Congress does something right?

[noel]

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/10/20/ ... index.html

"As one judge put it, if a person knows or should know that eating copious orders of super-sized McDonald's products is unhealthy and could result in weight gain, it is not the place of the law to protect them from their own excesses," said Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wisconsin, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.

The bill seeks to thwart class-action obesity lawsuits against food manufacturers and restaurants.

I have to admit that when I read the article, I was a bit shocked that something so clear and 'right' came from our legislative branch. Can anyone think of anything bad about this bill? It would seem that if this isn't overruled by the judicial branch, this bill could set a nice precedent for other aspects of life as well.

[Zaelath]

Here's one thing: It's not their fucking role.

Politicians are continually running around legislating away the whole point of the judicial branch of government with popularist bullshit and people just lap it up. Three strike laws for example.

You should be dragged out in the street and shot for supporting this crap.

[noel]

Here's one thing: It's not their fucking role.

Politicians are continually running around legislating away the whole point of the judicial branch of government with popularist bullshit and people just lap it up. Three strike laws for example.

You should be dragged out in the street and shot for supporting this crap.

Bring it.

Do you even understand the intent of the legistlative branch of the US government? Their job is to... wait for it... Propose new legislation in the form of bills which can be passed into law. The bills are supposed to represent the interests of their constituents.

Not sure in what way you think this is stepping on the toes of the judicial branch, but I'd be happy to hear it. Seems to me they're trying very hard to keep frivolous lawsuits from wasting the judicial branch's time.

[Aabidano]

What I've never understood is why the judges are willing to hear this type of case in civil court. I never thought they had to hear any civil case and could be thrown out without merit.

It's not McDonalds fauly that someone fat from eating thier food. Largely the same with most smokers, non-defect related SUV rollovers, etc.. IMO.

[Nick]

Frankly if fat people don't have the self restraint not to eat themselves to death that's their problem, not McDonalds, the government, or us.

Edit: I have nothing against fat people, . I am just fed up with these stupid court cases by chancing bastards out to capitalise on the whole "my own health is no longer my responsibility" situation that's evolving.

[noel]

I'd like to add that there are certainly more pressing and important issues for Congress to be dealing with, but I was pleasantly surprised to see a bill being proposed that actually made sense.

[Aabidano]

Personal responsibility is not high on the liberal agenda.

[Aslanna]

Do you even understand the intent of the legistlative branch of the US government? Their job is to... wait for it... Propose new legislation in the form of bills which can be passed into law. The bills are supposed to represent the interests of their constituents.

Not sure in what way you think this is stepping on the toes of the judicial branch, but I'd be happy to hear it. Seems to me they're trying very hard to keep frivolous lawsuits from wasting the judicial branch's time.

Schoolhouse Rock is all you need to know!

Gonna have a three-ring circus someday,
People will say it's a fine one, son.
Gonna have a three-ring circus someday,
People will come from miles around.
Lions, tigers, acrobats, and jugglers and clowns galore,
Tightrope walkers, pony riders, elephants, and so much more...

Guess I got the idea right here at school.
Felt like a fool when they called my name,
Talkin' about the government and how it's arranged,
Divided in three like a circus.
Ring one, Executive,
Two is Legislative, that's Congress.
Ring three, Judiciary.
See it's kind of like my circus, circus.


Step right up and visit ring number one.
The show's just begun. Meet the President.
I am here to see that the laws get done.
The ringmaster of the government.


On with the show!


Hurry, hurry, hurry to ring number two.
See what they do in the Congress.
Passin' laws and juggling bills,
Oh, it's quite a thrill in the Congress.
Focus your attention on ring number three.
The Judiciary's in the spotlight.
The courts take the law and they tame the crimes
Balancing the wrongs with your rights.


No one part can be
more powerful than any other is.
Each controls the other you see,
and that's what we call checks and balances.


Well, everybody's act is part of the show.
And no one's job is more important.
The audience is kinda like the country you know,
Keeping and eye on their performance.


Ring one, Executive,
Two is Legislative, that's Congress.
Ring three, Judiciary.
See it's kind of like my circus, circus.


Gonna have a three-ring circus someday.
People will say it's a fine one son,
But until I get it, I'll do my thing
With government. It's got three rings.

[Vetiria]

Not sure in what way you think this is stepping on the toes of the judicial branch, but I'd be happy to hear it. Seems to me they're trying very hard to keep frivolous lawsuits from wasting the judicial branch's time.

It's the job of the judicial branch to decide what can and cannot be heard in a court of law; that's not the job of the legislative branch.

[nobody]

it's as much the Legislative branch's place to say what what the courts can hear as it is the Judicial branch's place to legislate from the bench.

