Beware of what you wish for, because you just might get it.

What legal right does one have to take back what they asked for? In this tree trimming case we see how a Chinese proverb plays out in America's suburbia.

Motorcycles and Trucks are an Unfair Match

Injured Iowans with legal claims can learn more about their rights at the Lombardi Law Firm website or call 515-222-1110 or email: sdlombardi@aol.com.

Plant Blast At Iowa ADM - Worker Safety Issues

Injured Iowans with legal claims can learn more about their rights at the Lombardi Law Firm website or call 515-222-1110 or email: sdlombardi@aol.com.

Premise Liability – Repairs and Maintenance - Falling Out the Window

Injured Iowans with legal claims can learn more about their rights at the Lombardi Law Firm website or call 515-222-1110 or email: sdlombardi@aol.com.

Floyd County Jail Ceiling Collapsed due in part to heavy rains

Iowa property damage claims can result from insurance delay tactics. Call or visit the Lombardi Law Firm website for further information. www.lombardilaw.com

Passengers live and die with driver decisions

Iowa I-80 collision claims can result be difficult to adjust. Call or visit the Lombardi Law Firm website for further information. www.lombardilaw.com

Two-car Crash and Rollover in Monticello on 151

Iowa Rollover Crashes - Attorney studying the rights of passengers with drivers who lose control or drive too fast. visit www.lombardilaw.com for further info.

Does bad judgment or rude behavior by any citizen justify the use of force of an electric shock by the police in America?

Here we go again, another officer with poor or nonexistent communication skills using the Taser in a manner unacceptable in a free society. This new report comes from not New York City where you expect rude behavior to be the norm, but from the wild west of Glenrock, Wyoming.

Wasn’t it the Bush Administration that coined the phrase, “Freedom isn’t free.”? I’m left to wonder, free of what; free of excessive force from our own police force? Just going through the airport in America I’m made to feel like a criminal in ways you won’t feel going through airports in Europe. In Russia you get robbed over luggage charges but you expect it. In America we now get not just robbed by Wall Street, but there is a growing trend of being mugged by our own police forces.

Like many of the reports seen on YouTube and those that have made recent news, the police are using the Taser to effectuate an arrest but in a way to also punish citizens for what the officers perceive as some level of behavior that justifies force when the evidence would simply support either bad judgment or simply rude behavior. In this instance a 76-year-old man with a heart condition riding an antique tractor in a small town parade misunderstood where the parade route ended. Assuming tractors would do what they had done in years past at the end of the parade the elderly driver veered off towards the town park where in recent years a tractor pull had taken place. Apparently the office took offense and started a chase that culminated in a car accident. It seems the parade wasn’t going to end in the usual location. Instead of merely letting the old man on the tractor go, the officer chases the near octogenarian, another joins in with an SUV, there is an accident and while one officer removes the grandson from the tractor another points a Taser at the old-man and shoots him with it. The grandfather was unarmed and apparently in the officer’s eyes un-American. There isn’t any indication of resisting arrest, but then again there wasn’t an arrest so how could there be?

Why didn’t the guy who took the child off the tractor ask the old man to get off the tractor? Or if need be, he simply could have pulled him off the tractor. Why the use of the Taser? What were the facts about an old man that warranted the use of the Taser? But then again what are the standards for when law enforcement can use electric shock on citizens? Is saying it can be used to subdue citizens enough of a standard?

If there wasn’t any illegal behavior what justified the use of force? What fact justified an American police officer taking out a department issued weapon that can cause death and using it on an American citizen taking part in a parade? Once again we are back to traffic stops and the use of the Taser to punish the questioning of authority.

Has the 9/11-America redefined the Constitutional limits of excessive force?

Or is a declining America so scared of losing its place in the world that we are willing to punish anyone who questions our authority?

Are citizens so fearful of losing jobs to the developing world that emotionally we enjoy watching someone who questions American authority being shocked and made to go limp?

Are a few deaths acceptable to the many in order to quiet the demons in our heads that make us fear what the Chinese labor force is doing to our labor market?

Is speech free only when we speak it; but not for the other guy?

