Manhattan state Supreme Court Justice Milton Tingling has struck a victory for sanity (as well as individual choice) in striking down New York Mayor Bloomberg’s widely ridiculed ban on large sugary drinks. As we previously discussed, the law was a poorly drafted and poorly conceived ban that allowed a host of higher caloric drinks to be sold in bars and other establishments. Tingling found the law to be “arbitrary and capricious.” Bloomberg has appeared to have developed an insatiable appetite to dictating what others can eat, including a proposed crackdown on popcorn and milk. After the soda ban, a long list of items have been put forward to Bloomberg to ban before Judge Tingling put a halt to the feeding frenzy.
Tingling focused on the obvious “loopholes” in the law that barred sales for some establishments while allowed the drinks to be sold by other establishments “even within a particular City block, much less the City as a whole.” The judge also found that the law created a an administrative Leviathan and violate the separation of powers doctrine” by sweeping into areas of legislative authority with the city council.
As we discussed earlier, I have no problem with banning sodas in school as many district have done. However, Bloomberg has decided that educational programs and warnings are not enough because adults are not meeting the expectations of the government. Bloomberg is quoted as saying “I look across this country, and people are obese, and everybody wrings their hands, and nobody’s willing to do something about it.” The solution therefore is to take away choice and to dictate Dr. Bloomberg’s diet for all citizens.
Bloomberg insisted that when you are told that you cannot have that soda, “Nobody is taking away any of your rights. This way, we’re just telling you ‘That’s a lot of soda.’” Really? Sounds a lot like “you can’t have that soda.”
Honestly, if prohibition did not work for alcohol, it is likely to be even less successful for sodas. Then there are those other items like french fries, onion rings, and other unhealthy foods eaten in excessive quantities. How about requiring proof that a large stuffed pizza has no fewer than four persons willing to sign for it? I think people have a right to an unhealthy lifestyle. This is not like second-hand smoke that harms others. You can be around someone with a large soda and remain perfectly healthy. Then there are those high calorie alcoholic drinks being served with the loaded stuffed potatoes in bars around New York.
After the ruling, Bloomberg insisted “I’ve got to defend my children, and yours, and do what’s right to save lives.” Sixty percent of New Yorkers opposed the limit and clearly believe that they do not need Bloomberg making choices for them or their families. However, most parents feel that they can defend their own children and make choices for them. Moreover, Bloomberg did not ban sodas for school children, he dictated what adults can drink. The ban was facially absurd from the start since it would only force customers to buy multiple drinks if they wanted the same amount. Then there was the confusion of the lines of exemptions. The ban did not apply to pure fruit juice or fruit smoothies or drinks that are more than half milk. Starbucks yesterday vowed to continue to serve sweetened coffee drinks before the ruling, causing an outburst by Bloomberg.
Undeterred, Bloomberg has decided to spend more money in fighting the ruling and affirm his right to control the diets of people in the city. He rejects the widespread objections over individual choice and insists that New Yorkers must be required to comply with the dietary demands of his government. However, that Tingling feeling yesterday was the voice of reason.
Source: WSJ
Elaine:
Some places should have bans, such as government offices, schools, hospitals any place where a person cannot voluntarily choose to be.
Any place where you can voluntarily spend your money should be left up to personal choice.
You want to force people to accept your version of morality. To you it is immoral to smoke, to me it is immoral to have an abortion. You would scream bloody murder if I wanted to pass a law restricting abortion and rightly so.
If you dont like smoke, dont go into a private establishment which allows smoking. Seems pretty simple to me.
I know freedom is a hard concept for many on the left to wrap their minds around but it would be so much better and make for a better world if they would stop trying to use government to insinuate their world and personal views on society and leave government to its rightful work; the protection of our lives, our liberty and our property from force by others.
No, smoking in a restaurant does not take away any of those if you have a choice to enter or not.
Gene,
Non-smokers can’t get away from secondhand smoke in a restaurant or bar or an airplane, etc.
Oh, wait! It gets better . . . if by better I mean Bloomberg succeeds in looking more like an elitist jackass than he usually does.
“If you go back to the ‘20s, you see pictures of the old robber barons with their big stomachs out to here,” said Bloomberg.
“That was a sign of success. Today those people are doing pilates and running in marathons and triathlons and If you look at where obesity is in the country, it tends to be in people at the lower end of the economic ladder,” Bloomberg said. who don’t have the ability to take care of themselves as well. “If anybody will get helped by this, it’s them, because they’ve got to focus on working harder and moving themselves up the ladder, and being overweight doesn’t help you do that.”
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/law_would_benefit_pour_poor_most_WayM0RxFqU0j1lmVUEpkAN?utm_medium=rss&utm_content=Local
Yeah, those stupid poor people need you to tell them what to do on their way to be wage slaves for you and your buddies, Mr. Money Pants.
What a douche.
In case somebody comes back:
Locke, who’s Locke? Was he a FF. Did he write the Constitution?
Oh, it is old English law (or philosphy) whicw we have inherited.
In our Fledglinrg republics we were properly guided by this.
Does not Congress makes such laws every year?
Hope you have noticed this happening.
And each sitting of Congress can make such laws, giving the courts mcch work, and causing much pain to the people.
One hand (branch) washes the other (and neither is clean nor cleansed).
Elaine,
No, but you drink plenty of them. Alcohol is a known and listed carcinogen in medical literature.
Smoking in bars and public places was banned more than ten years ago here. Essentially much of the law focused on employee health from the second hand smoke. One of my employees told me he heard about a “cigar room” that had opened up in the upper floor of a business somewhere in the downtown area. I haven’t verified this but this is what he said.