[Vetiria]

The courts don't legislate. They say what is and is not constitutional.

[Voronwë]

The courts don't legislate. They say what is and is not constitutional.

NOT ACCORDING TO EL RUSBO!

[Nick]

Personal responsibility is not high on the liberal agenda.

Lol, what the fuck?

[Aabidano]

Your post brang that to mind

self restraint

Bwahahahaha! We'll have none of that, sue evilcorp when your poor choices result in you death.

my own health is no longer my responsibility

Sadly it doesn't seem to be.

[Zaelath]

Not sure in what way you think this is stepping on the toes of the judicial branch, but I'd be happy to hear it. Seems to me they're trying very hard to keep frivolous lawsuits from wasting the judicial branch's time.

It's the job of the judicial branch to decide what can and cannot be heard in a court of law; that's not the job of the legislative branch.

You see some compelling reason that the legislative branch should be making laws that remove people's right to be heard?

If you want to stop wasting the judicial branch's time, relax your drug laws. =p

[Drasta]

i only agree with relaxing it for pot thats it ...
and i don't smoke pot or think people should smoke pot ... just so i don't get accused of being a pot head =-P i've never smoked it either!

[kyoukan]

here's an idea. why don't you let legal precedent take care of frivolous lawsuits instead of a bunch of populist politicians wasting taxpayer money and time by enacting worthless non-laws like this? let experts on the rule of law decide whether or not suing mcdonalds for making them fat is something you can do.

nobody fucking forced anyone to smoke either, yet all I see is a bunch of crybabies whining about how they got lung cancer and getting big bucks out of tobacco corps from it.

all I see here is a bunch of politicians bending over for big corporations once again. no surprise in the USA.

[noel]

Perhaps it escaped you geniuses that seem to know everything, but not only does this bill have some amount of judicial support, but it also already exists as a state law in many states. I have no problem with someone having a right to be heard, but these lawsuits are fucking stupid and I have no problem with the US government legislating in just a tiny amount of personal responsibility.

As far as relaxing drug laws... Wanna know why that won't happen? The vast majority of people who don't do drugs don't get involved in the drug laws, and could give a shit what happens to people that do.

[Vetiria]

but not only does this bill have some amount of judicial support

Then let the judges say that in court. That is their job, afterall.

[kyoukan]

Perhaps it escaped you geniuses that seem to know everything, but not only does this bill have some amount of judicial support, but it also already exists as a state law in many states.

so what is the point of it? are they going to pass a law next outlawing murder?

[Cartalas]

here's an idea. why don't you let legal precedent take care of frivolous lawsuits instead of a bunch of populist politicians wasting taxpayer money and time by enacting worthless non-laws like this? let experts on the rule of law decide whether or not suing mcdonalds for making them fat is something you can do.

nobody fucking forced anyone to smoke either, yet all I see is a bunch of crybabies whining about how they got lung cancer and getting big bucks out of tobacco corps from it.

all I see here is a bunch of politicians bending over for big corporations once again. no surprise in the USA.

I stand corrected!

[Tuberok]

Wow, totally failed reading comprehension.... You also believe that Iraq has WMD right?

"all I see here is a bunch of politicians bending over for big corporations once again. no surprise in the USA"

key words being bending over FOR big corporations not the other way around.

[Kilmoll the Sexy]

but not only does this bill have some amount of judicial support

Then let the judges say that in court. That is their job, afterall.

Because, you dumbasses, just because a legal precedent is set, it does NOT stop these retards from bringing lawsuits in and wasting the taxpayer's money. The courts cannot tell you that you cannot file a lawsuit, all they can do is throw it out after it waste's their time. Then there is the appeal process.....

[Aabidano]

all they can do is throw it out after it waste's their time.

Unfortunately they don't throw these out, and juries full of stupid people grant them huge awards over it time after time.

An old girlfriend won a massive settlement against Suzuki due to a Samurai rollover. She was a passenger, the (deceased) drivers BAC was over .3. How is that the vendors fault? Look at parents successfully suing jetski manufacturers because little Timmy (who can't legally operate the craft) smacked into a dock, boat, tree, etc.. at 60mph.

[Chidoro]

There was a time when detailed nutritional information was not disclosed. That's just not the case any longer, especially from an obesity prevention standpoint. People would bitch about soft drinks which have ~250 calories for 20 oz. but have you looked at a Welch's grape juice label? A 20 oz bottle of purple grape juice has ~425 calories, almost the same as a McD's quarter pounder.

The real issue these days is how the food is collected and processed more than anything else. And while the purchaser can establish their guidelines, the supplier should be responsible for their due diligence as well. And it's the suppliers of places like McD's that get away with murder because the legislators(typically repubs) don't give a flying fuck so long as the lobby provides them with a time share in the caribbean

[Arborealus]

but not only does this bill have some amount of judicial support

Then let the judges say that in court. That is their job, afterall.

Because, you dumbasses, just because a legal precedent is set, it does NOT stop these retards from bringing lawsuits in and wasting the taxpayer's money. The courts cannot tell you that you cannot file a lawsuit, all they can do is throw it out after it waste's their time. Then there is the appeal process.....

Ummm yes it largely does...Lawyers tend not to take a case on spec when there is a clear precedent against the case...

[kyoukan]

Because, you dumbasses, just because a legal precedent is set, it does NOT stop these retards from bringing lawsuits in and wasting the taxpayer's money.

Yes it does. How many obesity lawsuits have you seen filed against fast food restaurants since the two major ones lost their suit? Zero. Not only is this law stupid, it's redundant.

If the government gave a dollar to a single mother you'd crap your pants in rage over it, but you don't mind your government spending millions of dollars and ignoring critical issues to work on horseshit like this? where are your fucking priorities?

[Boogahz]

Precedents can also be beaten by attorneys able to file the suit "with a twist." Having a law which prevents the suit is a little more difficult to get rid of.

[Vetiria]

And maybe that "twist" could make it a different lawsuit and an entirely different case, making it something worth hearing in court.

[Arborealus]

Precedents can also be beaten by attorneys able to file the suit "with a twist." Having a law which prevents the suit is a little more difficult to get rid of.

It is just as easy to find a twist around a law as it is a precedent...

[Boogahz]

Precedents can also be beaten by attorneys able to file the suit "with a twist." Having a law which prevents the suit is a little more difficult to get rid of.

It is just as easy to find a twist around a law as it is a precedent...

My point was just that a precedent does not necessarilly stop the suit. Neither does a law.

[Voronwë]

THANK GOD WE FIXED BIG MACS

BECAUSE EVERYTHING ELSE AROUND HERE IS JUST FINE!!!

[Deward]

I will play devil's advocate a little here. There are a lot of people in the USA who are dumb enough to believe that McDonalds isn't bad for their health. Think back to when you were a kid. McD's (and other fast food) has been filling the brains of kids and adults with happy thoughts and barely edible food. Sure they may never actually come out and say they are healthy or unhealthy but they give the impression that their stuff is good. Now if you are one fo the stupid people who spends 10 hours a day watching TV and using it as a babysitter then you may start gettign brainwashed into thinking that maybe this food really will make your day so you eat it. After a few meals you decide it is so easy to just pick it up that you stop cooking at home and eat fast food more and more often. Pretty quickly you are a 300 pound monstrosity.

Now I don't believe that these people should be able to sue and get millions of dollars. I do believe that these lawsuits bring VERY neeed exposure to the dangers of this crap and maybe it will lead some of these companies to change their habits.

I hate the fucking lawyers but we need to institute reward limits not outlaw the lawsuits.

[kyoukan]

I've seen ads that claim that Mcdonald's food tastes good, and I've seen ads promoting it as practically a lifestyle. I've never seen a fast food joint advertise their food as healthy except for their salads and yogurt and other crap. The only exception to this if KFC's disasterous attempt at promoting their chicken as healthy, which lasted on the air about half a week before it was pulled due to outcries from about every watchdog group in the US.

Mcdonald's is allowed to promote the fatty shit they sell. People are allowed to consume it or not consume it at their discretion. I agree 110% that people shouldn't be suing fast tood restaurants for making them fat the same way I agree that tobacco companies shouldnt be sued for giving people lung cancer and firearms makers shouldnt be sued when one of their guns kills a blonde white girl. However these cases have to be heard in due process and legal precedents need to be set. Why would you even want a government that can pass laws forbidding your constitutional liberties to seek damages if you've been wronged by another entity? Hey, I know, there's so many malpractice lawsuits out there let's just make suing doctors against the law. It was your choice to go see a doctor in the first place. So what if a huge corporation is negligent and you suffer physical or financial damages as a result? You could have stayed home that day. Is that the kind of place you want to live in?

[nobody]

SUBWAY does a good job advertising healthy food.

[kyoukan]

yeah I'll agree subway likes to portray their food as low fat and healthy when it really is not unless you get like a vegetarian sub on brown bread with no condiments or cheese.

[Zaelath]

yeah I'll agree subway likes to portray their food as low fat and healthy when it really is not unless you get like a vegetarian sub on brown bread with no condiments or cheese.

Heh, the cheese is my favourite part of the small print on the "Less than 6 grams of fat!" advertising. Everytime I had Subway in the US it was, "What cheese would you like?"

[kyoukan]

I ate at a buffet restaurant in florida once that had 12 different kinds of melted cheese.

[Sionistic]

While the average subway sub is much more than that little chart says, they are still better than cheeseburgers and such. Now if subway didnt overcharge like hell, that would be a good step.

[Kelgar]

but not only does this bill have some amount of judicial support

Then let the judges say that in court. That is their job, afterall.

Because, you dumbasses, just because a legal precedent is set, it does NOT stop these retards from bringing lawsuits in and wasting the taxpayer's money. The courts cannot tell you that you cannot file a lawsuit, all they can do is throw it out after it waste's their time. Then there is the appeal process.....

Ummm yes it largely does...Lawyers tend not to take a case on spec when there is a clear precedent against the case...

In a lawsuit filed in 2002, two Bronx teenagers accused McDonald's of making them fat by serving them highly processed food that affected their health. A judge tossed out the case a year later, but an appeals court reinstated part of the suit earlier this year, according to published reports.

[noel]

WTF is wrong with Subway?

You can go into a Subway and almost always get an extremely healthy sandwich. If you're a fucking idiot that loads it up with crap, sure it's going to be unhealthy, but you can tell them not to put the cheese on it, to use light mayonaisse or *gasp* mustard, instead of fucking oil and vinegar, and you can load it up with vegetables. You can also have your sandwich served on several different kinds of bread that aren't empty calories/refined-flour white bread.

If people are getting unhealthy food at Subway that's their fault. Almost every sandwich there can be made healthy with the exception of like meatball and if they have something that's breaded or served in some godawful creme-based sauce.

Oh damn, stupid people who are too lazy to be informed about a healthy diet will eat unhealthily *whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa*

[Leonaerd]

My only gripe with Subway is that I can make the same thing from the comfort of my kitchen, for a fraction of the cost. I've seen them make subs enough times to know what makes 'em good. If only I could get my hands on some Southwest Sauce.

[noel]

My only gripe with Subway is that I can make the same thing from the comfort of my kitchen, for a fraction of the cost. I've seen them make subs enough times to know what makes 'em good. If only I could get my hands on some Southwest Sauce.

Probably well over 90% of anything you can get in any restaurant (fast food or otherwise) can be made in the comfort of your kitchen for a fraction of the cost. Eating out has always been about convenience, not cost-savings.

[Sueven]

My only gripe with Subway is that I can make the same thing from the comfort of my kitchen, for a fraction of the cost.

And you can't make a burger?

[Drolgin Steingrinder]

I ate at a buffet restaurant in florida once that had 12 different kinds of melted cheese.

mmmm melted cheese [homersimpsonslobber]

[Deward]

I don't think you could replicate a McDonalds Hamburger in your home kitchen. To do so, you have to go to the local rendering plant. Scrape up whatever was on the floor and add a few dozen chemicals.

Here is a fact: Every McDonalds hamburger has at least one thousand different cows in it. yum yum!!

[Boogahz]

I don't think you could replicate a McDonalds Hamburger in your home kitchen. To do so, you have to go to the local rendering plant. Scrape up whatever was on the floor and add a few dozen chemicals.

Here is a fact: Every McDonalds hamburger has at least one thousand different cows in it. yum yum!!

Here's another fact...most school districts get lower grades of beef than McDonalds does!

[Leonaerd]

And you can't make a burger?

I hadn't included burgers in my statement because I don't eat out at any "fast food" restaurant other than Subway. I can't stand greasy food, so it would make sense that I don't eat at a place such as McDonald's.

Yes, of course I can make a burger. I'm a man. Men grill. Roar.

Probably well over 90% of anything you can get in any restaurant (fast food or otherwise) can be made in the comfort of your kitchen for a fraction of the cost. Eating out has always been about convenience, not cost-savings.

The difference is that I am not able to craft most of the food that I go out of my way to order from a restaurant. I don't know the first thing about a dish of Fettuccine Alfredo, for instance. Eating out might be entirely about convenience if I am visiting Subway, but if it is a fancy restaurant I'm going to, for instance, I'll likely try something I've never had.

[miir]

I don't know the first thing about a dish of Fettuccine Alfredo

Boiling water + fettucine = fettucine
Cream + butter + Parmesan + heat = alfredo


That's basically it.

[Wulfran]

I can't believe how far afield this thread has gone...

I guess I come down closer to Kyoukan on this one: I hate frivolous law suits but what I would like to see is more of an onus on the legal professionals than on the public and limiting their rights. Something along the lines of a judge having the ability to designate a suit as frivolous as such, and the presiding bar association would then investigate and if they agreed with the judge, they would impose disciplinary actions on the lawyer who was stupid enough to bring the suit. I'll admit its a pipedream though: asking the legal or medical communities to rule on their own ethics is like asking politicians to...