, the more it finds a need to … intervene some more. That may be one message from the Dodd-Frank financial “reform” law that I wrote about the other day.

The Wall Street Journal notes in an editorial that Daniel Tarullo, a governor of the Federal Reserve, now says the law, meant to protect taxpayers, could be creating institutions that are, as the lingo goes, “too big to fail.” The Journal concludes, “Instead of reducing systemic risk, Dodd-Frank has created more institutions whose failure would create it.”

Some observers have already noted that in the wake of Dodd-Frank, low-income people are finding it more difficult to obtain credit cards–and are thus driven into the arms of pawn shops. Don’t get me wrong, Pawn Stars is regular viewing in my house, but such a shop is not the first place I’d go to for credit.

It’s not just another too-big-to-fail institution or restrictions on credit card use that are problems. Access to banking itself may be threatened. The Durbin Amendment to the law establishes price controls on the fees that banks can charge merchants who accept debit cards–alternatives to credit cards. As Todd Zywicki, a George Mason University law professor, argued earlier this year, “While this will provide a major windfall to big-box retailers and other merchants, the impact on consumers will be devastating—and again low-income consumers will be the hardest hit.” He suggests that the law will lead to an increased number of low-income people becoming “unbanked”–that is, shedding their bank accounts because they won’t be able to afford the fees that banks will impose as a response to the costs imposed on them by Dodd-Frank-Durbin.

As Travis Tritt sagely observed, “Lord have mercy on the working man“–whose “representatives” in our legislative bodies want to regulate substitute their judgment for those of their constituents.

One reason I’m animated about this topic is that it’s another great example of the folly that embroils so much regulation. Another is that I found out the Legislature of my native state has taken up the issue and issued a resolution expressing many of the same concerns. (See, politicians can get it.)

As the Michigan Senate and House recognized in a resolution, a regulation on debit cards, which the Federal Reserve is formulating in compliance with Dodd-Frank, “could lead to the unintended consequences of increasing costs on consumers and limiting consumer choice.” The resolution also expresses a concern that the carve-out for smaller financial institutions won’t be implemented, a concern of credit unions in the state.

While a carve-out of any onerous regulation for smaller institutions has some merit–don’t we all love the little guy?–it doesn’t eliminate the odor of Dodd-Frank, or the fact that the Durbin Amendment is both a form of price controls and a taking-of-sides in a private commercial dispute.