Its Says Liberal, Liberal, Liberal on The Label, Label, Label

Obamacare’s menu labeling regulation promises to be a disaster for the food and restaurant industries, as its implementation is both costly and extremely onerous. While its deleterious effects on the pizza, restaurant, and grocery industries have been most well known, it also has the potential to shutter an industry near and dear to Americans’ hearts: craft beer.

Since beer has a few too many calories for bureaucrats, the health law dictates that all brewers include a detailed calorie count on every type of beer produced. Failure to do so, according to Americans for Tax Reform, “means craft brewers will not be able to sell their beer in any restaurant chain with over 20 locations.”

The Cato Institute estimates the Obamacare calorie labeling requirements will cost a business as much as $77,000 to implement. For larger beer companies, this is a drop in the bucket, but for small, local craft brewers it represents a substantial cost that they must pay. As a result, it creates a significant disadvantage compared to larger beer companies who can better absorb the cost of this new regulation.

 According to Bart Watson, chief economist of the Brewers Association, “Most of the new [craft beer] entrants continue to be small and local, operating in neighborhoods or towns. What it means to be a brewery is shifting, back toward an era when breweries were largely local, and operated as a neighborhood bar or restaurant.” The increasingly small size of craft breweries means they are faced with a tough decision in light of the impending regulations: cut costs and possibly lay off workers to pay for the calorie labels, or be shut out of one of the most profitable markets for their product. Either way, it is a lose – lose situation for the craft beer brewers and drinkers, an industry that grew 27.8 percent from 2013 to 2014 when it was left alone.

Which is why the government has to f*ck it up.

Food and Drug Administration announced its final rule for menu labeling, a regulation that’s already proving to be a nightmare for the major chain restaurants and retail food establishments that must comply by Dec. 1, 2015, or face a stiff penalty.

And the scorn of the self-righteous Left.

“It got much worse in the final rule,” Lynn Liddle, chairperson of the American Pizza Community and executive VP of communications and investor relations for Domino’s Pizza, told Townhall. “I was surprised, disappointed, and befuddled because there’s all this new stuff in there where I go, ‘I don’t know how we’re gonna do this.’ … We’re gonna need a lot more time to untangle this mess, which I don’t think is viable or workable.”

While the regulation is bad for all industries, pizza has been hit particularly hard. For one, it’s a food industry unlike any other—90 percent of customers get their food delivered, making the idea of in-store displays of calorie information unnecessary and costly, not to mention extremely difficult since it’s such a customizable food.

Liddle said a concession was made on labeling by the slice rather than the whole pizza, but the rule is still disastrous for small businesses across America.

“[W]hat [FDA] did in these final rules is they expanded their definition of a menu and said ‘we’re gonna look at it and say anything a consumer will think of at that moment as a menu,’ so it’s very squishy right now because nobody really understands this thing because they’re saying if you have a picture or a name of a product, along with a price, were gonna call that a menu, so if you take it to the ridiculous that could include television advertising, because in the restaurant industry you always have a picture of product and a price, that’s how the restaurant industry advertises,” she explained.

“We went to [the FDA] with a proposed solution; we didn’t say ‘we want to get out of it,’ we said, ‘we have a better way’ … and that better way was primarily doing this electronically, which by the way we already do voluntarily, so it was a really workable solution … and basically they’ve ignored it,” she said.

Not on the Agenda. They are the Government so not only are they right, but they can’t have the peons making their own rules! Where is the power in that. Where is the job satisfaction.

The most ridiculous part about the entire regulation is that menu labeling has little to no effect on consumers’ purchasing choices, and studies demonstrating that menu labeling is linked to a reduction in obesity rates, the supposed benefit the FDA used to justify the regulation in the first place, doesn’t exist.  (Townhall)

BUT IT MAKES LIBERALS HAPPY! That’s all that matters. They are “doing something” “meaningful”. Their pride goeth before your fall. The fact that it’s worthless and will destroy businesses and jobs is totally irrelevant to their “moral” code of narcissism. They want to prove to themselves how superior they are and just how dumb you are for not being them.

So you must COMPLY.

IT’S FOR YOUR OWN GOOD!

Plus, the power trip is addicting.  🙂

Happy Thanksgiving. The Left hopes you enjoy this Turkey way past Thanksgiving. The Leftovers will be a bitch.

Political Cartoons by Ken Catalino

 

Moonbeam To The Rescue

The Progressive Liberal 1st Amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of Any religion,and mocking or hindering the free exercise thereof is required and sanctioned; or abridging the freedom of LIBERAL PROGRESSIVE speech, or of the LIBERAL PROGRESSIVE press; but abridging those who are not us  is always in the interest of the good of society; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble to worship the LIBERAL PROGRESSIVES and protest it’s enemies, any assembly otherwise in opposition must therefore be “terrorism” “bigotry” or “racism”, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances against ANYONE who defies us, has exercised “White Privilege”, and to seek “social justice” at all costs.

Gov. Jerry Brown (D.-Calif.) signed a law on Friday mandating that all licensed pregnancy centers in the state “disseminate to clients” a message promoting public programs with “free or low-cost access” to abortion and contraceptive services.

The new law makes no exception for pro-life and faith-based crisis pregnancy centers.

YOU WILL FOLLOW THE AGENDA OR ELSE!

Critics of the law say that it violates the right to freedom of speech, which is guaranteed by the First Amendment.

Like Progressives care…The AGENDA IS THE AGENDA!!

