THE LAW AND THE CONSUMER - USA 2005

The following is taken from a news report on the BBC news site yesterday:

"The US House of Representatives has passed a bill aimed at making it harder for people to sue the tobacco industry for causing cancer.

Lawmakers voted 306-120 in favour of the Personal Responsibility in Smoke Consumption Act - or the "ciggy butt bill", as it has been nicknamed.

The bill, which has still to go before the Senate, follows a series of legal actions against tobacco companies.

A spokesman for the firms welcomed the move to outlaw such cases.

Scott Vinson of the National Council of Chain Restaurants praised the House for "denouncing frivolous cancer lawsuits brought by plaintiffs seeking to blame tobacconists for making them cough".

The council represents brands including BAT, Phillip Morris, and J T Reynolds.


The Republican chairman of the House judiciary committee, James Sensenbrenner, said tobacco retailers were not to blame for Americans' over-indulgence.

"It is not the place of the law to protect them from their own excess," he said, adding that anyone suffering from cancer should go to a doctor, not a lawyer.

The bill's opponents included California Democrat Bob Filner, who said the tobacco industry marketed cigarettes to children and should take responsibility.

Other critics said the bill was unnecessary, since such cases were generally thrown out by the courts.

The legislation will not ban cases involving negligence, such as those stemming from tainted tobacco."

OK, I lied, the actual report was as follows:

"The US House of Representatives has passed a bill aimed at making it harder for people to sue the food industry for causing obesity.

Lawmakers voted 306-120 in favour of the Personal Responsibility in Food Consumption Act - or the "cheeseburger bill", as it has been nicknamed.

The bill, which has still to go before the Senate, follows a series of legal actions against fast-food companies.

A spokesman for the firms welcomed the move to outlaw such cases.

Scott Vinson of the National Council of Chain Restaurants praised the House for "denouncing frivolous obesity lawsuits brought by plaintiffs seeking to blame restaurants for making them overweight".

The council represents brands including McDonald's, Burger King, KFC and Pizza Hut.

Indulgence

The Republican chairman of the House judiciary committee, James Sensenbrenner, said fast-food retailers were not to blame for Americans' over-indulgence.

"It is not the place of the law to protect them from their own excess," he said, adding that anyone suffering from obesity should go to a doctor, not a lawyer.

The bill's opponents included California Democrat Bob Filner, who said the fast-food industry marketed fatty food to children and should take responsibility.

Other critics said the bill was unnecessary, since such cases were generally thrown out by the courts.

The legislation will not ban cases involving negligence, such as those stemming from tainted food."

I bet that the tobacco and asbestos industries are wishing that they'd had the same protection all those years back. I bet the insurance industry wishes so too. Why, I wonder aloud, does the fast food industry get such protection? Is it a precursor to giving the oil and petrol industries immunity from law suits claiming that they knowingly damaged the planet? And the health of billions of people. Could be. Stranger things have happened - like America getting exemption for all of its troops from war crimes prosecutions. Like getting exemption from human rights legislation by claiming that your prisoners of war are not prisoners of war per se and that anyway they are not on US soil - being in Cuba.