| REDRESS |
|
|
LAWYERS RUN AMOK - A WORLD IN WHICH JUDGES DECIDE EVERYTHING "The Problem Is, Individual Responsibility Isn't Working" By Doug Bandow, Copley News Services, Reported in Las Vegas Review-Journal, 10-30-02, P. 9B As Washington, D.C., prepared to receive thousands of anti-globalization protesters, George Washington University law professor John Banzhaf proposed deploying the ultimate weapon: trial lawyers. Hit the demonstrators with a class-action lawsuit! Lucky, the city was able to cope without resorting to such extreme measures. But the proposal was in keeping for Banzhaf, who believes that just about every decision in life should be decided by judges. He cites among his accomplishments sex discrimination lawsuits against the Washington Cosmos Club and South Carolina's military-oriented university, The Citadel; hair stylists who charged more to cut women's hair and dry cleaners that charged more for women's clothes; and bars that discriminated against men with ladies' nights. Long known as the "Father of Potty Parity," earlier this year he joined in a federal complaint against the University of Michigan for having only a third more restroom facilities for women, which constituted illegal sexual harassment. He really hates the tobacco companies and adults who choose not to smoke. In September he put out a press release lauding a judge for banning parental smoking around a child in a custody case. Banzhaf is now targeting food. He has suggested fat taxes, with some of the money collected going "to fund healthy-eating messages to compete against the $30 billion that the food industry spends." Moreover, government should put more health foods in vending machines, install bike racks and showers at public buildings to encourage more exercise, and so on." Should his fellow citizens be too stupid to go along with his plans, however, he will sue. While helping to pioneer the basic theory in this area, Banzhaf was a little slow in finding actual plaintiffs. An overweight 56-year-old, Caesar Barber, was the first to file suit, charging McDonald's, Burger King, KFC and Wendy's for making him fat. But now Banzhaf is trying to catch up. He has just filed a class-action suit against McDonald's for selling to children, "since one can hardly blame youngsters who are lured into McDonald's by playgrounds, gotta-have toys in Happy Meals, birthday parties, etc." He's threatening to sue schools and school boards "for entering into contracts whereby they get paid for every fatburger and sugary soft drink they sell to kids." Elsewhere Banzhaf has admitted that consumers have some responsibility, but "to exercise their personal responsibility, consumers need the same clear and conspicuous disclosure of calories and fat content in fast foods that we enjoy and use regarding food purchased in stores." As if most people don't know that a Big Mac has more calories than a tub of tofu. The basic point is that people know better, but still choose "bad" stuff. Since most people eat most meals at home, grocery stores, diet doctors and packaging companies may be next on the legal hit list. Even people who give out candy on Halloween. Sue 'em all! Observes Banzhaf with delight: "Never underestimate the tenacity of a lawyer working on a contingency fee." Nor are private suits the only option. Threatens Banzhaf, we could see "state lawsuits against fast food companies for the public costs of obesity, just as states were so successful in suing tobacco companies for the public costs of smoking." The argument is superficially attractive. But the fact that government tries to socialize the cost of everything - taking over ever more of the expense of health care, for instance - doesn't entitle it to control our lives. Should people be able to hang glide? Should people be forced to exercise? Why let individuals decide anything about their lives? Banzhaf's objective is simple social engineering. After all, he told one critic, "the problem is, the remedies that you proposed - exercise, moderation in eating - and what some others propose - parental responsibilities, individual responsibility, education - aren't working." So government, or the courts, must act. At least Banzhaf sees some limits: "I can't think of any way we can legislate that people go out and jog a mile a day." Lucky us. "But we can change how fast foods are advertised, promoted, sold. We can adopt taxes on fast foods so the losses are borne much more by people who eat them," he notes. Who cares if people like fast food? If government won't do his bidding, then it will be "as in the tobacco area, where the legislatures did not act, we were forced to litigate." Freedom requires a willingness to bear the cost of one's actions. Increasingly, however, Americans want someone else to bear the consequences, to pay if they mess up their own lives. For social engineers like Banzhaf, this is a convenience excuse to discard freedom itself. Crazed litigators, no less than collectivist legislators, threaten the survival of America as a free society. WORKING TOGETHER TO ATTAIN FAIRNESS | ||
|
|
||
|
| ||
|
| ||