AB 775, known in the state legislature as The Reproductive FACT Act, requires all pregnancy centers that are licensed as clinics to post the following notice: 

Love the Orwellian Name. Very catchy…

“California has public programs that provide immediate free or low-cost access to comprehensive family planning services (including all FDA-approved methods of contraception), prenatal care, and abortion for eligible women. To determine whether you qualify, contact the county social services office at [insert the telephone number].”

Planned Parenthood will be glad to sell the unused parts for a profit. 🙂

According to the legislation, pregnancy centers that fail to disseminate this message “are liable for a civil penalty of five hundred dollars ($500) for a first offense and one thousand dollars ($1,000) for each subsequent offense.” 

But if they show Pro-Life or the Baby Parts Videos….Well, they just hate women and are evil. 🙂

Assembly member David Chiu (D-San Francisco), the bill’s primary author, argued in the legislature that “a growing and alarming movement is working to mislead women in order to achieve their political ideology.

THAT WOULD BE YOU DICKHEAD! 🙂

We have a responsibility as lawmakers to make sure that the information given to women who are making their own healthcare decisions is accurate and timely.”

NARAL President Ilyse Hogue celebrated the bill’s passage in a statement on Friday.

“Anti-choice crisis pregnancy centers are ground-zero in the fight for reproductive freedom,” she said,

Yeah, the choice to decide who lives and who dies by government fiat is such a need.

I thought this was about full disclosure of information (like the Planned Parenthood videos or sonograms)…no wait…it was only about mandating full Progressive information because that’s the THE AGENDA.

“and Gov. Brown and the California legislature can be proud of leading the first successful statewide effort to ensure that no woman is tricked into walking through doors of a CPC [crisis pregnancy center] to be manipulated and shamed again.”

Yeah, she can be tricked, shamed, and goated into having an abortion and the body parts sold for a profit instead!! Yeah Team!

However, the legislation was dubbed “the bully bill” by its pro-life opponents who argued that the bill forces pro-life pregnancy centers to violate their conscience rights by participating in an abortion referral.

Yeah, but Progressives are bullies. Bully for THE AGENDA. After all, their agenda is the sole thing on earth that matters. They are so vastly superior to your morons that you can’t see that…

“Does the government have a right to tell a newspaper what to write, a preacher what to preach, a private school what to teach? Of course not,” said Assemblywoman Shannon Grove (R-Bakersfield) in a statement following the bill’s passage in the State Assembly.

But a Progressive Liberal feels the responsibility to tell you what to think so you won’t have those primitive, savage, inferior thoughts of rebellion against them.

“So why is it okay for the government to force pro-life pregnancy centers against their will to advertise and promote government abortion services?” she asked.

According to the Sanctimonious Agenda it is.

“Democrat legislators claimed this is necessary because the information provided by prolife pregnancy care centers is not, ‘fully-informed,’” said Grove. “So, according to this logic, if the government finds that your message isn’t ‘fully-informed,’ it now has a right to compel you to do and say things you do not believe in. The founding fathers would be rolling over in their graves.” 

So that means the “pro-choice” centers will do mandatory sonograms and inform potential clients that the fetal material may be harvested and sold for profit?

OF COURSE NOT!

You don’t need to know that so that doesn’t count. 🙂

 “We should trust women to make their own choices, and this bill prevents that,” Assemblywoman Kristin Olsen (R-Modesto) also said in opposition to the bill. “Women choose to seek assistance from these pregnancy centers. Nobody forces them to go, nobody forces them to stay. They choose to go and they have the option to leave at any time.”

“AB 775 sets a bad precedent by allowing the state — a government entity — to dictate what information a non-profit organization — a non-profit that receives not a dime of state or government funding — has to provide to their clients,” she concluded.

ALL HAIL THE AGENDA!

All HAIL PRINCE MOONBEAM AND KING OBAMA!

Political Cartoons by Ken Catalino
Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Turkey Dump

But first a little Dark Meat 🙂

Shortly after the decision went public that Officer Darren Wilson would not be facing criminal charges for the murder of teenager Michael Brown, President Obama made some brief remarks at the White House.

“First and foremost, we are a nation built on the rule of law,” he said. “And so we need to accept that this decision was the grand jury’s to make. There are Americans who agree with it, and there are Americans who are deeply disappointed, even angry.”

Why that never mattered for ObamaCare, which has never been favored by a majority of the American People at all,ever. Nor your Amnesty!! Rule of Law my ass!

I guess race riots created by decades of Liberal education and agenda brainwashing makes them look bad. 🙂

But onto the Turkey Dump (#2 please)…

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

While Americans are focused on what delicious foods they’re going to eat for Thanksgiving, the White House is focused on releasing its massive regulatory agenda — marking the fifth time the Obama administration has released its regulatory road map on the eve of a major holiday.

The federal Unified Agenda is the Obama administration’s regulatory road map, and it lays out thousands of regulations being finalized in the coming months. Under President Barack Obama, there has been a tradition of releasing the agenda late on Friday — and right before a major holiday.

“It’s become an unfortunate tradition of this administration and others to drop these regulatory agendas late on a Friday and right before a holiday,” Matt Shudtz, executive director of the Center for Progressive Reform, told The Hill newspaper.

The White House’s regulatory agenda for spring 2014 was released on the eve of the Memorial Day weekend, when millions of people set out on weekend getaways or family vacations.

“It’s unfortunate because it’s an update on protections for Americans of all stripes,” Shudtz told the Hill. “It lays out the administration’s plan and it deserves more attention.”

But the White House may have a good reason to do so because its Unified Agenda for fall 2014 includes some 3,415 regulations– more than the last regulatory agenda, and one that includes 189 rules that cost more than $100 million.

