Our neighboring state of Maryland: Common-sense protections, or an increasingly repressive nanny state?
To be sure, the First State was almost first to impose a statewide indoor smoking ban (California did so many years earlier), but Delaware has generally lagged behind other states - notably Maryland - in considering and/or implementing what one might call progressive, protective legislation.
And the process exposes what one might call philosophical inconsistencies: For example, a proposal to criminalize the sale of energy drinks to minors, yet decriminalize the possession and use of small amounts of marijuana (although not for minors)?
Let's be blunt: To the extent that such things can be judged ideologically, conservatives seem to be okay with tobacco, and liberals, with marijuana. Libertarians, presumably, are okay with both. (Personally, I think the world would be a better place with neither!) As I've posted earlier, this also illustrates the relative fluidity of ideological labels: In the earlier 1970's, some "liberal" administrations in public high schools set up smoking areas for students, rationalizing that it removed the smoke from restrooms where non-smokers wouldn't have to inhale; and "conservative" administrations resisted this movement.
Anyway, read this article about Maryland's legislators from The WASHINGTON POST and tell me what you think---
As one could easily guess, I would/do categorize Maryland to be the land of Mary Poppins....it's bad when Progressives run a state and FAR worse when Progressive Poppins' run the entire country.
Maryland is indeed run by Progressives...hopefully those who want to stay in that state (many are fleeing the high taxation/Nanny State) will vote for Dan Bongino.
Mon, Apr 14, 2014 9:11am
I am thankful I do not have many years left. I really do not want to witness much more of the enslavement of Americans. The fact that it is being done under the “progress” label is most disturbing.
Governmental intrusion into our basic lives used to be called “fascist”, “Stalinist “or “Nazism”. Now those same politicians have changed the label to “progressives”. The media have bought into this, further deluding the voters. As the government increases its involvement in health insurance, government will attempt to justify their involvement with the “reduction of cost” argument.
The only progress being made is the progress toward a total erosion of our freedom to make life choices. That is never good.
Mon, Apr 14, 2014 9:58am
This is where conservatives totally fall off the edge of the world... Did anyone actually read the bills that were passed?
increasing the minimum wage,
passing civil rights protections for transgender
ban the Vaportini,
prohibit the retail sale of Everclear, (toxic grain alcohol)
Sorry. But the complainers are in the minority, and since they themselves can't gain any traction for passing responsible legislation, they have to complain about the responsible legislation that does get passed.... What losers.
Everyone complains about a new rule. If you don't believe me just relive your own past elementary educational experiences when the teacher would announce a new rule... Groans... lol.
But, I sure Jim and Allan can remember when the nanny state argument was applied to:
wearing seat belts.
putting limits on blood alcohol content
requiring proof of automobile insurance
banning smoking in public places including airplanes
require helmets for bicycles (but not Del. motorcycles lol)
requiring warnings on cigarette packs
limiting alcohol sales on Sundays
Setting lower speed limits in residential and business areas
Requiring headlights, taillights, and horns to be installed on every vehicle
Requiring trucks to rest at mandatory intervals
Requiring ethanol in gasoline
Requiring children under a certain age to be in car seats
Banning hand held phones while driving.
Anyone who thinks those laws' instigators were (let me quote here).... " “fascist”, “Stalinist “or “Nazism”." have not only fallen off the edge of the earth, but have fallen far past the outer reaches of the orb cloud.
So let us look at those issues that did NOT pass? Remember every state legislature has horrendous pieces of legislation offered yearly that never see the light of day, ... so doing what this article appears to do, push the nanny state philosophy on bills that never made it out of committee, is really being written by someone completely unfamiliar with how state house politics actually work...
After all, Delaware is the only single state in the entire union, that has zero, and I repeat, zero dumb pieces of legislation that ever make it out of committee and onto the floor for debate.. Oops... Just looked over the roster of Tuesday... Looks like I was wrong on that one... lol.
