No need to be Libertarian to question feds' cheesy rules

A few weeks back I spent a Saturday morning in a Virginia Beach fast-food chicken joint, at a meeting of the local Libertarians.

For starters, during the happy let's-go-around-the-room-and-introduce-ourselves portion of the meeting, almost no one admitted to belonging to the party.

Next, those present--members, observers and guest speaker (me)--were asked to stand, face the flag and recite the Pledge of Allegiance.

That we-don't-like-rules spirit seems to be at the heart of Libertarian philosophy. Although I am not now, nor have I ever been, a member of the Libertarian Party, from time to time they make sense.

As soon as I spotted that story I found myself entertaining random Libertarian thoughts as I wondered why the government was sticking its nose into our pizza toppings.

According to the Associated Press story, it may almost take an act of Congress to pry the greasy fingers of government from the frozen pizza industry. That industry is required -- by federal regulations -- to lard up its product with massive amounts of artery-clogging cheese and meat.

The rules say that a frozen pizza must have a crust, cheese, a tomato-based sauce and, on the meat pies, at least 10 percent to 12 percent meat.

Any company caught freezing a low-fat pizza or skimping on pepperoni could find itself in big trouble with the feds.

I hesitate to mention this, but these pizza rules apparently date back to the Carter administration.

For those too young to recall the Carter years, a little history lesson may help:

The period 1977-1981 is remembered not only for some of the worst rock music of all time (three words: The Bee Gees, three more words: The Village People), it's also known as America's Modern Ice Age.

The climate was not actually colder during those four years [sic, actually it was, especially in the Eastern U.S. during winter, not that this fact in any way excuses Carter's behaviour in office]. It just felt that way.

Instead of using effective diplomacy to end an aggravating OPEC oil embargo, the Carter administration simply told the nation to bundle up.

It's rumored that somewhere there's frightening film footage of President Carter greeting a White House tour group in a room so frigid that his breath shows. The chief executive is shown swaddled in blankets, teeth chattering uncontrollably beneath blue lips, as he begs the tourist not to touch their thermostats back home.

During this icy interlude the government tried to find innovative ways to keep the country warm without turning up the heat.

A bunch of clever bureaucrats came up with the idea of legislating fatty ingredients into frozen pizzas. They reckoned that the extra calories would help Americans put on a layer of blubber thick enough to keep them toasty for the duration of the oil crisis.

We can all see -- by looking the mirror -- how well the government's "War on Lean" went [except that it never was a declared objective].

Nine out of 10 Americans haven't seen their feet since Carter shuffled out of the White House, wearing two sweaters and a pair of mukluks.

Let's hope the present administration has as much success fighting the Taliban. [note: This piece was written in 2001, (I believe) before the fall of Kabul.]

The government defends its control of pizza toppings by claiming that given the chance, greedy frozen pizza makers would try to sell pizzas that contain little more than cold dough and a squirt of ketchup.

Someone should remind the feds that we live in a free market economy. [Carter, the bureaucrats, and the feds would prefer a conversion to Communism.]

If a frozen pizza tastes like cardboard, contains a microscopic amount of meat or is ladled with Cheez Whiz instead of cheddar, we won't buy it.

You don't need to be a card-carrying Libertarian to know that Uncle Sam has no business poking around our kitchens, sampling our frozen pizzas.

Bizarre as it seems, the Department of Agriculture (who knew pizzas came from farms?) is taking public comment on the pepperoni rules through Jan. 2 [2002].

Let's hope a bipartisan roll back of the cheesy Carter-era pizza regulations follows.

And let's roll back the rest of the Carter legacy (appeasement of terrorists, rather than victory over them) while we're at it! I presume that this (or perhaps Clinton?) is the president to whom Dick Gephart refers when he declares, "This president has been a miserable failure and must be defeated." After all, he's still menacing to this day and must be recognized as the crackpot failure that he is.

[bracketed lines are my comments]

Don't you long for the days when orange "juice" was really orange flavored water? Ditto grape "juice" (or any other juice)?

Pesky nanny government actually demanding that there be real orange juice in orange "juice" (or real meat in "meat" pies).

Couldn't they see how well the industry was regulating themselves?

Don't you long for the days when orange "juice" was really orange flavored water? Ditto grape "juice" (or any other juice)?

Pesky nanny government actually demanding that there be real orange juice in orange "juice" (or real meat in "meat" pies).

Couldn't they see how well the industry was regulating themselves?

The government might, maybe have a role in requiring honest labeling and ingredient lists, dishonest ones are fraud, but then it is up to the consumer to read the labels and buy what they want.

Caveat Emptor. People who don't read the labels deserve what they get.

SO9

Apparently, you are unable to function all by your wittle bitty self in a grocery store, so you need MamaGov to make sure your Tombstone has the proper amount of pepperoni on it.