The wrong-way tractor driver is shocked and quickly the parade crowd gets ugly with the officers and no arrest is made. Really, no arrest is made? I wonder why that might be. Following the incident, the police join ranks, hunker down with the local county attorney who says there will be no apology and denies the police did anything wrong. After a post-parade circling of the law enforcement wagons they rationalize that no arrest was made because the situation was getting out of hand and nearly turned into a riot. Really, a riot? I wonder why that might be. Perhaps the county attorney and the Glenrock Police Chief should pick up a book about why the American Revolution took place.

9/11-America clearly is losing control of its government – we are quickly becoming a police state with a police-state mentality run by thugs. The only difference between the American police state and those like Venezuela is the level of education of those running this one. The county attorney and police chief can rationalize the situation all they want but the facts speak for themselves and so did the crowd that saw it in real time. The American way of life is becoming, or maybe it’s become an intolerant society post 9/11 being run by a police force with a thug mentality. Sort of like the thugs on Wall Street. The Wall Street thugs steal our retirement funds and the politicians and law enforcement thugs steal our constitutional rights to freedom, but especially free speech. Like the SEC rationalizing how they missed Madoff operating an investment fund that never traded stocks, this county attorney rationalizing the accident as a ramming is an over-intellectualization of the truth. Just like anyone with a brain knows the SEC turned a blind eye to an obvious Ponzi scheme, the county attorney not filing charges against the officers is just as lame.

As a lawyer I’m finding it difficult to understand what has happened to America since 9/11 and the advent of the Bush Doctrine. Under the Bush Administration one day of multiple terrorist attacks was and is used to justify the use of force against American citizens for any behavior that questions authority. The use of the Taser by law enforcement is a prime example of how the U.S. Constitution has been gutted. This technologically sophisticated cattle prod is being used so frequently and in so many situations that it’s clearly not justified nor understood by law enforcement and perhaps the American judiciary. What ever happened to just good old police work that required good communication skills, an even temperament and thick skin? Alternatives exist that professional law enforcement could use and would be better suited; but it seems that officers with low intelligence, poor communication skills and quick tempers too quickly use a jolt of electricity to justify what can only be understood in real time to be the meting out of punishment. It isn’t being used to enforce the law, instead it’s being used to punish for minor infractions, bad judgment or speech that simply questions authority.

I’m seeing commenter’s on this blog that have shamefully low communication skills and whose temperaments mirror the officers who are quick to pull out the Taser and use it on American citizens who deserve nothing more than a good tongue lashing. Conditioned by the sitcom we want instant gratification and the Taser seems to dish it out in a way that we get to see someone with a bad disposition shake, then go limp and fall helplessly to the ground. None of us want to look at the ones who run, shake, drop and die. Those are too messy. Like American reality show mentality we justify the officer’s bad behavior through rationalization to win. Like the Bachelor or the Bachelorette we fool ourselves into believing that valuable human qualities can be developed and discovered in just a few short weeks. Like Big Brother we give the officers and the county attorney the power of veto (POV) so their own bad behavior is exempted, then empowered and require no intelligent explanation. Just say anything and you'll get to the final four because lying, cheating and scheming is now acceptable behavior in post-9/11 America. And this is the true Bush legacy.

It seems post-9/11-America can justify anything; even criminal behavior by law enforcement.

Is Free Speech Illegal in Post-9/11 America?

Where did people get the idea that questioning law enforcement is illegal? What created the impression that talking is resistance and can justify an arrest? If the standard-less use of the Taser continues to be tolerated by politicians and misguided citizens then the courts must step in and do what the other two branches of government are unwilling to do: stand up to Taser International and its growing league of thugs and say enough is enough. How many people have to die before the Court’s do what the U.S. Constitution mandates?

If freedom is not free then free speech certainly is.

One reader questioned why I draw the analogy that we are looking more and more like a communist regime backed up not by the rule of law but by a police force that use force to control speech, citizen temperament and the mere questioning of authority.