So here is what did NOT get passed but was still mentioned in that article...
forbidding fast-food restaurants and other such outlets from serving any beverage except bottled water or low-fat milk with young children's packaged meals ...
a proposed ban on the sale of highly caffeinated energy drinks..
a proposal to ban electronic cigarettes
bills to extend smoking bans to parks, public playgrounds, vehicles with a child present... or allow renters to ban use of smoking in their rental properties.
requires day-care centers to serve only low-fat or skim milk and promote limits on how much television children can watch.
provide free breakfast and lunch for all students — regardless of their families’ income — in public schools with high levels of poverty.
All of those make ration sense, just as banning smoking (picked up by Allan) makes rational sense...
Conservative who extol the imaginary "Nanny State" are forgetting the number one principle of FREEDOM... You are allowed to do what you want only... AS LONG AS IT DOES NOT HURT SOMEONE ELSE...
If you sell energy drinks to minors, and it kills them, what the sense in that?
If we imprisoned every single person who complained about a nanny state, we wouldn't have anyone complaining about it any more... The nanny state is an argument only for losers.
And anyone deriding living under a Mary Poppins legacy, obviously has not read the book or seen the movie... They would know that life under Mary Poppins is actually... pretty cool...
Mon, Apr 14, 2014 10:09am
I use Everclear as a cleaning agent. I would never drink it!
But I would like a good Vaportini!
Remember few of these fascist laws take effect the first time they are tried. But as you pointed out in your list, they do win after constant exposure.
Mon, Apr 14, 2014 11:49am
It was the same Nanny-state mentality of Progressives (along with religious Progressive zealots) who were responsible for the 18th Amendment to the Constitution (Prohibition).
Progressives believe they know best and believe the "common man/woman" are too stupid to make decisions for themselves...
How about we keep government OUT of the "bedroom", out of the "uterus" and out of our lives...minus the few portions government (via the Constitution) is supposed to exist (defense of the country and protection of US citizens).
The same group who claim the "right" to kill a baby, "right" to government health-care INSURANCE/tax and the right to smoke pot want to take away other's freedom to drink a soda, eat junk food, smoke a tobacco cigarette, select your own health-care, or take care of your own retirement fund...hypocrites.
Another excellent example of this hypocrisy is Diane Feinstein...many years ago she made it illegal for anyone in her district to carry a concealed weapon. Yet, she alone was able to carry.
The ones making up these laws DO NOT obey/live by the same laws they pass...they have special rules that exempt them from laws forced upon us by them. Vote these long-term reps out in 2014/2016.
Orwell summed it up well in Animal Farm, "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."
Mon, Apr 14, 2014 12:00pm
Funny (and not funny ha-ha)...everything in kavips' Progressive list of laws is ANTI-CHOICE!
Seems Progressives are only pro-choice when it comes to abortions.
Mon, Apr 14, 2014 4:14pm
Duh... unlike abortions, everything is anti choice because it is dangerous not to have them... Like brakes on a car...
Shows that conservatives have fallen so far, they no longer think straight... But, Earl misses a big distinction... When you get rid of abortions, someone has to carry the baby... When you mandate no texting and driving, everyone still has a choice of whether to choose to risk being illegal or not....
So, to show how Earl turns an argument into something totally ridiculous,,, Lol.. I guess you are now implying conservatives are against feeding children milk; and for insisting they should all have Big Gulps instead....
Mon, Apr 14, 2014 4:18pm
Going back to Prohibition... Conservatives and religious nuts, just like the Conservatives of today, were the ones responsible for Prohibition. The Progressives tended to all be found in the speakeasies.... Don't think you'd find any evangelical pastors there...
Mon, Apr 14, 2014 5:06pm
kavips: Your counter-points are ridiculous...abortions are safe but soda is dangerous? And no it wasn't Conservatives who who pushed Prohibition on the nation...Progressives were in control of government during that time period and now (just like then) Progressives want to tell everyone else how to live. I don't doubt for a second your premise that the hypocritical Progressives were in the speak-easies drinking bathtub gin...just like Sen. Feinstein was the only "special case" able to carry a weapon when she forbid all others the right.
Mon, Apr 14, 2014 7:39pm
JimH: Fear not. The TEA party is coming to the rescue!