However, the rest of us are capable of doing things which are obviously beyond your ability. Little things like reading the lable, gazing through the plastic packaging to actually see how much meat and cheese are on our frozen pizzas.

I'll bet you can't read an orange juice lable, or heaven forfend, actually sample the product once to see if it meets with your approval.

Tell me, do you still take your mama to the grocery store with you?

I'll bet she still folds your undies just the way you like them as well.

Pretty frigging pathetic.....

>Couldn't they see how well the industry was regulating themselves?

"Conditions in the U.S. food and drug industries a century ago can hardly be imagined today. Use of chemical preservatives and toxic colors was virtually uncontrolled. Changes from an agricultural to an industrial economy had made it necessary to provide the rapidly increasing city population with food from distant areas. But sanitation was primitive in the light of modern standards. Ice was still the principal means of refrigeration. The great pioneers of bacteriology were just starting their string of victories over infectious diseases. Milk was still unpasteurized. Cows were not tested for tuberculosis.

"In the same era, thousands of so called "patent" medicines such as "Kick-a-poo Indian Sagwa" and "Warner's Safe Cure for Diabetes" reflected both the limited medical capability of the period and public acceptance of the doctrine that the buyer could and should look out for himself. Medicines containing such drugs as opium, morphine, heroin, and cocaine were sold without restriction. Labeling gave no hint of their presence. Otherwise harmless preparations were labeled for the cure of every disease and symptom. Labels did not list ingredients and warnings against misuse were unheard of. What information the public received came frequently from bitter experience. ..." The Story Of The Laws Behind The Labels -- Food and Drug Administration, FDA Consumer, June 1981

Those labels are there because consumers demanded them. Do you honestly believe that if the FedGov repealed the regulations requiring them that companies would stop putting them on?

Noone but a Democrat could possibly be that dense.

"Those labels are there because consumers demanded them."

The content in the label is there because of the government. Information on calories, fat, etc. There is a new regulation coming for trans-fat.

"American consumers will soon be able to gauge how much trans fats their food products contain, thanks to a recent decision by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. The move is the latest effort to arm consumers with information they can use to make healthier food choices.
-- apha.org

The industry had nothing to do with it. Pretty pathetic you didn't know this.

> Noone but a Democrat could possibly be that dense

What's the sitch, witch? Why
the drama? Labeling laws
cause the sales of your

Crunchy Frogs to fall?
Sales plummet when "lark's vomit"
appeared on the box

as a garnish on
your Ram's Bladder Cup? Chill. Here --
Have a Spring Surprise...

"Conditions in the U.S. food and drug industries a century ago can hardly be imagined today.... What information the public received came frequently from bitter experience. ..."

No doubt about it. A trip from New York to Seattle, took over a week. Today, just a matter of hours. Progress has occurred.

Assuming that progress would not have occurred in any area of human concern is extremely narrow minded. I am sure that in a hundred years from now, some libertarian will try taking credit, for alleviating the unimaginable (at that time), bitter experiences from government, that people at this time, must endure.

I would propose to you that the progress that government is often credited for would have been quicker in the long run, had government not jumped in with its short term fixes for exaggerated problems.

Of course proving that alternate paths, would have equally worked, is not possible. Likewise, it is not rational to claim there would not have been progress.

> I would propose to you that the progress that government is often credited for would have been quicker in the long run, had government not jumped in

During the 50s,
"big bands" made so much money
that big band leaders

had great influence
on culture. These musicians --
obsessed with music --

hired black musicians,
black arrangers, just because
certain blacks were great

musicians. Big bands
did more to break color lines
than the federal

marshalls did ten years
later pushing government
de-segregation.

But when business-men
realized really big bucks
could be milked out of

the music "markets"
segregated into race
and economic

demographics, then
the free market maneuvers
of these exploiters

pretty much undid
"free market integration"
of earlier years.

"Free" markets can be
corrupted from without, or
within. Governments

can be corrupt, too.
But the real bottom line is
simple, dogmatic

belief in "structure" --
market or government -- is
an unreal dead-end.

"In the same era, thousands of so called "patent" medicines such as "Kick-a-poo Indian Sagwa" and "Warner's Safe Cure for Diabetes" reflected both the limited medical capability of the period and public acceptance of the doctrine that the buyer could and should look out for himself. Medicines containing such drugs as opium, morphine, heroin, and cocaine were sold without restriction. Labeling gave no hint of their presence. Otherwise harmless preparations were labeled for the cure of every disease and symptom. Labels did not list ingredients and warnings against misuse were unheard of. What information the public received came frequently from bitter experience. ..."

And your point is?
As recently as the 1970's, these patent medicines could still be sold (in accord with federal law) as long as they were sold continuously and no changes were made to the labels ... meaning that the same claims were still being made.
Caveat emptor may be a libertarian position, but it is a conservative position. A free market works. It's too bad we no longer have one.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.