Bloomberg To Force Flu Vaccinations On Pre School, Day Care Children

From Politicker:

On Wednesday, with just three weeks to go until he leaves office, Mr. Bloomberg’s controversial Board of Health is set to vote on new rules that would force children as young as six months old to be immunized each year before December 31 if they attend licensed day care or pre-school programs.



“Young children have a high risk of developing severe complications from influenza. One-third of children under five in New York City do not receive an annual influenza vaccination, even though the vaccine safely and effectively protects them against influenza illness,” the Health Department said in a statement. “This mandate will help protect the health of young children, while reducing the spread of influenza in New York City.”

The Board is stocked with mayoral appointees and controversial initiatives–from smoking bans to regulations on soda cup sizes–have sailed through with little opposition, angering a small, but passionate group of advocates who claim the vaccinations are potentially dangerous.

“The Bloomberg administration is wildly exaggerating the benefit of the flu shot and we think they are wildly underestimating the risks involved with it,” said John Gilmore, the executive director of the Autism Action Network, speaking more broadly than the controversial claim that links vaccines to autism.

“There are risks associated with every medical procedure,” he said, citing allergic reactions, toxic mercury used as a preservative and questions as to whether the Board’s move is legal given state government jurisdictions.

Whether you think mandatory flu vaccinations are safe and not a problem or you think they're a health risk, isn't this an issue we can roll over and deal with in the next administration?

Why does Bloomberg get to shove it through with 3 weeks to go?

This feels like another imperious move by our imperial mayor who has decided he will decide everything for everybody.

Bloomberg Loses Soda Ban Appeal

I'm going to celebrate with a Big Gulp:

NEW YORK (CBSNewYork) – It looks like supersized sugary drinks in New York City are staying on the menu.

In a unanimous opinion, an appeals court upheld a lower court’s decision Tuesday, saying the Board of Health’s plan to put a 16-ounce limit on sugary drinks was an illegal overreach of executive power.
The four-judge panel of the state Supreme Court Appellate Division said the Board of Health was acting too much like a legislative body when it created the ban and said it didn’t believe sugary drinks were “inherently harmful.”

...

The judges also said the board appeared to have created much of the new rules on political or economic considerations, rather than health concerns.

Bloomberg said he planned to appeal the appeal and, if that didn't work, buy off legislators with his PAC money.

Okay, I made up the last part about buying off legislators with his PAC money, but since that's what he's been doing on the gun control and education reform issues, there's no reason to think he won't try to do the same with the soda ban nonsense.

But for now, he has lost on this issue.

And now, on to my Big Gulp - although I prefer club soda to anything else...

Bloomberg Sets Up "Regulatory Hell" With Unfair And Unjust Grading System

This is about restaurants, but it might as well be about schools and teachers too:

The city received an “F” on its restaurant-inspection system yesterday from City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, who announced plans to revamp it while dramatically cutting the dough it produces from fines.

Quinn said the council would introduce bills this summer to reduce and waive certain fines and fees — three years after the Bloomberg administration introduced a letter-grading system it has described as a runaway success.

Quinn — who is trying to seize the pro-small-business mantle in her race for mayor — said the new bills would lower the fines paid by restaurant owners to $30 million from a high of more than $52 million in fiscal year 2012.

...

The legislation Quinn put forward would waive all violations for restaurant owners who receive an “A” grade after contesting an inspector’s initial findings at a city administrative tribunal. As of today, owners still have to pay summonses even if they succeed in their appeals.

Quinn also called for a system of no-fine inspections where inspectors would review restaurants without penalties or letter grades several weeks before a formal examination to give the eateries a chance to improve.

“The [letter-grading] system has brought information to New Yorkers, but it has also brought increased regulatory and financial burdens on restaurants,” Quinn said. “It also hasn’t been consistent in its implementation.”

Leonard de Knegt, owner of Jerry’s on Chambers Street, where the press conference was held, said he’s afraid whenever an inspector walks through his door.

“I’m not here to dig on the Department of Health or anything like that — because I fear them coming after me,” he joked. “Every time [an inspector] walks in the door, we just don’t know what’s going to happen. Our main deal is to give good service, to give good food and not to have to fear that maybe tomorrow we’ll be closed.”

Quinn vowed that those days would soon come to an end.

“The reason you have fines is to make sure people are following those rules,” she added. “The perception is the reality that this grading system has been used to generate fines. It should not be about revenue generation. We will put that to an end.”

The restaurant industry hailed the proposed changes to the grading system:

“Fines will be reduced; inspections will be fairer; due process will be improved and a system will be created for further changes in the future. All of this helps the small businesses without reducing one iota of the health and safety of restaurants,” he said. 

Do you see the parallels between the Bloomberg restaurant grading system and the teacher evaluation system?

I do.

Both systems have been put into place by Bloomberg as "gotchas" not to improve either restaurants or schools but simply to exert power and control, instill fear into people and expand the ability of the city to close either restaurants or schools.

Kudos to Quinn for trying to end the worst excesses of the restaurant grading system.

Too bad she didn't do this earlier.

Now let's see her (or somebody else) take on the Bloomberg school grading system and the teacher evaluation system in NYC and make it fairer, with improved due process, and show that it has been created to help schools and teachers improve, not to set them up to "fail."

Nanny Quinn Goes After Happy Meals

Sigh:

City Council Speaker Christine Quinn is following in Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s health-crusading footsteps, announcing a new crackdown today–on kiddie meals.

Ms. Quinn said that, if she wins the mayor’s race, she wants to force chain restaurants that already post their calorie counts to set new restrictions on kids’ menus and happy meals, more in line with the standards the USDA sets for school lunches.

According to her campaign, the grilled cheese kid’s meal with fries at Applebee’s packs a whopping 21 grams of saturated fat, 2,34o milligrams of sodium and 1,210 calories–dramatically higher than the 7.2 grams of fat, 740 mg of sodium and 650 calories school lunches are allowed.

“We’re not going to limit parents’ choices. You’ll still be able to order whatever you think is right for your children. But what we’re saying is that companies can’t spend millions of dollars on marketing or include items on children’s menus if those foods clearly are going to lead to obesity, which could lead to diabetes or other diet-related illnesses,” Ms. Quinn told reporters at a press conference at the Union Square green market.

The ideas was part of a package unveiled by Ms. Quinn that also included plans to double the number of school-based health centers and require all new schools to be built with gyms.

Ms. Quinn’s close ally, Mr. Bloomberg, has long been accused of taking his nanny-state paternalism too far, after barring trans-fats, forcing chain restaurants to post calorie counts and attempting–unsuccessfully–to regulate soda sizes.

Doubling the number of school health centers and requiring all newly built schools to have a gym is all well and good.

But would you leave the Happy Meals alone, please?

We cannot regulate our way out of bad behavior.

Prohibition of booze didn't work, the War on Drugs has been a dismal failure, and trying to over-regulate the food and restaurant industry isn't going to solve the health crisis.

Rather, educate people about their choices and let them know what eating a Happy Meal a day will do their kids and let it be.

Seriously.

I've had enough of the Nanny State.

In the end, it doesn't work.

Bloomberg Bans Butter

Nanny Bloomberg at it again:

First they went after the candy machines.

Then they took aim at the sugary sodas. And most of the bake sales. And the greasy french fries at lunchtime.

And now the latest target of the city schools’ push to fight childhood obesity is something as simple as butter.

The spreadable delight has been banned from school cafeterias. It can’t be used for cooking or offered with bread.

And now it’s the subject of an aggressive crackdown that threatens the livelihood of school kitchen managers who’ve dared to order the illicit treat.

“Please explain why your managers are ordering BUTTER!!!” a Brooklyn regional school food manager fumed in an email last week to officials overseeing 25 schools.

The email had an attachment called “Excess Butter Ordering Report” that identified school kitchen managers who’d ordered between $74 and $148 worth of butter.

“Every Manager on this list has to get a disciplinary letter by close of business next week Friday (5/10/13). I also want a copy of every letter sent to my office.”

One kitchen manager caught butter-handed then received a note warning that “if there is a repetition of this incident or similar incident, further disciplinary action will be taken against you which might lead to the termination of your employment with the Office of School Food.”

So what are they using instead of butter?

Why, a rancid genetically modified low fat salad soybean or canola oil of course!

Meanwhile, if Bloomberg and his toadies were really worried about obesity, they might get rid of some of the test prep and add back the gym classes:

Greenpoint mom Brooke Parker was baffled by the anti-butter crusade. “I don’t understand why the mayor is attacking butter. What’s he got against butter? It’s not that bad for you,” she said. “How about making sure kids have gym classes before they ban butter?”

Oh, no can't have gym class.

 

So they'll ban the butter and push the GMO oils instead.

Bloomberg's Soda Ban May Have Increased Soda Consumption

So says a new study:

Psychologists at the University of California, San Diego, wanted to see how much soda people would buy when drink choices were restricted to reflect a ban on larger sizes.

They presented a group of 100 male and female undergraduates with sample menus for venues such as ballparks, movie theaters and fast-food restaurants and asked them to tick off the food and drink items they would choose.

Some of the menus offered a traditional sampling of 16, 24 and 32 ounce drinks priced at $1.59, $1.79 and $1.99, respectively.

Others offered a choice of a 16 ounce drink for $1.59, a "bundle" of two 12 ounce drinks for $1.79, and a bundle of two 16 ounce drinks for $1.99. A third menu type offered only 16 ounce drinks for $1.59.

Participants bought more soda from the "bundle" menu than the traditional menu — about 3 more ounces on average — and about 12 more ounces than from the one-size menu.

The fictitional business owners also reaped more revenue from the bundle scenario than from either of the others.

"Even with the restriction, New York State Senator Daniel Squadron has said that 'those who want to drink more will still be able to go ahead and have two,'" researchers wrote, referring to comments on Mayor Bloomberg's proposed ban on drinks over 16 ounces, which was struck down by a judge in March. "Our study shows that when larger drink sizes are offered as bundles, people are very likely to go ahead and do just that."

Though the study doesn't measure how much soda individuals actually drink in the various menu setups — only what they say they would buy — the results take some of the fizz out of policy makers' aim to fight obesity by slashing drink sizes, said lead study author Brent Wilson, a Ph.D. candidate in psychology at UC San Diego.

I wonder if this kind of scenario occurred to Nanny Bloomberg?

 

Had the soda ban gone into effect, it could have potentially increased soda consumption and revenue for both business owners and the soda industry.

Bloomberg Intends To Push Soda Ban Through Even If Someone Else Is Mayor

The Little Dictator just cannot take no for an answer:

The mayor of New York, Michael Bloomberg, vowed on Tuesday to continue his fight for a controversial ban on large sugary drinks after he leaves office, in a tacit admission that he will not be able to resurrect his signature health measure before a successor takes over.

After a state judge struck down the measure the day before it was due to come into force, Bloomberg called on the leading mayoral candidates to get behind it. But the ban appeared to be in tatters on Tuesday: any appeal is likely to outlast Bloomberg's mayoralty and the front-runners to succeed him have declared their opposition to the restrictions.

Speaking at a cafe in midtown Manhattan which has decided to voluntarily implement the suggested regulations, the mayor admitted his staffers "don't know" how long an appeal will take.
...

When the Guardian asked if Bloomberg could see the soda ban being something he continues pushing for after leaving office, the mayor replied: "You can take it to the bank."

"Yes, what I'm going to try to do is the same thing I've been doing. I want to leave this world a better place for my kids and for their kids, and shame on me if I don't," he said.

Long after Bloomberg leaves his City Hall bullpen for the last time, we will be dealing with his policies via his "philanthropy".

Gun control, education reform, health concerns - the mayor has more money than God and because of that, he knows what's best for all of us, all over this country.

Scary, but true: we live in an oligarchy where a little self-centered, arrogant ass like this can promote his policies with millions until her gets what he wants.

Bloomberg Soda Ban Struck Down In Court

This news will make Mayor Bloomberg very, very sad:

A state judge on Monday blocked the Bloomberg administration's citywide ban on large sugary drinks.

The measure, slated to take effect Tuesday, would have prevented restaurants, theaters, sports stadiums, and any place that receives a letter grade from the city's Health Department from selling sugary drinks in containers larger than 16 ounces.

 In his decision, State Supreme Court Judge Milton Tingling said the ban is "unconstitutional and in violation of the separation of powers."

He went on to say the measure is "fraught with arbitrary and capricious consequences", noting that it applies to some but not all food establishments and excludes some drinks that have significantly higher concentrations of sugar and calories on suspect grounds.
 

 In a statement, the city law department said it plans to appeal the decision, adding, "This measure is part of the City’s multi-pronged effort to combat the growing obesity epidemic, which takes the lives of more than 5,000 New Yorkers every year, and we believe the Board of Health has the legal authority – and responsibility – to tackle its leading causes."

City Health Commissioner Thomas Farley also released a statement that said the decision threatens the health of New Yorkers.

"Without a portion cap on sugary drinks, it would be harder to tackle an obesity epidemic that kills more New Yorkers than anything other than smoking and causes misery for many thousands more who suffer from heart disease, diabetes and other debilitating illnesses," Farley's statement read. "Sugary drinks are a leading cause of this epidemic. Today’s decision threatens the health of New Yorkers, but we are confident that we will win on appeal.”

Monday's ruling sides with members of several beverage and shop owners' groups who had argued the ban would place an unfair burden on small businesses.

In a statement, a spokesman for the American Beverage Association said, "The court ruling provides a sigh of relief to New Yorkers and thousands of small businesses in New York City that would have been harmed by this arbitrary and unpopular ban. With this ruling behind us, we look forward to collaborating with city leaders on solutions that will have a meaningful and lasting impact on the people of New York City."

Unconstitutional.

Fraught with arbitrary and capricious consequences.

A violation of the separation of powers.

Sounds like history of Bloomberg's reign of error - especially this third (illegal) term.