Mon, Apr 14, 2014 8:59pm
Actually Earl. have you ever had an abortion? They're safe if not done in a back alley.
And soda... are you so completely out of the loop you have no idea of how bad it is?
And next time, before trying to sound like an expert on abortion... have one!
Mon, Apr 14, 2014 9:13pm
Earl... You are again making stuff up; probably because you are livid and upset that Obama is really doing well and Obamacare is turning into a really super great program like Medicare and Social Security....
Read Diane's account .... she used to carry a gun but then decided not to.. and unlike you, she came across her boss and co-workers murdered. Stuck her finger in the bullet hole to check for a pulse. Yes, she passed the greatest anti gun piece of legislation this nation has yet to see.... If citizens in San Fran want to ban guns. They should... Guns are dangerous toys in the hands of stupid people. America is full of stupid people. From the Supreme Court decisions being made in regards to free speech and campaign finance, it is rather obvious that the Supreme Court will eventually support a 2nd amendment with tight restrictions, even if only after several current justices retire...
The link shows Earl is doing his crazy talk... Like making stuff up out of thin air about Diane... Not a good thing to do on a news radio blog, where people KNOW how to find out the truth... lol.
Mon, Apr 14, 2014 10:51pm
kavips: Sorry but I'm not lying...once she became Senator Dianne Feinstein she no longer had a concealed carry permit… because she no longer needs one. As a United States Senator, she has access to armed security. But when she someday exits office, does anyone wonder if her home will be without any kind of arms on the premises?
Mon, Apr 14, 2014 11:11pm
kavips: No, I have not had an abortion but I do know women who have had them and suffered the physical, mental and spiritual repercussions from having an abortion...I also have quite a few friends who are doctors and give their stories of ER visits from young and older women who have had severe bleeding and trauma...so don't lecture me on not knowing medical "safety" of an abortion simply because I personally never had an abortion...BTW, medical journals and scientific evidence support/document quite a few serious health effects for women who have elective abortions due to (in addition to the procedure itself) the dramatic drop in hormones in the female body. You really should try some open-minded research and apply a bit of critical thinking to your opinions.
I don't have lung cancer either but know a lot about the disease and know how to better avoid it... would I really be any more of an "expert" if I had decided to smoke six packs of unfiltered Camels for the past twenty years?
"A new study pointing to a link between breast cancer and abortion among Chinese women may breathe new life into a debate over a long-contentious issue which both sides have accused the other of exploiting to promote its cause.
The meta-analysis by Chinese researchers, published in the peer-reviewed journal Cancer Causes and Control, found a 44 percent increased breast cancer risk after an abortion. It also found that the risk grew significantly with subsequent abortions – a 76 percent increase after two abortions, 89 percent after three.
“In summary, the most important implication of this study is that IA [induced abortion] was significantly associated with an increased risk of breast cancer among Chinese females, and the risk of breast cancer increases as the number of IA increases,” said the authors, from the Tianjin Medical University Cancer Hospital’s epidemiology and biostatistics department.
Mike from Delaware
Tue, Apr 15, 2014 8:41am
This was a case of politics making strange bedfellows, conservative churches with progressive politicians:
In the early 19th century, Protestants -
including Methodists, Baptists,
and Presbyterians - took part in revivals to convert
new followers to Christ to overcome corruption
in the world [at this point in time, the Methodist Church was the largest Protestant denomination in the US]. In their eyes, drinking was part
of that corruption. They became advocates for
temperance, which is defined as personal self-restraint
or abstinence from alcohol. At this
time, temperance advocates were not calling for
legal prohibition of alcohol, but rather asking
citizens to choose to abstain from its use. [These were conservative denominations back then vs. their modern counterparts].
Many Protestant churches joined forces with
the Anti-Saloon League (ASL). The ASL began
as a state organization in Ohio in 1893, and in
1895, Anti-Saloon Leagues across the country
came together to form the nation’s leading
lobbying group for anti-alcohol legislation.
