Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 552 and ask for its immediate consideration. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to my friend, the gentleman from…
Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 552 and ask for its immediate consideration.
Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to my friend, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume.
During consideration of this resolution, all time is yielded for the purposes of debate only.
Mr. Speaker, the resolution before us is a fair and open rule that allowed every single Member of this body to offer any amendment that they wished to debate after simply having it preprinted in the Congressional Record. On March 4, the Committee on Rules publicly notified Members of the possibility that it may report a rule to give every Member of Congress an opportunity to have their amendment heard on the House Floor, giving Members ample time to draft and submit their amendments for consideration.
The rule also provides one hour of general debate, equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking member of the Committee on the Judiciary, and allows the amendment in the nature of a substitute to be considered an original bill for the purpose of amendment, and that it shall be considered as read.
The rule waives all points of order against the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute and provides that only the authoring Member or a designee may offer a preprinted amendment. Finally, the rule provides the minority with one motion to recommit either with or without instructions.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the rule for H.R. 339, the Personal Responsibility and Food Consumption Act. This bill is common sense legislation that requires courts to dismiss frivolous lawsuits seeking damages for injuries resulting from obesity and its attendant health problems that are filed against the manufacturers, distributors, sellers, marketers, and advertisers of any food product by a claimant or their spouse, parent, or child. That is, simply put, what this bill does, and I would like to congratulate our chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) and the bill's sponsor, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Keller) for their hard work in bringing this legislation to the floor for its consideration today.
Despite its opponents' claims to the contrary, what this bill does not do is to relieve manufacturers of their existing Federal and State responsibilities for manufacturing, marketing, distributing, advertising, labeling, or selling their products, nor does it affect existing State laws against deceptive trade practices or lawsuits filed for the relief of claimants who become sick from tainted food products. This bill is a carefully crafted bill to address a specific problem: to put an end to frivolous lawsuits that have been filed against the lawful and productive food services industry, an industry that provides 12 million Americans with jobs and is the Nation's largest private sector employer. And, it accomplishes this while protecting all of the other rights currently given to consumers.
This bill simply codifies the current tort law of every State in America that already has preventive injury claims based on obesity and makes permanent what a recent Gallup poll has shown that 89 percent of Americans already knew: that lawsuits against the food industry are an attempt by the trial bar to make an end-run around our Nation's established democratic process through litigation. H.R. 339 creates a narrow, national solution to the problem of these costly and wasteful lawsuits, and establishes in Federal law
the simple concept that consumers, not the plaintiffs' bar or a government agency, shall have the right to choose what they eat.
Every Member of this Chamber understands that obesity and the greater health problems that it causes, such as heart disease and diabetes, is a dangerous and growing problem to America. Over the last 20 years, obesity rates have increased by more than 60 percent among adults, and the rate of increase in obesity among young people has risen even more rapidly. To address this problem, President Bush has demonstrated his leadership by providing funds in his budget for general health promotion activities, including efforts to educate the public on preventing diabetes and obesity. President Bush has also outlined a fitness challenge to all Americans by asking adults all across America to get at least 30 minutes of physical activity each day, for children and teenagers to get at least 60 minutes of physical activity each day, and for parents to commit to family activities that revolve around physical activity.
But the American people understand that fitness, health, and well- being is not something that can be legislated, nor something that lawyers can sue for. A commitment to a healthy lifestyle is something that everyone must make for themselves, and it is a matter of personal responsibility. People all across this country understand that since 2002, trial lawyers have been sizing up the deep pockets of the food industry and are ready to pounce upon them when they see a golden opportunity to reap billions of dollars for themselves by filing these lawsuits against the productive food industry.
John Bahnzaf, one of the lead litigators of these frivolous suits, has publicly announced that his goal is to ``open the floodgates'' of the litigation against the food industry because, he says, ``Somewhere there is going to be a judge and a jury that will buy this, and once we get the first verdict, as we did with tobacco, it will open up the floodgates.'' All it will take to do irreparable harm to consumers, the economy, and millions of jobs is just one judge making a nonsense opinion by falling victim to what the trial lawyers wish to do. I believe it is Congress's obligation to allow commerce to proceed by preventing these suits from wasting the time of our courts and the resources of a lawful industry.
By passing this legislation today, the House will tell consumers, investors, and countless employees of local Mom and Pop burger joints all across America that we care about them and their jobs, and that we will make sure that we will protect them. We will be telling Americans we think that they are smart enough to decide what they choose to put in their own mouth, and we will be helping those everyday working Americans who rely on fast, affordable nutrition in their hectic lives, not by allowing the courts to increase the price of food that they freely choose to eat.