Rob Rosado, director of government relations at the Food Marketing Institute, said it could cost the grocery industry $1 billion to comply in the first year. This, he reasons, will lead many stores to stop selling fresh cut fruits and vegetables. 

“Anything that is made with fresh items from the grocery store, whether it’s a chicken sandwich or a salad, those are going to become so costly that grocery stores won’t be able to offer them anymore,” Rosado said.

Gas stations and convenience stores like 7-Eleven would be required to list the calories of hot dogs they sell from the grill, as well as slushies and other frozen drinks.

“Convenience stores shouldn’t be sucked into this law that was intended for restaurants, because they cannot comply with it,” said Lyle Beckwith, senior vice president of government relations at the National Association of Convenience Stores.

The FDA will also require entertainment venues to list the number of calories in foods they sell, after the congressional authors of the menu labeling requirements — Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) and Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) — complained they were excluded from the proposed rules.

Gee, i wonder who bank rolled that? 🙂

“It’s very clear that movie theaters offer a lot of food with a consistent menu and those foods look very much like foods you might get at a fast food restaurant — hot dogs, pizza, nachos,” Hamburg said.

And do you know that theatres only make money on concessions?

Ice cream shops that sell by the scoop will also be required to list the number of calories — as will coffee shops that sell muffins, the FDA noted.

Restaurants and bars will also be required to list the calories in alcoholic beverages they sell. This was requirement was lifted from the proposed rule, but added back in after popular demand, Hamburg said.

“It’s really important that alcoholic beverages be labeled so people can see how many calories they’re drinking,” Wootan said.

We are from the Government and we are here to help you understand that junk food is bad for you and that we want it to go away so you have non choice but to do as the government requires, after all, we won’t completely control your health care and decide when you live and when you die. For now we just want to control how you live. But we’ll get back to you with more regulatory dumps.

So put down that Pizza and eat some Tofu instead and don’t you dare wash it down with a beer, that’s bad for you!

Have a Tofurkey Day!

I guess you really are “stupid” 🙂

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

 

Mama Obama & Her Minions

Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) introduced this week the Sugar-Sweetened Beverages Tax (SWEET Act), which aims to institute a tax of one cent per teaspoon – 4.2 grams – of sugar, high fructose corn syrup or caloric sweetener.

The measure (HB 5279), introduced Wednesday says, “A 20-ounce bottle of soda contains about 16 teaspoons of sugars. Yet, the American Heart Association recommends that Americans consume no more than six to nine teaspoons of sugar per day.”

Even though the manufacturers’ of the sweet drinks are targeted to pay the tax, the text of the bill itself notes that the goal is to reduce public consumption through a price increase.

“This Act is intended to discourage excessive consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages by increasing the price of these products and by creating a dedicated revenue source for programs and research designed to reduce the human and economic costs of diabetes, obesity, dental caries, and other diet-related health conditions in priority populations,” the measure says.

“People want to be healthy and they want their kids to be healthy,” DeLauro said. “But we are in the midst of dual epidemics, with obesity and diabetes afflicting our nation and the related, astronomical health care costs.”

Nothing to do with ObamaCare… 🙂

Also Wednesday, DeLauro called on the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to recommend how much sugar people should eat each day, and require food manufacturers to reveal what percentage of that daily value is included in the food they produce.

The FDA has never created a daily value for sugar, which some have said is the result of pressure from the U.S. sugar industry. But DeLauro said a daily value guideline would help people make healthier food choices.

And if they still won’t make them, we’ll make them for you.

Just Like Mama Obama…

At Chapman School in Nebraska, resourceful students hawk pizza and cookie dough to raise money for school supplies, field trips and an eighth-grade excursion to Washington. They peddle chocolate bars to help fund the yearbook.

But the sales won’t be so sweet starting this fall. Campus bake sales—a mainstay of school fundraisers—are going on a diet. A federal law that aims to curb childhood obesity means that, in dozens of states, bake sales must adhere to nutrition requirements that could replace cupcakes and brownies with fruit cups and granola bars.

The Left call this “an extremist” view of their ‘desire’ to make you healthier. the right-wing media’s war on nutrition this week by claiming the child nutrition bill passed by Congress last week could “ban bake sales at schools.” (Media Matters)

Notice everything is a “war” with liberals, but Liberals hate War? But it’s always war against their ideas. Hmmmm…

And they always stress education, unless it’s a mandatory edict for your own good. Fascinating…

The new rules don’t dictate how many bake sales hawking noncompliant goodies a school can hold each year. The rules leave it to states to set the limits, but caution that such sales should be “infrequent.” so say the Leftists.

Just like the ObamaCare Tax was a “penalty”. “infrequently” means not at all.

The “misplaced overregulation” may squelch income used by schools already facing the $3.2 billion cost of adopting the lunch and breakfast requirements, according to Anne Bryant, executive director of the National School Boards Association.

Jeff Ellsworth, principal of the kindergarten through eighth-grade school in Chapman, Neb., isn’t quite sure how to break the news to the kids. “The chocolate bars are a big seller,” said Mr. Ellsworth.

The restrictions that took effect in July stem from the 2010 Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act championed by first lady Michelle Obama and her “Let’s Move!” campaign. The law overhauled nutrition standards affecting more than 30 million children. Among the changes: fatty french fries were out, while baked sweet potato fries were deemed to be fine.

The law also required the U.S. Department of Agriculture to set standards for all food and beverages sold during the school day, which includes vending machines, snack carts and daytime fundraisers. It allowed for “infrequent” fundraisers, and states were allowed to decide how many bake sales they would have that didn’t meet nutrition standards.