At their inception, they advocated not only
for temperance, but for laws suppressing the rights of saloon owners to do business. By the
early 1900s, the ASL was becoming a major
Prohibition succeeded in large part when
the ASL was able to apply political pressure to
intimidate politicians. The ideas used to justify a
nationwide legal ban on the sale, manufacture,
and transport of alcohol can be understood in
the context of progressivism. Progressivism
was a significant shift away from the traditional
American understanding of the purpose
of government to that point. The Founders
believed citizens could best pursue happiness
if government was limited to protecting the
life, liberty, and property of individuals. They
believed people were naturally flawed, and
structured government so that people's inherent
self-interest would lead officials to check one
another's attempts to exercise more power than
the Constitution allows.
Unlike the framers of the
Constitution, Progressives believed that man's
nature can, and should be bettered by enlightened
rulers. Therefore, they believed, government
should provide citizens with the environment
and the means to improve themselves through
government-sponsored programs and policies as
well as economic redistribution.
The Progressive movement successfully
enacted a host of constitutional changes
which increased the power of the national
government. The 18th Amendment banned the
manufacture, sale, or transport of intoxicating
beverages and the Volstead Act codified it in
U.S. law. The Sixteenth Amendment authorized
the national government to tax incomes for the
first time ever. The Seventeenth Amendment
provided for the direct election of U.S.
Senators, diminishing the power of the states to
influence national laws in Congress. The 19th
Amendment barred states from denying female
citizens the right to vote in federal elections.
The fundamentalist / Pentecostal churches too, were and still are, anti-alchohol. They were much smaller churches then and didn't seem to get into politics in a large way until the Scopes Monkey Trial in 1925, but they too were supporters of Prohibition.
So that was a case of politics making for strange bedfellows, progressives and conservative Christians. I believe those churches had the right idea in the beginning [late 1800's], for each individual in seeking God to choose on their own to forgo liquor, but sadly succumbed to making it a political issue [early 20th century].
Tue, Apr 15, 2014 9:20am
I agree with you...the religious groups had good intentions, but those intentions were morphed into a giant Progressive/Federal government program that crashed & burned...one would hope a lesson was learned by this experiment in social control of the entire country.
The Federal government is supposed to protect our Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness...not be our Nanny.
Mike from Delaware
Tue, Apr 15, 2014 10:34am
EarlGrey: I agree, but there are aspects of life today, far different from colonial days, where that extra help might be needed. The elderly affording medical care in old age is an easy example. The key is finding the right things to help with.
The other problem is there probably are some things today the government is doing that government shouldn't be, but it can't be changed overnight; this is the TEA party's biggest Achilles Heel as Tea party folks, unlike their liberal counterparts, don't do things in small steps, but the TEA folks want the whole enchilada in one fell swoop. So the TEA party's programs tend to hurt people, and that's why the TEA folks lose elections.
Take Social Security for example. The TEA/G.O.P. hate that program of FDR's New Deal, but you just can't stop it overnight, because millions of folks have banked their golden years on it. But for the next generation, the millenials who still have 40 years to work, sure. start some new thing for them [the bank 401K plan you and I have discussed previously for example], then in 30-35 years, as the ends of the Baby Boomers have passed on to their eternal destiny, the "new" program would be ready to go for this next group of elderly, while providing today's elderly [Boomers and the tail-end of the Greatest Generation who are still among us] with the Social Security they've paid for, and are counting on.
I NEVER hear ANY TEA/G.O.P. party candidate say such things.
If Mrpizza had his way, he'd cancel all fed programs tomorrow other than military. That's not workable. Sure, let's gut the Education Department of the Fed, and other things like that, but the socal programs that feed and help many poor folks just can't be stopped overnight. Before that can happen, we've got to have plenty of jobs for people to go to, so they can support themselves. Simple fixes don't do the job. This stuff is layered and will require small steps moving the ball towards the goal of getting government out of stuff it doesn't need to be doing.
Sadly the TEA/G.O.P. folks lack that sort of foresight and patience.
Kavips said an important thing that both liberal and conservatives, whites and blacks, males and females all forget today: "The number one principle of FREEDOM... You are allowed to do what you want only... AS LONG AS IT DOES NOT HURT SOMEONE ELSE..."