If the House fails to pass this legislation, where will the madness end? Will sit-down restaurants, which some studies have shown often, serve food with a nutritional and caloric content similar to fast food? Will they be next on the trial lawyers' hit list? Will trial lawyers target chicken producers who supply countless moms across America with the raw materials for homemade fried chicken, or the beef producers who conspire to provide them with raw ingredients for fattening homemade meatloaf? Or will they simply wait for the next fad diet trend to come along and go after whoever is producing the unfashionable food of the moment?
Mr. Speaker, there is a cure to the obesity problem in America. By taking the road to reducing the medical costs associated with obesity is the right way to do it, not in the courtroom. It begins when Americans decide to leave a little bit on their dinner plate and to run that extra mile. It begins when a parent decides to take an active role in their child's life and coaches their son or their daughter's Little League team. It begins the next time you or I step up to the counter and order the salad, not the extra cheese pizza. But that should be our choice as Americans, because we know best that we make better decisions than the government or than trial lawyers can make for us. These are decisions that Americans can and should make for themselves. Unlike the opponents of this bill, I trust the American people and believe that Americans are smart enough to make these decisions for themselves.
Mr. Speaker, I support this rule, and I support the well-crafted underlying bill of the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Keller).
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, a good number of Members of Congress spend a lot of time trying to promote health and fitness and worthiness, and one of those Members is with us today. He is the chairman of the Committee on Rules, from San Dimas, California.
Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier).
(Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney), the chairman of the Committee on House Administration.
Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Orlando, Florida (Mr. Keller), the original sponsor of the bill.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to notify my colleague that we do not have any further speakers at this time, and I would entertain him to please feel free to run down that time and then I will choose to close.
Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. Speaker, I believe we had an open rule last week.
I thank the gentleman for allowing me to respond. The Committee on Rules, when we file the rule and when we prepare these documents ahead of time, we notify every Member of Congress of our intent to have a meeting at the Committee on Rules to consider a subject. We ask them to please preprint those things that would be necessary. We ask every Member to please work with legislative staff who would help in preparing those documents to make sure that they are in order, would be made in order under the rule, under the rules of this House, and we believe we are trying to do things to move legislation forward, allow time just as we have done here, notify people ahead of time.
One of the things about this process is that for years and years the House has worked off Jeffersonian rules. We have a Speaker who is up here. We have a parliamentarian. We have people who make decisions about what is right and what is wrong and what is fair and what is not, and we believe what we have done here today from March 4 was said here on the floor of the House, all Members of Congress----
Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman would yield, the answer is no.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
(Mr. SESSIONS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks, and include extraneous material.)
Mr. Speaker, this House has, in the 8 years I have served in it had debate after debate, hours on the floor, to make sure that we discuss the issues that are of relevance and important to the American public, but these same things also take place, the debates, in our committee system, and committees hold hearings. Committees go around the country to hear testimony from people about issues like obesity, like prescription drugs, like health care, that are important to the American public and to our health and to our safety.
Mr. Speaker, these issues about obesity and about what the answer would be, we hear from the trial lawyers that they want to open up the floodgates, and we hear from people who are engaged from the nutritional side talking about how better labeling would be good or how food that is served to our children should be leaner and have less fat. We have heard from people like Dr. Kenneth Cooper from Dallas, Texas, talk about how our children need more physical fitness and to be more active. All of these things have contributed to a part of what this bill is about.
Mr. Speaker, I will include in the Record at this point the testimony of Dr. Gerard Musante, who is the founder of the Structure House, before the Senate Subcommittee on Administrative Oversight and the Courts on October 16.
Testimony of Dr. Gerard Musante
Good afternoon, Chairman Sessions and Honorable members of
the Subcommittee on Administrative Oversight and the Courts.
I am Dr. Gerard J. Musante and I appreciate the opportunity
to appear before you today. I have been called here to share
my expertise and educated opinion on the importance of
personal responsibility in food consumption in the United
States. This lesson is one I have been learning about and
teaching for more than 30 years to those who battle moderate
to morbid obesity--a lesson that emphasizes the criticality
of taking responsibility for one's own food choices. I am
testifying before you today because I am concerned about the
direction in which today's obesity discourse is headed. We
cannot continue to blame any one industry or any one
restaurant for the nation's obesity epidemic. Instead, we
must work together as a nation to address this complex issue,
and the first step is to put the responsibility back into the
hands of individuals.