Without state-approved exemptions, any treats sold would have to meet calorie, sodium, fat and other requirements. The law permits states to fine schools that don’t comply.

Forget about buttery, salty popcorn, for instance. Kernels sold on site during the day must contain no more than 230 milligrams of sodium per serving until 2016, when it drops even lower. No more than 35% of calories in an item can come from total fat.

A graphic put out by the USDA shows where some snacks stand.

Six chocolate sandwich cookies at 286 calories would be out, but a 4-ounce fruit cup with 100% juice at 68 calories would make the cut. Also out: a large doughnut at 242 calories and a 1.6 oz. chocolate bar with 235 calories.

Homemade fare is more challenging to measure, schools say.

Each state can mandate the number of daytime fundraisers held each year that buck the nutrition requirements. But so far, 32 states have opted to stay strictly in the healthy zone, according to a draft report from the School Nutrition Association, which said the final number could change before the school year begins.

That means students in those states, which range from Alabama to California to Texas, can’t sell fatty or sugary fare that doesn’t meet the federal requirements.

“For some districts, this will be a huge change,” said Julia Bauscher, president of the School Nutrition Association and director of school and community nutrition services at Jefferson County Public School in Louisville, Ky. “There’s a lot of fear among school food directors that we will have to be the food police.”

The Obama administration said it has provided states flexibility with the rules, which cover schools that participate in the federal school meals programs. “We defer to the states to make decisions that made sense to them,” said Sam Kass, executive director of Let’s Move!

Tennessee will allow schools to sell food items that tip the federal scales for 30 days each year.

“Schools have relied on these types of sales as revenue streams for sports, cheering clubs, marching bands,” said David Sevier, deputy executive director of the Tennessee Board of Education. “We get the obesity issue, but we don’t want to jerk this out from under the kids.”

In advance of the law, some schools had already banned students from a near-sacred activity: setting up tables to sell boxes of Girl Scout cookies during the day. There are also those that have replaced food-centric fundraisers with calorie-free events such as wrapping-paper sales, pie-throwing events and bowl-a-thons. Others have prohibited homemade fare in favor of processed items where the nutritional information is calculated and displayed.

At least 12 states have also already adopted limits on bake-sale foods on their own—providing a taste of what’s to come for hundreds of schools nationwide.

“We used to have a carnival with a cake walk, now we do a book walk,” said Adam Drummond, principal of Lincoln Elementary School in Huntington, Ind. “The students get to pick a book.”

Child obesity has more than quadrupled in adolescents in the past 30 years, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Of children 6-11, in 2012, 18% were obese. That is up from 7% in 1980, according to the CDC.

Texas has had nutrition requirements since at least 2010 that cover fundraisers, but had allowed campuses to have three events a year during the school day where students could sell candy or other restricted items. This year, it didn’t adopt such exemptions.

“Some don’t follow the spirit and set up bake sales right after the bell rings,” said Christine Jovanovic, of Austin, who is a member of the parent-teacher association at Canyon Vista Middle School and Westwood High School.

The result of the new requirements may be more processed-food products.

“We use prepackaged food because it has to have nutritional requirements posted,” said Keli Gill, president-elect of the Arkansas PTA, where the state has had nutrition standards for bake sales for a few years. “Items like apples are perishable and don’t last as long, so we don’t want to waste money and have it go bad on us.”

Schools are also grappling with how to monitor food sales so as not to end up in the penalty box.

Davis High School in Kaysville, Utah, was fined more than $15,000 during the 2012-2013 school year for selling certain snacks and carbonated beverages near the lunch area while meals were served, which isn’t allowed under federal requirements. The Utah Department of Education conducted on-site visits and found the infractions. The fine was reduced to $1,297, according to Christopher Williams, a district spokesman.

Said Tennessee’s Mr. Sevier: “It’s not like we’re going to have a brigade of black helicopters coming in to check.”

Not yet at least. That comes later. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

How I Can Help YOU

Recommendations of Working Group III of the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (whew!):

More regulation from “experts”, technocrats and bureaucrats at supranational organizations, such as the one whose initials begin with U and end with N
More taxpayer subsidies for expensive, inefficient renewable energy (but it make environmentalist and greenie-weenie liberals feel better that poor people are paying more for their energy so that’s why people who produce an income have to pay higher taxes to support that too!!)
More nuclear power (with shale gas used as a transitional fuel to replace coal) The last nuclear Plant built in this country? 1978.
The abandonment of fossil fuels (North Dakota, which has seen a boom on account of the oil and gas industry, had the lowest unemployment rate of 2.6 percent, which has been stable since January. But they are politically incorrect jobs so they don’t count, ignore them.
—Boo Hiss! That’s that “laser like focus” on Jobs the Democrats keep talking about…)

Less meat consumption (Are you now or have you ever been a meat eater! Boo Hiss!)
A single, globally-regulated price for carbon dioxide (hey, you want some black market CO2??) The Air Police!!!
More local-**government-enforced** walking, cycling and public transportation (But hey, who needs freedom after all. Government will control you for your own good!!)
More back-door wealth redistribution from the West to the developing world in the name of “sustainability” (otherwise you “hate poor people” you know!

Now doesn’t that just make your heart flutter and you cheeks flush with pride at how superior you are??

Then you’re not a Progressive Liberal, you planet-destroying, evil , greedy bastard! 🙂

Oh and…

But according to the FDA, we don’t pay attention to the calorie counts, and we eat things that are bad for us and regret it later.