Tue, Apr 15, 2014 10:56am
Mike: I know that you are a big fan of the Progressive presidents (FDR, Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson)...so are there any non-Progressives for whom you would actually vote?
As you have probably figured out, I'm not a very big fan of the Progressive/Big Govt. type leaders and have grown to really admire all the more President Lincoln, Calvin Coolidge, and Ronald Reagan.
If Hillary decides (or it's decided for her) not to run in 2016, would you vote for any Republican or Democrat who is not a Progressive/Big Govt. type?... Would you consider someone like Rick Perry, if he's able to make sense in the debates this time around? I still like the idea of electing a governor for president...one who has done a good job for their state and shown practical examples of leadership. That, IMHO, is the biggest weakness for Ted Cruz and Rand Paul...neither one has run anything.
Mike from Delaware
Tue, Apr 15, 2014 1:15pm
I like Rick Perry, and would watch him with much interest, but I'd still need to hear him say it loud and clearly that for those of us 55+ we won't get short-sheeted in terms of Social Security.
Mike from Delaware
Tue, Apr 15, 2014 1:25pm
EarlGrey: I agree that being a successful governor is a good prerequisite for being President.
As I said, I do like Rick Perry and would seriously consider voting for him IF he made it very clear that those of us 55+ would not see our Social Security benefits cut, or the age when we can retire raised.
I'm sure he's creative enough to come up with a plan for the kids, but again, TEA/G.O.P. folks tend to want a one-size-fits-all solution, and in the case of Social Security, that doesn't work. So send him yours and my plan for fixing that problem; maybe he'd use it. Maybe he'd call it the EarlGrey plan -a good tea party name, works for me.
Tue, Apr 15, 2014 1:37pm
Sounds good Mike...I thing Perry has done a pretty good job as governor of the Republic of Texas and believe he could address Social Security, manufacturing (as Biden would say...that 3-letter word J-O-B-S) and Immigration better than most candidates...but he needs to polish his speaking/communication skills to play in the "big league".
Mike from Delaware
Tue, Apr 15, 2014 3:22pm
EarlGrey: I agree. Hopefully Governor Perry is getting help in that department.
I must have missed that specific "Biden Moment", that 3-lettered word, J-O-B-S. Of course that's better than the OTHER 4 lettered word he shouted into that microphone; OK actually that was a 7-lettered word counting the suffix ing - haha !
I sure hope he's figured it out that he's go NO chance at winning the Presidency in 2016, and spare Delaware further embarrassment.
Tue, Apr 15, 2014 8:06pm
I propose a Cruz/Paul ticket for 2016.
Tue, Apr 15, 2014 9:14pm
Here's a short Biden-ism: Three letter word...j-o-b-s.
Tue, Apr 15, 2014 10:02pm
Actually, if Biden became president, the whole country could end up like Job.
Mike from Delaware
Wed, Apr 16, 2014 7:53am
EarlGrey: thanks for the link of Biden, I'm sure Joe's buddy Barack told Joe later: A Joe, Jobs is a 4 letter word, if you don't believe me, look it up in the dictionary. Look Joe, I'd rather you didn't quote me, especially if you're going to make me look stupid, after all I'm an Ivy Leaguer.
Wed, Apr 16, 2014 9:33am
You mean the "Ivy Leaguer" who can't spell R-E-S-P-E-C-T ;)
Mike from Delaware
Wed, Apr 16, 2014 10:23am
Yep, the same "Ivy Leaguer" heh heh. That's why he doesn't ad lib and tries to always use a teleprompter, because when he does try to be cool and "wing it" he finds himself at the same level as his former Scranton now Delawarean scrapper, VP Biden.
Add your comment: Attention: In an attempt to promote a level of civility and personal
responsibility in blog discussions, we now require you to be a member of
the WDEL Members Only Group in order to post a comment. Your Members
Only Group username and password are required to process your post.
You can join the WDEL Members Only Group for free by clicking here.
If you are already a member but have forgotten your username or password, please
Please register your post with your WDEL Members Only Group username and password below.