Leave it to the Big Apple to put a giant worm in a system that works perfectly.
I'm talking about the new law in New York City making it mandatory for restaurant chains with more than 15 locations to post calorie counts on their menus. The thinking is that by listing the caloric amounts, which must be in font at least as large as the prices, inroads can be made in battling America's obesity problem.
It's flawed thinking, through and through.
Most people throw caution to the winds when they go out to eat. They expect fine restaurants to use real cream-based sauces and to offer calorie-rich desserts.
Seeing full calorie disclosure on a menu is like meeting your future mother-in-law at the bar when you're trying to bed her daughter. It's sure to put the brakes on the evening and will leave a lot of fine desserts spinning in the pie case long after last call.
The new law is sure to hurt sit-down restaurants, while barely making a dent in the economic gut of the chains for which it was created -- fast food giants McDonald's and Burger King.
Laws like these insult the intelligence of Jane and John Q. Public. The implication is that when you order your double Whopper with bacon, large fries and serving of Coke so big it won't fit into your car's cup holder, you're somehow under the misapprehension you're eating healthy. In fact, you are fully aware that you're taking in a day-and-a-half worth of calories in one sitting, but at that moment you just don't give a flying Frosty.
While the law fails in practical application, it does offer a premise that could prove useful elsewhere. If lawmakers decide to wield their considerable influence and apply this full-disclosure ideology in other venues, the results could be of great benefit to the public.
For instance, what if big-box chains like Wal-Mart were required to give a full breakdown of where dollars are allotted for each of the items on their shelves?
The price tag on a $29.99 sweater might read like this:
Full disclosure like that just might lead to a boom in the long-lost pastime of knitting.
How about professional boxing? The sport of kings has been reduced to playing court jester to the soaring popularity of mixed martial arts fighting. There hasn't been a great heavyweight since George Foreman traded in his gloves for kitchen mitts.
One of the biggest drawbacks of boxing is its flawed system of scoring. Usually three judges score each round to determine a winner. The problem is that the scores are not revealed until after the final bell. This cloak-and-dagger method of determining a winner has led to numerous disputed decisions. Hagler vs. Hearns and Roy Jones Jr. vs. Park Si-Hun are two great examples of indefensible decisions made against fighters who had clearly won.
The powers that be in boxing should pass a law requiring all judges' scores to be posted after each round. Let the fighters and the crowd know exactly where a fight stands at each stage of the contest.
Can you imagine an NFL game where the final score wasn't reveled until the game had ended? Of course not! So why is boxing still in the Dark Ages with its scoring system?
And what about the problem of bugs in cereal?
In 1994, the FDA passed the Dietary Supplement and Health Education Act. The act established what the FDA termed "Defect Action Levels (DAL)." Title 21, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 110.110 allows the FDA to establish maximum levels of natural or unavoidable defects in foods for human use that present no health hazard.
In short, don't be buggin' about the bugs in your corn flakes.
The DAL for wheat flour is an average of 75 or more insect fragments per 50 grams and an average of one or more rodent hairs per 50 grams.
So why doesn't the ingredient list for a box of cereal read something like: Bran, Raisins, Sugar, Fly Wings, Centipede Legs, Ant Antennae, Mouse Hairs?
Better yet, put the bug ratio on the McDonald's menus instead of the calorie count if you really want to curb obesity.
A recent article in the Buffalo News detailed how the odds of winning at certain lottery games are skewed against the poor. More expensive scratch-off games pay off at an appreciably higher ratio than do the $1 and $2 tickets favored by most low-income players. Keno and Pick 3 and Pick 4 games fare even worse.
Here's an idea: Why not put those odds right on the ticket? For instance, a $2 scratch-off ticket might read:
Odds on Winning
Gas prices have never been higher. Many people think that the local stop-and-gas is getting rich, but it's just not true. Why don't we enact a law that says full disclosure must be adhered to on those marquee signs employed by the local Mobil stations?
I can see it now:
$4.29 Unleaded ($3 to OPEC, $1.24 to George Bush's buddies in the oil industry, 5 cents to Mom and Pop Sunoco Station Owners).
Finally, tourists are always asking hotel concierge staff which streets in town are safe to traverse after dark. It's a fair question, but one that would be rendered moot if a simple full-disclosure law were enacted pertaining to street signs.
Under this new legislation, cities would be required to list crime statistics for the previous year on all street signs. For instance, tourists taking a stroll along Main Street in a big metropolis might see a sign that read:
Main Street
2007 Crime Stats: 4 Murders, 8 Rapes, 27 assaults, 56 Robberies, 2 Car-Jackings
Have a Nice Day!
It would be one way to take a bite out of crime.
They say you can't lobby for change without making the first sacrifice yourself. With that in mind, here's the full disclosure on the column you just read:
| Niagara Falls Reporter | www.niagarafallsreporter.com | July 22 2008 |