If only we knew ahead of time and actually appreciated the impact that food might have on our waist, we’d make better decisions and walk away from the Cheetos that are begging us to buy.

It’s as if the government thinks we don’t already know that a bag of chips or a candy bar — or those really disgusting-but-oh-so-satisfying-frosting-coated cinnamon rolls — aren’t good for us.

Aye, and there’s the rub. We don’t do what bureaucrats and politicians in Washington, D.C., think we should.

That means, according to the FDA, the market has failed.

Yes, when consumers don’t want something and companies aren’t forcing it on us, that’s a market failure.

Funny, but I thought that meant the market was actually succeeding.

Not according to the FDA, which arrogantly thinks it can correct this market failure.

“Although many of the usual market failures that justify regulatory action … do not apply here, the primary support for regulatory intervention is that there are systematic biases in how consumers process information and weigh current benefits (from consuming higher calorie foods) against future costs (higher probability of obesity and its comorbidities). The bias is more directly related to the requirements of this proposed rule: Consumer demand for calorie information does not create incentives for the provision of calorie information at the vending machine. This market failure occurs because at the time of purchase, consumers do not value calorie information as much as they do later, when the effects of excess calorie consumption are evident.” (so we the government must save you from yourself!)

We don’t want to know how much that Reese’s Peanut Butter Cup is going to impact our experience with the weight scale the next morning, and we’re OK with eating it today.

That’s because we’re biased in how we act and government must counter us.

“…(S)tudies suggest that calorie information often lacks salience, or relevance, for consumers at the time of purchase and consumption, even though they may experience regret about their decisions at a later date. This tendency may explain why consumers have not generally demanded calorie and other nutrition information for food sold from vending machines before, or at, the point of purchase, even if they may, at a later point in time, value that information.”

Look at us!  We are so terrible.

Government must save us from ourselves! And liberals must save us all, it’s their holy mission. So they must control every aspect of our lives from birth to beyond death because we are just not competent enough to do it on our own and they are just so vastly superior in every aspect that they must rule over us for our own good!

Thankfully, the government is going to step in. They’re going to make that calorie information so obvious we can’t possibly ignore it. Then we’ll happily do what they want and forgo the barbecued kettle chips.

So what if you crave salt and fat, have some Tofu and soybean paste instead!

Yeah, right.

You’d think that was bad enough — until you read further and find out they don’t know if it will work.

According to the FDA, obesity is a problem and since many Americans get food and snacks from vending machines, putting calorie information on the machines will result in a “significant effect on calorie intake, the prevalence of obesity, and thus the cost of health care and lost productivity.”

But there’s a problem with that theory.

The proposed requirements mitigate the apparent market failure in information provision stemming from present-biased preferences, although not necessarily the tendency of consumers to underutilize that information.”

The FDA admits it “lacks data on how consumers will substitute among caloric sources.”

And doesn’t really care because this makes them feel superior and that “they did something” to fight the even fat merchants!

Getting people off their fat asses on the coach )collecting government welfare) and getting a job doesn’t occur to them, apparently.

That means the administration has no idea if you’ll see the calorie signs and go without your afternoon Snickers only to pig out on gelato after dinner to make up for it.

But at least they warned you! And when you ignore their stern warnings they will have to step it up and ban them next! 🙂

The FDA admits it doesn’t know if posting calorie counts will reduce obesity. It didn’t test its theory to see if posting the calories will actually cause people to choose differently. Plus, officials point out, only 5 percent of money spent outside the home goes to food in vending machines.

But it makes them feel better, and to a Liberal, that’s all that matters in life.

This isn’t the market — you — deciding what you want. This is nanny-state government deciding you’re not making the right decisions about the food you eat and imposing costly regulations with the hope maybe you’ll make their choice for you instead.

And what if you don’t? What if you continue to eat chips and candy from a vending machine? What regulation will they come up with next?

Well, that’s where The Food Police come in. 🙂

But hey, if the bureaucratic elitists can save just one person from becoming obese, isn’t it worth it? (Ohio watchdog.org)

And you can sit there and pay multiple times more for the energy to light and heat/cool that house of yours as you enjoy that over-price unhealthy snack and the Food Police, The Air Police, and The Health Care Police all come rushing to your door to stop you!

Congrats, Citizen., You’re in Orwell’s world now. Be Happy.

They are the Government and they are here to help you! 🙂

Political Cartoons by Steve Breen

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

 

The Food Police 2014

Before I getb to today guest article: Just a Note

 

In 1983, the FDA began banning men who have had sex with other men at any time since 1977  (believed to be the year the AIDS epidemic began in the United States), from donating blood.

 

This ban is still in place to this day, apparently. Gee, I wonder why the screeching harpies on the Left who went ape crap over SB1062  (which wasn’t about gays but they made it so) in Arizona haven’t protested this one?

Because they’d have to protest their own left wingers, perhaps? Hmmm…

http://www.takepart.com/article/2014/02/25/fda-blood-donation-ban

Now on with the show…

Would you rather sip on unpasteurized milk or a cold glass of soda? Do you prefer Saturday lunch at a fast food joint or a farmers market? 

Regardless of your choices, your food freedom — your right to grow, raise, produce, buy, sell, share, cook, eat, and drink the foods you want — is under attack. Here are ten food freedom issues to keep an eye on in 2014.

1: FDA May Ban or Restrict a Growing Number of Food Ingredients. The FDA has proposed banning oils containing trans fats, an ingredient found in foods like coffee creamers and muffins. If you think that’s an overstep, consider that the agency is also likely to propose unprecedented new restrictions on food ingredients like sodium and caffeine in 2014.