The traffic-stop-Tasering situation in New York involving Mrs. Harmon and the one involving the man in Alabama remind me of the U.S. Supreme Court’s situation in Jacobellis vs. Ohio, 378 U.S. 184(1964) in which Justice Potter Stewart in talking about pornography stated, I may not be able to define pornography but I know it when I see it. When watching the following video clips in real time and thinking through what law enforcement does in each I can say this: I may not be able to completely define police brutality but I know it when I see it. Like the crowd in Wyoming, the prosecutor can take a single fact, spin it and justify the officer’s position, but in real time the rest of us aren’t fooled.

To the people of Glenrock, Wyoming, as law abiding citizens you still have a choice. You can honor the Constitutional rights of every townsperson by throwing the bums out of office. Remove the prosecutor and the police chief and fire the officers involved. You’re better off with the criminals not wearing badges and having the right to “legally” carry deadly weapons. Take back your government and take back our country.

The terrorists may have taken down the World Trade Center towers but they didn’t rob America of its soul. America is still free to choose who runs our government. Freedom may not be free in an esoteric sense, but you better damn well not forget that in America speech still is.

Driver Safety: Teens need to stop and think before getting behind the wheel.

Let's end this month with a simple message - think. Yes, simply think before acting.

Lawyers deal in the facts about car, truck, ATV, boat, truck, motorcycle, moped, pedestrian, skateboard and other types of roadway-street-avenue accidents than many people. We see it and we hear about it. We read about it and talk about it. We discuss it with Judges, juries, adjusters, other attorneys and clients. We see way too much of it. And so we know that like Tennessee's Governor talking to teens in that state, the same message applies to Iowa teens.

I've raised four teenagers all of whom drove and had accidents. I watch teenagers talking on the cell phone, texting and simply not paying attention. And that's the key, paying attention. You have to pay attention rather than try to do everything but pay attention to what is going on in traffic. It's irritating to other drivers for someone to be yakking on the phone, shaking their head back and forth, fully engaged in a conversation that makes it extremely obvious to those other drivers that you aren't paying attention.

Be safe, smart and protect yourself. Think before doing, so you can live another day to talk about it.

Wisconsin ruling honors the limits of privacy not actually waived

We’ve been covering privacy issues and the violation of privacy rights. We’ve discussed in recent posts the unauthorized surveillance by a husband of the wife in her bedroom, the Anthony Pellicano invasion of privacy indictment and prison sentence in California and finally stalker secrets involving bullying. Each post involves the limits of privacy. At the end of December 2008 the Wisconsin appellate court ruled that agreeing to be naked with a person in the privacy of a bedroom does not waive the person’s privacy right not to have the activity videotaped. The Court’s concerns probably have to do with the nature of video and the Internet’s ability to make video so widely and readily available on sites like YouTube,  AOL Video, Bullz-Eye, LikeTelevision, CNET TV and LiveVideo, to name just a few.

The Court of Appeals assigned the docket number 2007AP002130 for State vs. Mark T. Jahnke.  The Wisconsin brief bank doesn't appear to have the briefs. I searched using the docket number, 2007AP002130.  

The import of free video on the Internet and the damage that can result can be seen by the number of viewers that can watch a video. On YouTube there is a video clip Free Hugs Campaign - Official Page (music by Sick Puppies.net ). This video has been viewed 36,073,252 times from September 22, 2006 to the day I’m writing this blog post on December 31, 2008.

Consider the personal reputation damage that one person can inflict on another by such an action. An attorney could try the case, a jury award $10,000,000.00 but realistically this kind of verdict can’t be collected from the average Joe or Jane. There is no way to adequately compensate an individual from such an invasion into their privacy. Experience tells me the Court’s will universally come down hard on this type of invasion.
State vs. Mark T. Jahnke - 2007AP002130 Docket number Portage County, Court of Appeals, District 4, Scheduled for release on December 30, 2008. Opinion.

It does not appear the Court of Appeals opinion has been ordered to be published.

 

School Safety: The Lab, Why do teachers and students have responsibilities?