Essentially it is just a smoking area with cigars and drinks, (don’t know if it serves booze)anyway the waiters and waitresses there earn their money from tips only, so that they are independent contractors and not employees. The place requires the patrons to be “members” of the organization who collectively rent the room when they are there. Apparently you can smoke anything there: cigarettes, cigars, marijuana (which is legal now). I had to laugh but skirting the loopholes is what some people do best it seems.
Gene,
they have even outlawed smoking in the pubs in Ireland! It is also one of best things Illinois has done in recent years when it banned smoking in restaurants and bars and public buildings.
I appreciate the no-smoking ban. I’ve had one in my home and car long before it was adopted generally.
The decision re: the big drinks is a good one, but it doesn’t affect me directly. I haven’t bought a soft drink in decades. If I’m buying lunch or dinner, no one drinks soft drinks. Not a popular rule with the young ones but they now accept it and drink more water. Once I started paying attention to nutrition and the lack of it in most foods in the grocery store, I started buying raw and organic. The removal of pesticides, preservatives and processing from the foods in my diet have made a big difference in my health.
Natural sweeteners like real maple syrup (not the flavored corn syrup), rice syrup, molasses, and others do a great job for sweetness. Coconut oil and virgin olive oil are much better than canola oil which is probably GM0’d. My food bill is probably the biggest part of my discretionary budget, but what else is more important?
Now if I could just quit the coffee and start walking a mile every day …….
My youngest just left her old job and started with a new department. They have a strict no smoking policy. That makes sense to me for the simple reason health care costs are lower for non smokers. Also less likely to develop COPD, which can start to make a difference in stamina as early as the mid-30s.
All new officers have to take the usual drug screen, but they also screen for tobacco; e.g., nicotine. This department has an aggressive fitness and weight control program, with prizes and bonuses for achieving fitness goals. I can see the economic benefits in fewer sick days alone, not to mention less tangible benefits.
Ralph, I totally agree with you! Whatever will people do when The Great One is no longer there to direct them?
I just found out recently that HFCS contains mercury. Something else they’re trying to kill us with!
I read one of my father’s Libertarian magazines once (in the 90s), and got very upset, as it said the party’s stance was that cigarette smokers should have the liberty to smoke when and where they wanted. This very much upset me. I considered myself Libertarian at the time (which I was), but I believe that I have the right to breathe air that does NOT contain cigarette smoke! I am allergic to it and it gives me migraines. And that’s not getting into how just flatout stinky and disgusting it is!
I felt like my right to breathe air free of smoke trumped the smoker’s right to smoke. Because he does NOT have the right to pollute my air, in my book! He can smoke where he is not bothering anyone else. And I can’t STAND it when smoker’s stick their smelly, noxious cigarette OUT THE CAR WINDOW so everyone else has to smell it. Put your stank thing in your own car and roll your windows up. If you want to smoke it so badly you should LOVE the smell so keep it to yourself! I don’t want to breathe the nasty stuff at a redlight.
As for bars! My thought on that is that there could be certain bars where smoking is allowed, and some bars where it is not allowed. It could eventually be worked out ratiowise, once things get going and it can be determined which are more popular. But I think both sides should have at least one place they can go for whichever is their choice. The employees in the smoke bars can be smokers. That’s just my ingenious plan on that!
Gene,
When one drinks alcohol in a bar, does the one emit fumes that are carcinogenic?
Let me refine that . . .
In a place where toxins are served for pleasure, it seems a bit hypocritical to ban another toxin used for pleasure.
The only place I have issue with a smoking ban (and I am a former smoker) is in bars. In a place where toxins are served, it seems a bit hypocritical to ban another toxin. For bars, it should be left to the owners to set policy and patrons (and employees) to decide whether or not to stay. Unless you’re spending waaaaaay too much time in bars, the exposure to carcinogens is probably considerably less dangerous than living near a power station which is full of dioxins and PCBs or even driving your car which in addition to producing carcinogens out of the engine contains all kinds of plastics that off-gas carcinogenic substances.
Bron,
So…you think it’s okay if smokers pollute the air on planes and in restaurants, hospitals, and public buildings? I should have had to quit my teaching job in order to avoid inhaling carcinogenic secondhand smoke? What about my rights to breathe clean air?
Bron, I think of it as air pollution, and I don’t care to be around it. I smoked off and on for 15 years when I was younger before I finally decided to stop. We know a lot more about the harmful effects of second hand smoke now.
Elaine:
why dont you believe in freedom? Dont work at a place where smoking is allowed, dont eat at one, dont fly on a plane which allows smoking.
Why do people have to give up their rights because someone complains? If you dont like it, dont go there.
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/2013/01/01/how-corn-syrup-might-be-making-us-hungry-and-fat/
Sugar tastes better, that’s all an Italian cares about.
What You Need to Know About Sugar
By Robert H. Lustig, M.D.Dec. 27, 2012
http://ideas.time.com/2012/12/27/what-you-need-to-know-about-sugar/
Myth 4. High fructose corn syrup is worse than table sugar.
Studies comparing HFCS and table sugar (sucrose) head-to-head show that they are similar in terms of their metabolic effects; both are equally bad for you. HFCS is 55% fructose, sucrose is 50% fructose. However, a recent study suggests that some commercial sugar-sweetened beverages might have as much as 65% fructose, which could potentially make them worse. This has yet to be shown in large studies.
Mike S.,
Ditto … though not to the smoking for 40 years.
However, my emphasis is not, for the sake of this blog article, with the individual vices such as tobacco, alcohol, etc but with how the government exercises its power over the population of the governed. And so I return to the original philosophical argument: “You can’t legislate a duty of virtue as if it were a duty of right. That’s the exercise of power beyond right which no one has a right to.”
Back to Scrabble 🙂