More City Council legislation
Andrew Casana, a spokesperson for the California Restaurant Association stated they will consider a legal challenge to the recent moratorium that was approved by the Los Angeles City Council. The Canadian Press: Los Angeles city council votes to block new fast-food outlets from poor areas
The moratorium essentially freezes any new fast food restaurants from opening in this particular area of the city.
The city council wants there to be healthier choices.
It is believed to be the first of its kind legislation.
I’ll ask again, what role does the government have in making this type of decision?
Once started, there will be nothing off limits.
The moratorium essentially freezes any new fast food restaurants from opening in this particular area of the city.
The city council wants there to be healthier choices.
It is believed to be the first of its kind legislation.
I’ll ask again, what role does the government have in making this type of decision?
Once started, there will be nothing off limits.
Labels: choice, fast food, legislation
posted by Anonymous at 5:46 AM
3 Comments:
I wouldn't disagree with the specific point being made here, but the reality is that hardly anyone is very consistent in deciding what is appropriate or inappropriate for government action. Liberals love laws that regulate the devil out of business practices and matters such as smoking, gun ownership and seat belt usage. But, for most of them, any law that affects the absolute right of just about anyone of any age to obtain a “no questions asked” abortion is an unacceptable intrusion in one’s personal life. On the other side, many religious conservatives (that would be the group just to the left of where HB lives) consider prohibiting prayer in schools or the display of the Ten Commandments in government facilities a major violation of religious freedom. However, lots of those same folks have no trouble at all with legislation specifically prohibiting, say, sex education that includes birth control methodology (other than plain old abstinence). And, a number of religious conservatives actively lobby for laws that would force schools to include a version of religious creation mythology in science classes.
It seems to me that an awful lot of people from all points of view consider the goals they support to be a legitimate use of government authority while condemning as intrusive, laws that promote objectives with which they disagree.
Whether poor people would or should eat healthy food it if it were available is irrelevant -- they can't afford it.
This is discrimination pure and simple.
Post a Comment
<< Home