2: Raw Milk Bans Drawing Fire. Unpasteurized (“raw”) milk is increasingly popular, but because consuming raw milk carries some risk, the FDA and some states ban its sale. 

Yet the risks of drinking raw milk are similar to those posed by eating a medium-rare hamburger, spinach, cantaloupe or other foods that rightly warrant nothing more than a government warning sticker. Look for continued fights over overly strict raw milk regulations in 2014.

3: New York City’s Soda Ban Not Dead Yet. Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s ham-handed attempt to ban large sodas earned him scorn from Jon Stewart and the New York Times editorial board. It also forced a broad coalition of unions, soda makers, restaurants, and minority businesses to sue to overturn the ban. Nevertheless, Bloomberg’s successor Bill DeBlasio has vowed to forge ahead with the soda ban. After two stinging losses, the city has filed a last gasp court appeal that should be decided in 2014.

4: Farm Subsidies Will Prop Up Big Farms, Cost Taxpayers Billions. Farm subsidies administered by the USDA shift taxpayer money to mostly large, already profitable farmers so they can do things they’d already be doing (like, say, farming) or things that don’t make much sense (like planting more crops than consumers want to buy). That may or may not have been a good idea in the 1940s, when federal farm subsidies first arose, but it’s been nothing but a terrible boondoggle since. 

Everyone knows this, and yet Congress will still pass a Farm Bill in 2014 that features some form of wasteful farm subsidies.

5: FDA’s Menu Labeling Rules Could Be a Colossal Mess. One underreported element of ObamaCare is that it requires the FDA to enact nationwide menu labeling rules. The rules would require many chain restaurants to provide calorie counts on most menu items, but what about pizza delivery chains like Domino’s which has 34 million different ways to order a pizza? What about grocery stores with a salad bar? Even as study after study shows that menu labeling is actually counterproductive, the FDA will have to answer these questions in 2014.

6: Some Cities Still Kicking Food Trucks to the Curb. 2013 was a pretty good year for food trucks around the country. Washington, D.C. opted not to crack down on its vibrant food truck scene, instead enacting new rules that appear to have brought some tasty peace to the nation’s capital. New Orleans did the same. 

How will food trucks fare in 2014? They still face existential threats from regulators in cities nationwide—including Alexandria, Va., Birmingham, Ala., Lexington, Ky. and San Diego, Calif.

7. Soda Taxes Still Being Pushed in San Francisco. San Francisco has proposed a 2014 ballot measure to make its residents “healthier” by adding nearly $1.50 in taxes to the cost of a six-pack of soda. 

Good idea? Hardly. 

Research shows food sin taxes don’t work. So does real life. After Denmark implemented a series of food sin taxes, the country was forced to scrap the laws because they were bad for business, caused job losses and didn’t work.

8:  Rise of Voluntary GMO Labeling. To borrow a phrase from prognosticator extraordinaire Nate Silver, the noise is that 90% of voters want the government to force GMO labeling on consumers. The signal—specifically from voters in California and Washington State, who’ve both rejected mandatory GMO labeling—is that Americans prefer a different approach. As we’ve seen with companies like Whole Foods and Chipotle, some restaurants and grocers are responding to demands from their own consumers that they label or move away from GMO foods on their own. Expect consumer choice on GMOs to continue to trump government mandates in 2014.

9: FDA’s Proposed Food Safety Rules Could Hurt Farmers, Raise Food Costs. Advocates for small farmers were up in arms in 2013 over proposed FDA food safety rules that could bury them in pointless, costly red tape. Even the FDA admitted the rules, which would cost nearly $1 billion each year, would only make food up to 5.7% safer. While the FDA recently scrapped the proposed rules and will go back to the drawing board in 2014, there’s no promising the next round of proposed rules will be any better.

10: Government to Consider Restrictions on Food Marketing to Kids (Again).Companies that advertise foods that parents buy for kids are often vilified by a segment of the public health community. 

Food companies may indeed want kids to nag parents to buy their foods, but parents and guardians—not kids—determine what kids eat. 

If you’re a parent and you (and Santa) didn’t buy Johnny or Susie all the toys they asked for at Christmastime, then you already know when, why, and how to say no to your kid. But that bit of common sense likely won’t stop the government from considering new food marketing restrictions in 2014. (the “wrong network”)

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Would you rather sip on unpasteurized milk or a cold glass of soda? Do you prefer Saturday lunch at a fast food joint or a farmers market?

Regardless of your choices, your food freedom — your right to grow, raise, produce, buy, sell, share, cook, eat, and drink the foods you want — is under attack. Here are ten food freedom issues to keep an eye on in 2014.

1: FDA May Ban or Restrict a Growing Number of Food Ingredients. The FDA has proposed banning oils containing trans fats, an ingredient found in foods like coffee creamers and muffins. If you think that’s an overstep, consider that the agency is also likely to propose unprecedented new restrictions on food ingredients like sodium and caffeine in 2014.

2: Raw Milk Bans Drawing Fire. Unpasteurized (“raw”) milk is increasingly popular, but because consuming raw milk carries some risk, the FDA and some states ban its sale.

Yet the risks of drinking raw milk are similar to those posed by eating a medium-rare hamburger, spinach, cantaloupe or other foods that rightly warrant nothing more than a government warning sticker. Look for continued fights over overly strict raw milk regulations in 2014.

