The article didn't suggest that people with more "desirable" faces do anything to prevent an unfair advantage. It merely brought to attention a universal prejudice, with a suggestion that people, especially those making decisions wrt employment, be aware of the prejudices, so that they don't unfairly disadvantage candidates, and so that they don't dismiss someone who might be a better candidate solely on the basis of their looks.
Sure it did. How about here:
“The question is, do we want to spend government money protecting bad looking people when – it’s my personal view – other groups merit more attention?”
Thats as much of a hint on government regulation as it can be.