As a clinical psychologist with training at Duke University
Medical Center and The University of Tennessee, I have worked
for more than 30 years with thousands of obese patients. I
have dedicated my career to helping Americans fight obesity.
My personal road, which included the loss and maintenance of
50 of my own pounds, began when I undertook the study of
obesity as a faculty member in the Department of Psychiatry
at Duke University Medical Center. There, I began developing
an evidenced-based, cognitive-behavioral approach to weight
loss and lifestyle change. I continue to serve Duke
University Medical Center as a Consulting Professor in the
Department of Psychiatry. Since the early 1970's, I have
published research studies on obesity and have made
presentations at conferences regarding obesity and the
psychological aspects of weight management. Today, I continue
my work at Structure House--a residential weight loss
facility in Durham, North Carolina--where participants come
from around the country and the world to learn about managing
their relationship with food. Participants lose significant
amounts of weight while both improving various medical
parameters and learning how to control and take
responsibility for their own food choices. Our significant
experience at Structure House has provided us with a unique
understanding of the national obesity epidemic.
Some of the lessons I teach my patients are examples of how
we can encourage Americans to take personal responsibility
for health and weight maintenance. As I tell my participants,
managing a healthy lifestyle and a healthy weight certainly
are not easy to do. Controlling an obesity or weight problem
takes steadfast dedication, training and self-awareness.
Therefore, I give my patients the tools they need to
eventually make healthy food choices as we best know it.
Nutrition classes, psychological understanding of their
relationship with food, physical fitness training and
education are tools that Structure House participants learn,
enabling them to make sensible food choices. As you know, the
obesity rates in this country are alarming. The Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention have recognized obesity and
general lack of physical fitness as the nation's fastest-
growing health threat. Approximately 127 million adults in
the United States are overweight, 60 million are obese and 9
million are severely obese. The country's childhood obesity
rates are on a similar course to its adult rates, as well as
increases in type II diabetes. Fortunately Americans are
finally recognizing the problem. Unfortunately, many are
taking the wrong approaches to combating this issue.
Lawsuits are pointing fingers at the food industry in an
attempt to curb the nation's obesity epidemic. These lawsuits
do nothing but enable consumers to feel powerless in a battle
for maintaining one's own personal health. The truth is, we
as consumers have control over the food choices we make, and
we must issue our better judgment when making these
decisions. Negative lifestyle choices cause obesity, not a
trip to a fast food restaurant or a cookie high in trans fat.
Certainly we live in a litigious society. Our understanding
of psychological issues tells us that when people feel
frustrated and powerless, they lash out and seek reasons for
their perceived failure. They feel the victim and look for
the deep pockets to pay. Unfortunately, this has become part
of our culture, but the issue is far too comprehensive to lay
blame on any single food marketer or manufacturer. These
industries should not be demonized for providing goods and
services demanded by our society.
Rather than assigning blame, we need to work together
toward dealing effectively with obesity on a national level.
Furthermore, if we were to start with one industry, where
would we stop? For example, a recent article in the Harvard
Law Review suggests that there is a link between obesity and
``preference manipulation,'' which means advertising. Should
we consider suing the field of advertising next? Should we do
away with all advertising and all food commercials at half
time? We need to understand that this is a multi-faceted
problem and there are many influences that play a part. While
our parents, our environment, social and psychological
factors all impact our food choices, can we blame them for
our own poor decisions as it relates to our personal health
and weight? For example, a recent study presented at the
American Psychological Association conference showed that
when parents change how the whole family eats and offer
children wholesome rewards for not being couch potatoes,
obese children shed pounds quickly. Should we bring lawsuits
against parents that don't provide this proper direction?
Similarly, Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston recently
reported in ``Pediatrics'' that children who diet may
actually gain weight in the long run, perhaps because of
metabolic changes, but also likely because they resort to
binge eating as a result of the dieting. Do we sue the parent
for permitting their children to diet?
From an environmental standpoint, there are still more
outside influences that could be erroneously blamed for the
nation's obesity epidemic. The Center for Disease Control has
found that there is a direct correlation between television
watching and obesity among children. The more TV watched, the
more likely the children would be overweight. Should we sue
the television industry, the networks, cable, the television
manufacturers or the parents that permit this? And now we
have internet surfing and computer games. Where does it stop?
School systems are eliminating required physical education--
are we to also sue the school systems that do not require
these courses?