It seems everywhere you look today someone is protesting being held accountable. Lobbyists are crawling all over Washington enticing our government representatives to pass laws creating immunity against liability. You might want to know what immunity against liability is all about. Well, it’s about someone getting a get out of jail free card against any wrongdoing they might do. Another way of looking this is it’s a category of people asking for the right not to be held accountable if in the future they do something wrong. For a list of those asking for freedom from responsibility follow these links: Texas, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, a national well orchestrated clearinghouse, and even lawyers are lobbying for their clients to get a free-get-out-of-jail card.  It’s all very shameful and discouraging to well behaved and well intentioned citizens.

And that was my point with yesterday’s and today’s posts about school safety and the responsibilities of students and teachers. Students can’t look to teachers and say it’s all your fault, nor teachers to students. Administrators can’t put full blame on either of those two. What makes America work is that everyone has a certain responsibility to society. Even jurors have a responsibility. That doesn’t mean jurors get to turn everyone away from the courthouse without compensation by saying that’s just the way it is, why should the Plaintiff get money? Doing so is just another way of giving the wrongdoer immunity from responsibility.

If you want to know what I’m talking about consider this. What if your teenage son approached you just before heading out with the family car on a Friday night and asked this question; “Mom and Dad, before I leave the house I’d like you to tell me it’s alright if I don’t make curfew, smash up the car, drink even though I’m underage, give liquor to all of my underage friends and use your credit card.” Would you do it? Would you agree to allow him freedom from being held accountable?

Of course you wouldn’t and as parents we all know why. If we did this otherwise good son would see no boundaries to what he could do with his friends. He’d allow himself to be led astray. He’d do everything he wanted to do even though he knew it wasn’t the right thing to do. We all need boundaries. We all need that line in the sand we just don’t cross. We all need to know even if we disagree, that the boundaries are there for a reason and if we cross them we will get in trouble; we will be held accountable.

That’s what duty is about in a tort. A duty is the first necessary element that needs to be proven. Duty is the line in the sand that we weren’t supposed to breach and if we did we are to be held accountable.

And that is what these two posts are able. It’s about being held accountable for crossing the line in the sand.  I’m not picking on teachers and students. Trust me I could write a similar post for lawyers, doctors, accountants, engineers, nurses, clerks and judges. My point is that just ignoring the do’s and don’ts that make up our responsibility in the lab won’t change the rules; that line in the sand will still be there and if we, you, breach it you will likely be held responsible. So today when you look at the teacher’s responsibilities don’t forget to go back and review the student’s responsibilities because those are equally important.  And each has a duty to each other and to other students that may be injured when either crosses that line in the sand.

As a lawyer, a parent and a citizen I support bright line responsibilities rather than granting people a free pass to be irresponsible. I don’t support tort reform that grants blanket immunity to corporate America because it weakens our system and the American way of life. I can’t understand why I should support corporate freedom from responsibilities while working people continue to do the right thing and follow the rules?  America will remain strong so long as everyone has lines in the sand and they are held accountable. Special interests support special rights for a select few. That is wrong for one and for all of us.

 

School Safety: The Lab, What are the teacher’s responsibilities?

Teachers just know that today I’m not picking on you. I do realize you have a tough job babysitting all those kids raised on participation trophies. I know what happens. They show up to class with arms outstretched, hands raised and say, “What? What’s your problem? I showed up!” meaning okay so my homework isn’t done and I didn’t read today’s lesson. Its okay with my parents so what’s with you getting mad? You know I showed up! So where is my trophy? Yeah that’s what ten years of coaching soccer taught me.

Today we continue our series on school safety and will list the lab teacher’s responsibilities when running the lab class in order to protect themselves, the school staff and the students. Yesterday we explored student responsibilities and today we explore yours. Also today we will discuss why each has a list of responsibilities and why that is necessary to creating a good and safe learning environment. (School Safety: How to Avoid Accidents and Injury in the School Laboratory and Megan’s Experiments in Education.

I’m using NIOSH’s list of each. I like the format and simplicity they’ve chosen.  There are six areas of responsibilities to focus on and if you do you should stay out of any lawsuits.