3: New York City’s Soda Ban Not Dead Yet. Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s ham-handed attempt to ban large sodas earned him scorn from Jon Stewart and the New York Times editorial board. It also forced a broad coalition of unions, soda makers, restaurants, and minority businesses to sue to overturn the ban. Nevertheless, Bloomberg’s successor Bill DeBlasio has vowed to forge ahead with the soda ban. After two stinging losses, the city has filed a last gasp court appeal that should be decided in 2014.

4: Farm Subsidies Will Prop Up Big Farms, Cost Taxpayers Billions. Farm subsidies administered by the USDA shift taxpayer money to mostly large, already profitable farmers so they can do things they’d already be doing (like, say, farming) or things that don’t make much sense (like planting more crops than consumers want to buy). That may or may not have been a good idea in the 1940s, when federal farm subsidies first arose, but it’s been nothing but a terrible boondoggle since.

Everyone knows this, and yet Congress will still pass a Farm Bill in 2014 that features some form of wasteful farm subsidies.

5: FDA’s Menu Labeling Rules Could Be a Colossal Mess. One underreported element of ObamaCare is that it requires the FDA to enact nationwide menu labeling rules. The rules would require many chain restaurants to provide calorie counts on most menu items, but what about pizza delivery chains like Domino’s which has 34 million different ways to order a pizza? What about grocery stores with a salad bar? Even as study after study shows that menu labeling is actually counterproductive, the FDA will have to answer these questions in 2014.

6: Some Cities Still Kicking Food Trucks to the Curb. 2013 was a pretty good year for food trucks around the country. Washington, D.C. opted not to crack down on its vibrant food truck scene, instead enacting new rules that appear to have brought some tasty peace to the nation’s capital. New Orleans did the same.

How will food trucks fare in 2014? They still face existential threats from regulators in cities nationwide—including Alexandria, Va., Birmingham, Ala., Lexington, Ky. and San Diego, Calif.

7. Soda Taxes Still Being Pushed in San Francisco. San Francisco has proposed a 2014 ballot measure to make its residents “healthier” by adding nearly $1.50 in taxes to the cost of a six-pack of soda.

Good idea? Hardly.

Research shows food sin taxes don’t work. So does real life. After Denmark implemented a series of food sin taxes, the country was forced to scrap the laws because they were bad for business, caused job losses and didn’t work.

8:  Rise of Voluntary GMO Labeling. To borrow a phrase from prognosticator extraordinaire Nate Silver, the noise is that 90% of voters want the government to force GMO labeling on consumers. The signal—specifically from voters in California and Washington State, who’ve both rejected mandatory GMO labeling—is that Americans prefer a different approach. As we’ve seen with companies like Whole Foods and Chipotle, some restaurants and grocers are responding to demands from their own consumers that they label or move away from GMO foods on their own. Expect consumer choice on GMOs to continue to trump government mandates in 2014.

9: FDA’s Proposed Food Safety Rules Could Hurt Farmers, Raise Food Costs. Advocates for small farmers were up in arms in 2013 over proposed FDA food safety rules that could bury them in pointless, costly red tape. Even the FDA admitted the rules, which would cost nearly $1 billion each year, would only make food up to 5.7% safer. While the FDA recently scrapped the proposed rules and will go back to the drawing board in 2014, there’s no promising the next round of proposed rules will be any better.

10: Government to Consider Restrictions on Food Marketing to Kids (Again).Companies that advertise foods that parents buy for kids are often vilified by a segment of the public health community.

Food companies may indeed want kids to nag parents to buy their foods, but parents and guardians—not kids—determine what kids eat.

If you’re a parent and you (and Santa) didn’t buy Johnny or Susie all the toys they asked for at Christmastime, then you already know when, why, and how to say no to your kid. But that bit of common sense likely won’t stop the government from considering new food marketing restrictions in 2014.

Actions Have Consequences

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

President Obama’s proposal to raise the minimum wage to $10.10 an hour would increase earnings for 16.5 million low-wage Americans but cost the nation about 500,000 jobs, congressional budget analysts said Tuesday. (WP)

Then they can pay for ObamaCare! They just might not have a Job…:)

A bipartisan group of lawmakers is asking the Obama administration to scale back draft regulations under ObamaCare that would force restaurants to post nutritional information on their menus.

“Specifically, the proposed rule limits the ability of businesses to determine for themselves how best to provide nutritional information to customers,” (The Government knows best always, right?) the lawmakers wrote in a letter to FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg. “As a result, the proposal harms both those non-restaurants that were not intended to be captured by the menu labeling law as well as those restaurants that have flexibility and variability in the foods they offer.” 



Pizza places and grocery stores in particular have complained about the draft standards, saying they would be all but impossible to maintain. For instance, there are 34 million different combinations of pizza toppings, according to an industry trade group. It’s impractical to require that they list calorie counts for all of the options, they say.



“Yet, to date there is little evidence to suggest that the FDA has considered these alternatives,” the lawmakers wrote to Hamburg. “Instead, it appears that the FDA has withdrawn from interacting with affected industries and instead proceeded on a path that will unnecessarily burden many small businesses across the country.” (The Hill)
THE AGENDA IS THE AGENDA!  And no grubby Congressperson or Pizza joint is going to stop us from our holy mission to force you to do the right thing and make you less fat!

We’ll just remove the source… 🙂

And, of course regulations like this and a $3 raise in the minimum wage won’t have any effect on a businesses bottom line or cause them to go out of business.

And if it does, who needs them.

The equivalent of about 2.5 million Americans will quit their jobs, cut their hours or stop looking for work during the next decade because of new benefits available under the health-care law, according to recent Congressional Budget Office estimates that have renewed debate over the program’s effect on the economy.