Throw social influences into the mix and we have a whole
new set of causes for obesity. Another recent study in
``Appetite'' indicated that social norms can affect
quantitative ratings of internal states such as hunger. This
means that other people's hunger levels around us can affect
our own eating habits. Are we to blame the individuals who
are eating in our presence for our own weight problems? As
evidenced in these studies, we cannot blame any one
influencing factor for the obesity epidemic that plagues our
nation. Through working with obese patients, I have learned
that the worst thing one can do is to blame an outside force
to get themselves ``off the hook,'' to say it's not their
fault, and that they are a victim. To do this can bring about
feelings of helplessness and then resignation. Directing
blame or causality outside of oneself allows the individual
not to accept responsibility and perhaps even to feel
helpless and hopeless. ``The dog ate my homework'' and ``the
devil made me do it'' allows the individual not to take
serious steps toward correction because they believe these
steps are not within their power. We must take personal
responsibility for our choices.
What does it mean to take personal responsibility for food
consumption? it means making food choices that are not
detrimental to your health, and not blaming others for the
choices we make. Ultimately, Americans generally become obese
by taking in more calories than they expend. But certainly
there are an increasing number of reasons why Americans are
doing so producing rising obesity rates. Some individuals
lack self-awareness and overindulge in food ever more so
because of psychological reasons. Others do not devote enough
time to physical activity, which becomes increasingly
difficult to do in our society. Others lack education or
awareness as it relates to nutrition and/or physical activity
particularly in view of lessened exposure to this
information. And still others may have a more efficient
metabolism or hormonal deficiencies. In short, honorable
members of the Subcommittee, there is yet much to learn about
this problem.
Congress has rightly recognized the danger of allowing
Americans to continue blaming others for the obesity
epidemic. It is imperative that we prevent lawsuits from
being filed against any industry for answering consumer
demands. The fact that we are addressing the issue here today
is a step in the right direction. No industry is to blame and
should not be charged with solving America's obesity problem.
Rather than pointing fingers, we should be working together
on a national level to address the importance of personal
responsibility in food consumption. The people who come to
Structure House have a unique opportunity to learn these
lessons, but they are only a select few. These lessons need
to be encouraged on a national level, from an early age--in
schools, homes and through national legislation that prevents
passing this responsibility onto the food or other related
industries. In closing, I'd like to highlight the fact that
personal responsibility is one of the key components that I
teach my patients in their battle against obesity. This
approach has allowed me to empower more than 10,000 Americans
to embrace improved health. I urge you to consider how this
type of approach could affect the obesity epidemic on a
national level. By encouraging Americans to take personal
responsibility for their health by limiting frivolous
lawsuits against the food industry, we can put the power back
into the hands of the consumers. This is a critical first
step on the road toward addressing our nation's complex
obesity epidemic.
For years, I have seen presidents call for ``economic
summits.'' I urge that we consider an ``obesity summit.'' Let
me suggest instead of demonizing industries that we bring
everyone to the table--representatives in the health care
industry, advertising, restaurants, Hollywood, school
systems, parent groups, the soft drink industry, and the
bottling industry. Instead of squandering resources in
defending needless lawsuits by pointing fingers, let's make
everyone part of the solution. Let us encourage a national
obesity summit where all the players are asked to come to the
table and pledge their considerable resources toward creating
a national mind set toward solving this problem.
That would be in the interest of the American people.
I feel privileged to be a part of the Subcommittee's
efforts. I want to thank you for allowing me to testify here
before you today and I will now be glad to answer any
questions.
Mr. Speaker, let me tell my colleagues what he said. He is a gentleman who has worked for 30 years on obesity in this country, and he said, ``Through working with obese patients, I have learned that the worst thing one can do is to blame an outside force to get themselves `off the hook,' to say it's not their fault, and that they are a victim. Congress has rightly recognized the danger of allowing Americans to continue blaming others for the obesity epidemic. It is imperative that we prevent lawsuits from being filed against any industry for answering consumer demands. The fact that we are addressing the issue here today is a step in the right direction.''
Mr. Speaker, I will tell my colleagues that the Republican House and the Republican Senate are addressing the issues. We are doing those things that not only Members find of interest to people back home, but also in the interest of what is the right thing for America to do.
I feel like what we are doing today is right in line with what all 50 States have and that is a law that says we will not take these fast food restaurants to task, to go and have a lawsuit against them, and the Federal Government, we, as members of Congress, are going to affirm that, to avoid a problem before it becomes one. We have been warned about the problems. We are trying to do aggressive things and the right thing for it.
I support this rule. I support this underlying legislation, and I think that it will win overwhelmingly because this is the best answer.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.
The previous question was ordered.