Louisiana regulators have decided to appeal a ruling in favor of casket-making monks that found a state law unconstitutional in giving funeral directors exclusive rights to sell caskets. The law has been criticized as a case of a powerful lobby getting politicians to snuff out their competition. Louisiana legislators caved into demands for the protective measures, but Judge Stanwood R. Duval, of the U.S. District Court in New Orleans found that the legislation did not even satisfy the low rational basis test. The regulators are now appealing to the Fifth Circuit.
The monks of the St. Joseph Abbey of Covington have made simple wood caskets to the chagrin of the funeral home lobby. For full disclosure, we buried my father in a casket made by monks on the East Coast. As a lifetime and accomplished wood worker, the simple but elegant casket was much preferred over the garish and gaudy things sold by funeral directors. It was a beautifully hand-made wooden coffin.
Duval saw the law as little more than a monopoly secured from politicians yielding to a well-heeled lobby. He found that “there is no rational basis for the State of Louisiana to require persons who seek to enter into the retailing of caskets to undergo the training and expense necessary to comply with these rules.”
In St. Joseph Abbey v. Castille, Duval noted
With the advent of the internet, consumers can now buy caskets from retailers across the country including Wal-Mart and online retailers such as Amazon.com. (T.T. at 67). This fact is salient in that Louisianians can indeed purchase from these out of state retailers who are not subject to the Act. Indeed, with the exception of an April 13, 2009 Cease and Desist Order issued to National Memorial Planning, the EFD Board has not issued any other Cease and Desist orders to out-of state casket retailers in the last ten years. (Doc. 73, Pretrial Order, Uncontested Material Fact M, at 12). Thus, it is clear that Louisiana consumers are able to buy caskets from anyone out of state—from individuals that are not licensed funeral directors and companies that are not state-licensed funeral establishments. Equally clear is that they do not enjoy this right with respect to in-state retailers. In addition, the cost of these out of state caskets can be substantially less than most caskets offered by licensed funeral directors.
Now, the Louisiana Board of Embalmers and Funeral Directors, indicated that his clients will appeal. Of course, any physical requirements for caskets are spelled out by regulation and can be further articulated in code. However, the regulators insist that you need professionals in dealing with people who are grieving. Yet in his stinging decision, Judge Duval noted that “the only persons being protected are the funeral directors of Louisiana and their coffers.”
Source: NOLA
Jonathan Turley
Gene H.,
Before you respond…the paper is written by the CATO Institute…….Is is the demagoguery for the highest order of socialism in the world…they want free markets…peace…and individual liberty….
What I take from that is…they want to make a product…they don’t care who or what is damaged while doing so….and when someone breaks into or steals something from them, they want the government to step in an take it back….or a better example would be the merchant marines running arms during WWI and having full naval escort to protect the goods…a lot of good that did…that’s the part I do not understand…Wilson tried it and it did not work…..my take is that they don’t want government intervention unless it benefits them……
Here is a brief snippet….
On August 4th, 1914, Wilson officially announced that America would be neutral in World War One. That neutrality extended to a policy of ‘fairness’ – whereby American bankers could lend money to both sides in the war. Overseas trade was more complicated. Trade with both sides was permitted and merchant ships crossed the Atlantic to trade. However, a British naval blockade of the German coastline made it all but impossible for America to trade with Germany – through no fault of her own. The British policy of blockading Germany was the primary reason for Germany ultimately introducing unrestricted submarine warfare. Germany would have claimed that Britain had forced her into taking this action.
It was Germany’s use of U-boats that pushed America into a corner and ultimately to declare war. On February 4th, 1915, Germany announced that merchant shipping in a specified zone around Britain would be legitimate targets. They added that this would include neutral ships because many Allied ships had taken to flying the flag of a neutral nation to assist its safety. Wilson warned the Germans that he would hold them to account if any American ships were sunk. This threat was tested when on May 7th, 1915, the ‘Lusitania’ was sunk. 128 Americans on board the liner were killed. However, the ‘Lusitania’ was not an American ship and Wilson accepted the Germans change of policy – that U-boats would adopt ‘cruiser’ tactics and surface and attack a ship by guns fitted on to their decks. The German chancellor, Bethmann-Hollweg, managed to avoid a major diplomatic issue this time but the military in Germany was adamant that the ‘cruiser’ tactic was not going to be used as it was too dangerous.
America entered World War One on April 6th, 1917. Up to that date, America had tried to keep out of World War One – though she had traded with nations involved in the war – but unrestricted submarine warfare, introduced by the Germans on January 9th, 1917, was the primary issue that caused Woodrow Wilson to ask Congress to declare war on Germany on April 2nd. Four days later, America joined World War One on the side of the Allies.
http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/america_and_world_war_one.htm
Why Warren Buffett Is Wrong
In a New York Times op-ed, Warren Buffett asserts that the super-rich do not pay enough taxes. He suggests that any new budget deal should raise
rates on the super-rich, especially on their “unearned” income from interest, dividends and capital gains. Cato scholar Jeffrey A. Miron responds, “Buffett is wrong. Bad government policies play a major role in generating inappropriately high incomes, but singling out the super-rich is misguided.”
“Why Warren Buffett Is Wrong,” by Jeffrey A. Miron
“Warren Buffett’s Fiscal Innumeracy,” by Daniel J. Mitchell
http://www.cato.org/
What is wrong with these folks…
Raff/AY,
Ridiculously over priced goods plied to people in their moment of grief no less.
Sorry, kderosa . . . still not taking you seriously.
Pete,
In most states where the water table is near ground level in most instances unless not required by the cemetery you must place them in a vault of some kind…to keep them from floating to the top….
When my grandfather died… they had to pump the grave out three or four time because it kept filling with water and that was far north Houston….wood does float eventually….
raff,
The thought is that anyone can file a claim…and if they take them in priority….the funeral expenses will never be paid…Think of it in terms of a bankruptcy filing…They have super priority….just like wages….even over taxes….essentially what the funeral homes are offering is a service….in of course, over priced goods…..
GeneH,
You need to do a little book learning on why corporations are accorded certain Constitutional rights, such as freedom of speech.
Here’s a good start.
Come back when you can hold an intelligent discussion or at least the best you can do to emulate an intelligent discussion with your diminished capacity.
hate to point this out but this is Louisiana we’re talking about. sometimes after a flood caskets come floating out of the ground. after the flood waters recede do you really want to come home and find grandma back in the house.
That should read “priority”!
Thanks for the personal story Lotta. It is interesting that the funeral directors are first in priortiy!
Anonymously Yours: ” “the regulators insist that you need professionals in dealing with people who are grieving”……….
What is interesting is that the funeral expenses are paid even before TAXES….I wonder who has the strongest lobby….Here is an excerpt from the UPC: …”
———
Right. When my father died 2 years ago in order to finalize his estate I had to go to the probate division of the muni govt and get a ‘creditors refusal letter’ before I could take charge of the estate. It required verification that the funeral expenses had been paid in full. Due to the insufficiency of the funeral homes receipts I ended up having to go to City Hall twice and request that the funeral home do various supplemental, itemized receipts. The letter itself cost $100.00, that’s not counting the loss of time and parking tickets- parking ‘surcharges’ are part of doing business if you are unlucky enough to ever have to visit City Hall.
The fact that my father had other debt’s was not an issue but you had to prove that the funeral was paid for. The city, by virtue of being required to take the estate hostage, became the government arm of the funeral directors payment enforcement branch and the next of kin got to pay for the privilege. So wrong on so many levels.
kderosa,
I’m glad you’ve recognized you’ve got a problem, Mr. Corporations Are People. That’s the first step to getting help.
**************
OS,
Yep. Floating caskets present their own interesting health problems (both physical and psychological). A gal I knew in N.O. was dealing with the destruction of Katrina until she saw some floaters. She said that was the instant she knew she had to move away. She chose Colorado.
Gene,
Yeah, I know. Sometimes there is more than meets the eye. I lived in Louisiana for a time when I was young and have visited many cemeteries, especially in New Orleans. You know what I am referring to.
http://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&hl=en&source=hp&biw=1067&bih=456&q=new+orleans+cemetery&gbv=2&oq=new+orleans+cemetery&aq=0&aqi=g3&aql=&gs_sm=c&gs_upl=1141l5524l0l7774l22l22l1l10l11l0l201l1542l2.8.1l11l0
“No, not at all. Only a corporatist would argue that a corporation is the equivalent of a person and entitled to the same free speech as a natural person. You’ve done that. You defend the political activities of Koch Industries and the likes of ALEC. You’ve been toting the corporatist agenda all along, kderosa. There is no need to make up something that is true.”
More delusions, GeneH.
OS,
Don’t forget that in some places vaults are a water table issue as well.
“’You’re the one trying to make graft by any other name acceptable, but that’s just par for your corporatist apologist course.’
This you are just making up.”
No, not at all. Only a corporatist would argue that a corporation is the equivalent of a person and entitled to the same free speech as a natural person. You’ve done that. You defend the political activities of Koch Industries and the likes of ALEC. You’ve been toting the corporatist agenda all along, kderosa. There is no need to make up something that is true.
Hey everybody, read the FTC rule. The undertakers are going to lose this case, IMHO.
A cemetery often requires that a coffin and vault be used, but that is their prerogative if you want to be buried in that cemetery.
As a side note and not really relevant to the legal issue addressed by our host, our local cemetery where we buried my grandson requires a vault, even if the remains are cremated. The reason given me is they learned early on that some families decided to move away from the area and want to take Grandma with them. A vault makes that possible.
@Gyges,
“O.k. NOW I proof that Roco doesn’t blame the businesses.”
No, that is not what he is saying.
Gene and OS,
O.k. NOW I proof that Roco doesn’t blame the businesses.
Gyges:
you have that all wrong, one is a mutually beneficial voluntary association; the businessman and the arsonist. While the other is coercive. The business man is not paying the arsonist for protection and the arsonist is not asking the businessman for money to not burn down his warehouse.
Government tells the businessman to play ball or else, the arsonist is a provider of voluntary service.
The monks are now forced to find someone to pay off if they do not win in court or they will have to discontinue building coffins. Seems to me the embalmers are using the government as an arsonist and the monks will have to pay protection or cease and desist.
Now who is furthering the monopoly of the Embalmers? Oh yes it is government. And that is the way it works up and down the economic spectrum. Play ball with government or else you will be forced into bankruptcy or worse.
The Mafia only wished they could offer “protection” like that.
@OS, “That statement is a truth, couched in sarcasm. How is that a strawman, or has snark suddenly become a logical fallacy?”
It is true, but it is an argument that no one is making. That’s why I labeled it a strawman.
Gyges, I am a big fan of dry humor. You are an expert at it and I enjoy your wit. As opposed to the witless, let’s say…..