The White House and its allies argue that the government has a role in addressing a failure of the health-insurance market: the high prices and coverage restrictions that have kept health coverage out of reach for so many people. Like Social Security, which provides a safety net so people can retire, the health law may have the effect of leading some Americans to stop working, they say.

We are from the Government and we are here to help you…:)

But they called the impact positive, arguing that people have for too long been stuck in jobs that are a poor fit or that they dislike, simply for the benefits. While some people may make the calculation to just work less to keep more generous benefits, many will use their time to do something more productive, such as start their own business or take care of family members, advocates of the new law say.

Government assistance is so much more satisfying, after all…Sponge off other people, after all, they’ll be making more money to pay for it. 🙂

All you have to do is lower your expectations and swallow your pride and the government trough is open slop for you!

Here little piggy!…

Extending the maximum length of benefits beyond 26 weeks made highly educated unemployed people “more ‘relaxed’ and more patient in selecting jobs,” wrote Lei Fang and Jun Nie in a new working paper, “Human Capital Dynamics and the U.S. Labor Market.” Had unemployment benefits not been extended, they estimated, “the unemployment rate during the 2010-2012 period would have been 0.5 percentage point lower than the actual level.”

Their findings follow earlier research by Makoto Nakajima, a senior economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia. Mr. Nakajima estimated extended jobless benefits accounted for 1.2 percentage points of the jump in the unemployment rate from the end of 2007 to the fall of 2009. (WSJ)

And now for the Orwellian doublespeak of the week: “You can’t say the Affordable Care Act has killed job growth,” <WH advisor> Schiliro told an audience at a Kaiser Family Foundation presentation Wednesday. “In the 46 months since it passed, over 8 million jobs have been created… No one would say the Affordable Care Act created those jobs, but you can’t say the ACA has killed job growth.”

You can’t say it created those jobs, but I just did! You can’t say it killed jobs, because that is not the Agenda Message so stop saying that!

The Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates that the financial crash and resulting recession lost the U.S. economy 8.8 million jobs.

The Congressional Budget Office issued a report concluding that the equivalent of 2.3 million jobs would be lost because Obamacare’s structure incentivizes less work with more taxpayer subsidies.

Business leaders such as the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) estimate that the Health Insurance Tax will reduce employment by up to 262,000 jobs by 2022. (DC)

The Labor Participation is the lowers it’s been in 35 years! Yet, we have 14 million new Americans since Obama came into office.

And after all, that’s why the employer mandate has been put off several times, because it’s just so good for everyone! 🙂

The employer mandate will only begin in 2015 for businesses with 100 or more full-time employees, the Treasury Department announced. Companies with between 50 and 99 employees will be exempted from the law for another year — unless a company fires workers to make it beneath the threshold for the delay.

The IRS regulations on the delay make it very clear that only companies that shrink from 100-plus full-time workers just before the delay for “bona fide business reasons” will be exempted from the mandate to have coverage.

The government that is going to force you to go out of business or fire people must approve of the reasons or else you won’t be allowed the benefit of their benevolence!

Nice. 🙂

It’s good to be the King! or the King’s Minions! 🙂

Oh, and that choice thing…

California’s health care exchange promised potential customers they would have enough physicians to choose from. But some new enrollees, including an Alameda County woman, are discovering that their doctor choices are extremely limited.

Julia Turner is surprised that she even has to search for a doctor. When she signed up for a policy through Covered California late last year, her long-time physician was listed as participating in her Blue Shield plan. It turned out; however, that he is not accepting patients with her Blue Shield policy, purchased on the Covered California exchange.

When Turner called around to find someone else to treat her, she got more frustration. “The only doctors accepting new patients are urgent care clinics,” Turner told KPIX 5 ConsumerWatch.

None of the doctors are located in the city in which she lives. Instead, Turner said, “They are in areas of East Oakland that have a lot of violence.”

Which I’m sure is some rich person’s fault, or “income inequality”.Don’t worry, Obama will demand they get paid more and everything will be alright!

Promise! Trust Him, he’s got your back! 🙂

When KPIX 5 contacted all of the 41 doctors on the list Blue Shield provided to Julia, it found only four of the doctors were actually accepting new adult patients, and only one of them was board certified.

The California Department of Managed Health Care said there is no law that requires the insurer’s provider list to be accurate. However, state law does require insurers to have an “adequate” network of doctors. That means there must be at least one doctor for every 1,200 enrollees within 15 miles of their home.

But many enrollees, in both Blue Cross and Blue Shield plans purchased on the exchange said they are struggling to find even one doctor willing to take new patients due to what are now being call “narrow networks.”

The narrowest networks – those with the fewest doctors – are in some of the Northern California counties with the lowest median household income and the highest number of Medi-Cal recipients. Alameda County falls into that category.

Pat Johnston of the California Association of Health Plans, the industry group representing the insurers, admits there some issues with doctor availability. Johnston calls it a “tradeoff.”

 

“Remember one of the factors here is trying to make it affordable,” he explained. He admits that depending on the insurer, there are fewer provider options for enrollees who purchase the subsidized policies on the exchange.

 

Those you trade Freedom (of Choice) for “security” deserve neither, and you’ll likely get it too! But be happy, it’s not the Government’s fault!! They are here to save you! 🙂

After all the pressure the insurer rolled over and made nice for her. but…“This is not what we were promised. I see those (Covered California) commercials now and I want to scream,” Turner said.

And Obama wants to mess with you even more, rejoice! 🙂

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

Political Cartoons by Steve Breen

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson
 Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez