Tuesday, July 12, 2011

This Day in California's Nanny State: July 12, 2011

Wow, are nanny-staters busy in California busy this week! Here are some of the lowhighlights:

  • First up, Pacoima state Senator and noted 4th Amendment fan Alex Padilla is at it again. In just the past few months, Padilla has tried to prevent cell phones from being smuggled to prisoners, and to keep people from smoking in their own homes. Now, according to the Sacramento Bee, the Assembly has approved his SB 39, which will ban so-called alcopops (sweet, caffeinated alcoholic beverages like Four Loko and Joose) in the state. While we think these drinks are disgusting, it hardly seems necessary to prevent their importation and sale in the state. But to Padilla and most of the Legislature, the fact that they're sweet and caffeinated means that Californians can't be trusted to drink them responsibly.
  • If she lived in San Diego, she'd be going broke.
  • Second, the San Diego City Council will soon be taking up a proposal to require cat owners to register their pets with the city, and to pay a $25 fee. Because this is San Diego and not San Francisco, the Council is at least openly admitting that the "cat tax" is a way to generate revenue. Nevertheless, we'd have to agree with Councilman, mayoral candidate, and cat tax opponent Carl DeMaio, who said, "We have more pressing issues to tackle than creating a cat tax. I urge the mayor and the City Council to send this flawed idea back to where it belongs — the litter box."
  • And finally, the Bay Citizen reports that San Francisco is not giving up its preposterous crusade against cell phone radiation. Despite the fact that there's, you know, no evidence of a link between cell phones and cancer risk, the city that bans Happy Meals and goldfish is pushing ahead with its effort to require phone retailers to include information on the radiation levels of all of their products. After having their original law struck down by a suit from the wireless industry, the Board of Supervisors is proposing a new requirement that retailers display an information placard telling customers that their phones emit radiation, and that they provide tip sheets on how to reduce radiation exposure.
Those tax dollars sure are working hard for us, aren't they?


  1. But... but... if it saves just one life!...

  2. And even if it doesn't, isn't it worth it to feel like we're saving lives?