1.      Upkeep of Laboratory and Equipment

2.      Recordkeeping

3.      Safety and Emergency Procedures

4.      Maintenance of Chemicals

5.      Preparing for Laboratory Activities

6.      Ensuring Appropriate Laboratory Conduct

 

Each area is important to some aspect of safety in the lab. Safety isn’t just about what is done before there is an accident. It’s also about what to do following an accident. And it’s about being able to prove you’ve been following these simple rules. I’ll quote NIOSH and if you follow the link it will take you to the site where they are listed along with a PDF version you can save to your computer, print and post in the class or use as a handout at the beginning of the school year.  

 

What Are the Teacher’s Responsibilities?

Teachers and teacher-aides should lead by example and wear personal protective equipment; follow and enforce safety rules, procedures, and practices; and demonstrate safety behavior and promote a culture of safety. They should be proactive in every aspect of laboratory safety, making safety a priority. The following is a checklist for teachers highlighting essential information for working in the high school laboratory. This is a general safety checklist and should be periodically re-evaluated for updates.

Upkeep of Laboratory and Equipment

• Conduct regular inspections of safety and first aid equipment as often as requested by the administration. Record the inspection date and the inspector’s initials on the attached equipment inspection tag.
• Notify the administration in writing if a hazardous or possibly hazardous condition (e.g., malfunctioning safety equipment or chemical hazard) is identified in the laboratory and follow through on the status.
• Never use defective equipment.

Recordkeeping

• Keep organized records on safety training of staff for as long as required by the school system.
• Keep records of all laboratory incidents for as long as required by the school system.

Safety and Emergency Procedures

• Educate students on the location and use of all safety and emergency equipment prior to laboratory activity.
• Identify safety procedures to follow in the event of an emergency/accident. Provide students with verbal and written safety procedures to follow in the event of an emergency/accident.
• Know the location of and how to use the cut-off switches and valves for the water, gas, and electricity in the laboratory.
• Know the location of and how to use all safety and emergency equipment (i.e., safety shower, eyewash, first-aid kit, fire blanket, fire extinguishers and mercury spill kits).
• Keep a list of emergency phone numbers near the phone.
• Conduct appropriate safety and evacuation drills on a regular basis.
• Explain in detail to students the consequences of violating safety rules and procedures.

Maintenance of Chemicals

• Perform regular inventory inspections of chemicals.
• Update the chemical inventory at least annually, or as requested by the administration. Provide a copy of the chemical inventory to the local emergency responders (i.e., fire department).
• Do not store food and drink with any chemicals.
• If possible, keep all chemicals in their original containers.
• Make sure all chemicals and reagents are labeled.
• Do not store chemicals on the lab bench, on the floor, or in the laboratory chemical hood.
• Ensure chemicals not in use are stored in a locked facility with limited access.
• Know the storage, handling, and disposal requirements for each chemical used.
• Make certain chemicals are disposed of properly. Consult the label and the Material Safety Data Sheet for disposal information and always follow appropriate chemical disposal regulations.

Preparing for Laboratory Activities

• Before each activity in the laboratory, weigh the potential risk factors against the educational value.
• Have an understanding of all the potential hazards of the materials, the process, and the equipment involved in every laboratory activity.
• Inspect all equipment/apparatus in the laboratory before use.
• Before entering the laboratory, instruct students on all laboratory procedures that will be conducted.
• Discuss all safety concerns and potential hazards related to the laboratory work that students will be performing before starting the work. Document in lesson plan book.

Ensuring Appropriate Laboratory Conduct

• Be a model for good safety conduct for students to follow.
• Make sure students are wearing the appropriate personal protective equipment (i.e., chemical splash goggles, laboratory aprons or coats, and gloves).
• Enforce all safety rules and procedures at all times.
• Never leave students unsupervised in the laboratory.
• Never allow unauthorized visitors to enter the laboratory.
• Never allow students to take chemicals out of the laboratory.
• Never permit smoking, food, beverages, or gum in the laboratory.

Links:  http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2007-107/

 

PDF Version: http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2007-107/pdfs/2007-107.pdf

 

As a lawyer, a parent and a citizen I support bright line responsibilities rather than granting people a free pass to be irresponsible. I don’t support tort reform that grants blanket immunity to corporate America because it weakens our system and the American way of life. I can’t understand why I should support corporate freedom from responsibilities while working people continue to do the right thing and follow the rules?  America will remain strong so long as everyone has lines in the sand and they are held accountable. Special interests support special rights for a select few. That is wrong for one and for all of us.

What is federal preemption and why should I take the time to care?

I grew up as a small boy in New England whose father died of lung cancer. He was twelve when he started to smoke and I was thirteen when he passed away. His wife, my mother was just thirty-seven and he left her with five children under fourteen. We didn’t have much and didn’t ask for much, except to be educated. Being scared to be poor is a cornerstone of my daily drive. If you’re not scared to be poor then you’re not as worldly as you might think. Dad didn’t believe in life insurance and when he died he left my mother that legacy. It was a tough road she walked with us five kids. She kept us happy by taking on all the worrying for her five little ones.  I joke today with my mother that she worries about not having anything to worry about. She’s used to worrying and finds comfort in knowing she still counts. But worrying about feeding five children, about medical care, dental care, a college education, transportation, each of us having spending money may today sound nostalgic, but as those days following my father’s death turned into years it had to have taken it’s toll on her. During my childhood I never knew my mother to take a vacation or for that matter a day off.  It pained me to watch my mother always put on a show of strength but never to open up and have the simple luxury of someone’s shoulder to cry upon.

After finishing law school I enjoyed minute of every news report of the tobacco industry being taken to task for lying about the link between smoking cigarettes and developing lung cancer. Watching my father die is probably why today I detest corporate liars and cheats.

In this month of October, 2008 we are addressing federal preemption, a little understood legal concept that affects many widows, orphans and supporting spouses of brain damaged men and woman who live in a nursing home or assisted-living facility. If you care about the life style you will live in the future you’d better care about federal preemption laws being considered by Congress.  For my 80-year old mother her time has passed but for those of you who are in your twenties, thirties, forties and fifties - your time is now.

1.       What is federal preemption?

Answer: Federal preemption is a legal doctrine that holds a federal law governs all claims that fall within it. In other words if the Congress passes a law creating federal preemption over pharmaceutical claims you will not have a traditional right to pursue a claim under state law.

2.       How might it affect me?

Answer: The affect is you lose your right to pursue a traditional state law claim. Unless the federal law allows a claim there is nothing anyone can do to help you.

3.       Why should I care?

Answer: You should care for the same reasons you care about your insurance bill being paid. It won’t affect you until you need to file a claim; then you’re in serious trouble. Most of the lay people, the tax paying citizens, don’t appreciate the federal preemption until they have the need to file a claim. And then they find out there is nothing any lawyer in their state can do for them. Say you’re spouse in taking their daily meds has a stroke and suffers terrible brain damage. Only then do you learn that the cause of the stroke was likely the meds he took; and that a ton of research showed the cause of strokes in people just like him, but no one ever brought it to your attention. About that time that the $950.00 per month in social security disability benefits doesn’t cover the monthly mortgage you then begin to realize how federal preemption fit into your life and why a long time ago you should have cared.

4.       I don’t have time to write my Congressman.

Answer: I don’t have time today to write this blog post but I’m still doing it. You see you’d better take the time now to write to your Congressman to impress upon them that you do care, are listening and want them to vote against any legislation having to do with federal preemption of your right to bring a claim under state laws.  Where to go to write to my Senators or House of Representatives.

5.       I don’t understand why I should be so concerned with a bill title that says it’s in my best interest?

Answer: Oh really? Most bills that will do away with existing rights read something like this: It’s pink, fuzzy and will save you time. Yeah it’s a stiletto sheath made out of baby seal fur and it’s going to be used to cut out the heart of your claim. It will save you time, because you won’t be spending any time in any court of law trying to prove those multi-million-dollar-bonus-drug-company-executives knew of the risk of a stroke and didn’t let the information out so you could be warned, because they didn’t want bad news to depress their stock price.  

6.       Why can’t I just rely on my Congressman to protect my family?

Answer: When a young man or woman first runs for Congress they are somewhat pure thinkers thinking only about doing good for the voters. They get elected and then begin to think about getting re-elected and how much it costs. Along come Mr. and Mrs. Pharmaceutical and Corporate Lobbyist with plenty of cash to donate to friendly politicians in Congress. See now you know why that pink sheath is pink and not black. It’s to give you the impression it’s being passed by your friendly Congressman and is there to help you or better yet, to save your tax dollars. In reality what is it? Go ahead you can say it, “It’s BS!” Yes it is, just ask the actor Dennis Quaid and his family.

Federal Preemption, the Hearing

The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform held a hearing yesterday on federal regulation of medical devices, a session meant to set the stage for reversing federal preemption of state regulations -- such a reversal being a priority for trial lawyers wanting to sue in state courts.

Testimony by Dennis Quaid -- you remember, the actor? -- got the most attention, even showing up on local news broadcasts in D.C. Quaid and his wife are suing Baxter Healthcare for a Heparin overdose given to their twin infants.

We commend the testimony of John E. Calfee, Ph.D., of the American Enterprise Institute. You can read Calfee's conclusions here. Bottom line: Eliminating pre-emption will encourage litigation, an ineffective and expensive approach of promoting safety or advances in prescription drugs.

And for a classic example of one-side reporting, read this AP scene-setter, an article that accepts the thesis from the activists (trial lawyers and self-styled consumer groups) that the Bush administration is using regulations to lock in federal preemptions, sticking it to the little guy in the process. Five separate people are cited complaining about pre-emption, "balanced" by two people making neutral observations about the legal and political landscape. Did no one make a positive case for federal preemption?

P.S. Ah, we see the AP reporter reported on the committee hearing from the same vantage point, that of doubting preemption.

7.       Why can’t I rely on the FDA and other federal agencies to protect my family?

Answer: Well it’s like the fox watching the hen house or trying to run a major corporation on a paper boy’s earnings. You can’t.

In 2008 the number of paid lobbyists totaled 17,170 and spent over $1.59 Billion lobbying elected officials and candidates, companies, labor unions and other organizations. If you doubt my research just do your own search of the Lobbying Database. Since 1998 over $20 Billion has been spent on lobbying efforts.  The 2008 overview of lobbying dollars shows the House raised over $380 Million, the Senate over $194,929,656. The U.S. President they spent over $1.132 Billion.  As you can surely appreciate it costs corporate American a lot of money to pay your elected official to take away your rights and to get a corporate free pass from being responsible for the damage they cause. What you don’t see is how your elected officials use your rights as leverage to get more and more money from the lobbyists for reelection campaigns. That’s a total of $1.7 Billion being spent to buy influence from your elected officials.

“In addition to campaign contributions to elected officials and candidates, companies, labor unions, and other organizations spend billions of dollars each year to lobby Congress and federal agencies. Some special interests retain lobbying firms, many of them located along Washington's legendary K Street; others have lobbyists working in-house. We've got totals spent on lobbying, beginning in 1998, for everyone from AAI Corp. to Zurich Financial.”

In the case of the Food and Drug Administration the experts they rely on work for the drug companies or earn money speaking to your doctor.  This system of regulation is supposed to work by doctors sending in reports about bad reactions from taking those morning meds. Ask your doctor how often he’s sent in a report. You’ll be surprised that many have never done so. And that’s a problem with the research and the reporting of adverse affects that create a basis for a warning. You aren’t going to get the warning because they are too busy practicing clinical medicine to file the reports; so the drug box warnings or those you might hear from your physician are woefully inadequate. And if you think the research done by the pharmaceutical industry is complete and always fully filed with the FDA, think again. It’s not. Remember the Tobacco Institute, the research arm of the tobacco industry and its lobbyists? We found out years later they were created and funded by those companies make billions from selling you cancer sticks. The role of the Tobacco Institute was to create research that could be used for men to take an oath and to say there was no link between smoking cigarettes and lung cancer. Okay, now you understand and can draw the analogy to the FDA and some of the research being turned over to the FDA. I’m not saying the FDA is anything like the Tobacco Institute, but I am saying pharmaceutical company research is designed to prop up stock prices before it does anything to help you the consumer.

8.       Won’t the Courts protect us?

<