62 Comments - GoldCoastConservative - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 10:49 am: Enough Nanny-statism. And shouldn’t the do-gooders feel the least bit akward they they are planning to allow trans-fat laden foods to be served in schools for three years after they would be banned at McDonalds? - RobM - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 10:50 am: Just another law that tells prospective businesses to look elsewhere. I just dont get it. And, since when did it become the government’s job to tell me what I can and cannot order at a restaurant? Why do lawmakers think they need to become our parents? Its government run amok and interfering in our lives once again– and I am a Democrat! - One of the 35 - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 10:53 am: The key here is that trans fats canot be safely consumed in any amounts. In effect, they are poison to your cadiovascular system. They should be banned. - Ray del Camino - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 10:53 am: You can’t order absinthe in a saloon. When big states put pressure on Big Processed Food Inc. it will have to find a way to provide us with healthier, or at least less harmful bland mass-produced food. - Bill - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 10:55 am: Yes. For the reason look at the fat old guys in the caption contest. - Robert - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 10:57 am: I voted No - I’m all for government intervening like a nanny to discourage poor choice, but believe taxation is the way to do it, not banning the behavior outright. Extra tax on products with transfat or charge for a license to sell anything with transfats, but don’t ban it. also - “Most prepacked food would not be covered” - hmmmm…I smell a lobbyist. - Pink Girl - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 11:00 am: @ Ray del Camino, Actually, you can order Absinthe now in the US. - Way Way Down Here - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 11:07 am: Yes. Health care costs. - Both Sides Now - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 11:09 am: As an adult, I don’t appreciate being told what I can and cannot eat. However, I would appreciate being informed of WHAT I am eating. A more practical and sensible solution is requiring all restaurants with more than one permanent location put the basic caloric information on their menus. Then as adults we could make the best choice for ourselves - be it “I’ll choose this meal because it’s the healthiest” or “I’m going to splurge but eat better for dinner”. I think most people would be amazed at the caloric and nutritional content of their food. Legislation such as this would also not be a burden on the small, Mom & Pop, independent diners like D & J or Coney Island, who are less likely to have the resources to determine the caloric content. It would also exempt vendors that are in a location for a short time (think about the cotton candy stand at the Fair or a Festival, and the hot dog cart in a metropolitan area). However, I have no problem with enacting specific healthier standards for school lunches. Maybe we should invite Jamie Oliver to come for a makeover! It doesn’t make sense to feed the kids food that is obviously not healthy at school as well as allow for exemptions for P.E. and then wonder why our children are obese. - 47th Ward - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 11:09 am: No, tobacco is a poison and we don’t ban it. Alcohol too. No need to ban something when warnings might suffice. It’s still a free country, isn’t it? - downstate hack - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 11:09 am: Get the government out of my life. They can’t balance a budget, They can’t control fraud and waste, they can’t agree on almost anything, but they want to tell me what to eat? Give the taxpayers a break and go home. Oh, and following the California example, the only State more broke than Illinois makes a lot of sense. Sorry to vent, but this legislature leadership (both parties) and this governor has lost any and all credibility. - Conservative Veteran - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 11:10 am: I voted no. Each person should be responsible for researching the food that he or she might order, at a restaurant. If someone wants food that includes transfats, he or she should have the right to eat it. The bill is too much government control of businesses. - Louis G. Atsaves - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 11:11 am: Perhaps Nanny Illinois Goverment can answer the following question: You ban transfats product sales but won’t ban tobacco sales Why? Nanny government with no logic or reason. Nanny decides like a tin horn dictator, and that’s that! Tobacco kills too. If Mom packs transfat loaded snacks in junior’s lunchbox for school, is she breaking the law? Or if Mom serves it anyway at home? Does the school call the police? And where are McDonald’s corporate offices located these days? Another example of a “pro-business” environment that Quinn and our legislative leaders chirp about. - wordslinger - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 11:11 am: I voted yes, because it’s a worldwide health movement, and it’s coming anyway. The food and restaurant industries know it and are already making their moves. There are plenty of other options available to them. It’s not an anti-business act, it’s public health act and everyone’s going to be on the train sooner or later. Add it to the list of mandatory seat belts, public smoking bans, etc., that many considered egregious blows against liberty at one point. - heet101 - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 11:13 am: No. If I want to eat spoonfuls of lard every day all day long I should be able to. I don’t need a bunch of people who can’t even manage to do their job to pass balanced budgets telling me how to achieve a balanced diet. - Cheryl44 - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 11:15 am: I’m trying to avoid trans fat and this will make that easier. So yes, ban it. - Jaded - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 11:17 am: No. If they want to force businesses to disclose any use of trans fats in giant letters on a menu or in restaurents so people know what they are eating, then that is one thing, but banning it is over the top. - Louis G. Atsaves - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 11:18 am: Now that Nanny Government is running wild in Illinois let’s ban the following food items: 1. Food with salt in it. 2. Sugary candies, gums. In fact, ban all candies. 3. All liquor products. 4. All soda pop. 5. Anything spicy sold in restaurants or grocery stores. 6. Chocolate. 7. Coffee with artificial stimulants. 8. Drinks that are labeled “power” or artificially keep you awake. 9. Cheeses. 10. Red meat. 11. Hamburgers and sausage meats. 12. Most Breads. 13. Peanuts. 14. All vegetables not grown organically. 15. All meats not raised organically. That should be a good start for our Nannys in Springfield. I’m sure others can add to the list. - Small Town Liberal - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 11:18 am: Yes. The comparison to cigarettes is somewhat valid but I wouldn’t say they’re exactly the same. I’m pretty sure everyone knows how terrible cigarettes are for you, and there are warning labels on every pack. They’re also taxed pretty heavily. Do you think restaurants would go for their food products being taxed like cigarettes? Doubtful. I also doubt they’d appreciate putting a warning label on every container of french fries. - Generation X - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 11:20 am: Absolutely not. If i want to consume unhealthy items that is my choice. I do not want the government overlording over my every step. Sugar isn’t healthy either is that next? - Louis G. Atsaves - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 11:20 am: 16. Artificial sweeteners. 17. Fat in diary products and ice creams. - Amuzing Myself - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 11:23 am: Absolutely not. This is ridiculous. I can see tighter regulations on what our kids are fed at school, but to ban this stuff from restaurants where patrons already have the freedom to vote with their wallets is WAY over-the-top. And putting another cost on restaurant owners in the midst of the current economic mess is pure lunacy. That could only be thought up by some liberal academic with no grasp of reality. Geez. No wonder our state’s such a mess. Someone actually took the time to discuss this, draft legislation, and vote on it. And we wonder why people see the Legislature as a laughing-stock. Shocking. - Louis G. Atsaves - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 11:26 am: 18. Most cereals. - cermak_rd - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 11:30 am: Yes. Trans fats in any significant amount are harmful to the cardiovascular system. They are also highly artificial which makes them different from either alcohol (made by distilling alcohol off fermenting grain) or cigarettes (made from paper & dried tobacco primarily). and heet101, you can still enjoy your spoonfuls of lard. Lard is not a transfat it is a saturated fat, which is not particularly healthful as a food item but much more so than transfats. - Wumpus - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 11:33 am: No, I don’t thik fats should be discriminated against in any matter, regardless of their sexual orientation. Gay, Lesbian, Bi or Transfats deserve the dignity to be consumed. - wordslinger - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 11:36 am: –That could only be thought up by some liberal academic with no grasp of reality.– The Big Heat behind trans fat bans in the United States are the Docs and the corporate human resources profession — the folks who negotiate all those healthcare plans. How liberal they are, I don’t know, but the reality is that the train’s already left the station. Most of the fast-food biggies are already on board, as are big-food manufacturer’s. Once the Docs say your product kills people, you know the lawsuits are coming, and they already have. Business has been adjusting for a while and any action in Illinois is not as groundbreaking as it seems. http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/10_05/b4165067423261.htm - grand old partisan - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 11:38 am: Does anyone else find it completely backward that private restaurants would be required to comply with this law 3 years before public institutions?? - Solomon - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 11:48 am: Absolutely not. Let people make their own choices, or mistakes, or whatever you’d like to call them. - Velda - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 11:54 am: It is healthy legislation, literally… and would be even greater legislation if it applied to the schools like yesterday, (Or before their foods contract was signed by Blago). You are what you eat. - Throwing Stones - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 11:54 am: Absolutely not! Freedom of choice. I am all for healthy living, but people should be able to choose the healthy lifestyle or not. Plus, the popcorn at the movie theatre would just not be the same. - Anonymouse - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 12:01 pm: If they are not banning ALL of it, they shouldn’t ban any of it(prepared vs prepackaged). I vote for butter, always. - John A Logan - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 12:01 pm: Of Course not. We would be better off making exercise mandatory and leaving the trans fats alone. Government has no business in this area. Furthermore, someone will soon realize that you can’t tax something at an insanely high rate if it is banned. I hear the “tran fat” tax on the way now. - Cook County Commoner - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 12:10 pm: Just another way to chase business out of Illinois. I personally think the issue was raised only to encourage political donations. But if our “leaders” are ready to make trans fats illegal for health reasons, are they now ready to prohibit the sale, possession and use of tobacco? Just when I think I finally comprehend how stupid some politicians are, this sort of thing arises. - Ghost - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 12:27 pm: Yes I am for it. Pretty much for what Word said. For al the chase buisness out of IL people…LOL you may want to look at buisness moels again. I hope all the restrauts leaem becuase I will make a killing flooding the market with my restraunts. Same for all the plumbers and eletirican leaing IL to overstaurae low inc tax states. leaves me to reap huge profits by being the only supplier. yep a buisness location has nothing to do with supply or deand, its al based on taxes and trans fats. - Bonsaso - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 12:35 pm: Yes. We can substitute an ingredient so you don’t have a hard attack a few years from now and this is somehow bad? Don’t see how schools should have to wait so long, they should be the first priority. - mokenavince - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 12:44 pm: My head say’s yes,because I try to stay away from trans-fats. When I look at how wide the kids are getting, my heart also thinks it’s wise. So lets start by making olive oil our state oil. - downhereforyears - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 12:46 pm: @wordslinger ====The Big Heat behind trans fat bans in the United States are the Docs and the corporate human resources profession — the folks who negotiate all those healthcare plans. How liberal they are, I don’t know, but the reality is that the train’s already left the station. Most of the fast-food biggies are already on board, as are big-food manufacturer’s=== HB 1600 was sponsored by LaShawn Ford and Monique Davis, hardly “tankers for big business and the Doc’s - wordslinger - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 12:59 pm: Downhere, I don’t think it’s one of those simple liberal/conservative issues, as many are not. The Docs and corporate human resource people are certainly pushing it all over the country, and the world, for that matter. It will be a done deal everywhere, through law and industry changes that are already well under way, sooner rather than later. Again, this isn’t as radical as it might appear to some. - Cincinnatus - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 1:28 pm: Ridiculous. One further factoid is that anything done in the schools will require a supporting Federal law. I do, however, propose this. All public employees who receive healthcare benefits from their employer shall be prohibited from eating any foods with transfats, smoking or drinking. They shall be subjected to periodic testing to confirm compliance. This requirement shall also be made a requirement of Medicare and Medicaid. Anyone who uses their own money to buy personal insurance shall be allowed to continue eating yummy food, have an occasional blast, and enjoy a good cigar while golfing. - OldSmoky2 - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 1:39 pm: Absolutely - it is ridiculous that people are making every single issue that comes up part of some imagined liberal conspiracy to control their lives. This stuff is poison, plain and simple. What’s the next cause? Arguing that there should be no car safety standards? Declaring that if people want to drive cars with no brakes, then, by golly, that’s their right as freedom-loving Americans? - cermak_rd - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 1:40 pm: Cincinnatus, Uh, transfat laden food != yummy. Butter laden food or coconut oil cooed food are yummy. Trans fat produces food with long shelf life but not much flavor. It’s the salt that gives them flavor. - Both Sides Now - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 1:41 pm: Does anyone see any irony that this Legislature has debated both “Let’s get rid of trans fats because they are bad for you” and “Let’s allow marijuana for medical purposes”? - Rich Miller - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 1:43 pm: Both Sides Now, do you realize how stupid that comment was? - formerpolitico - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 1:47 pm: Yes. The stuff is poison. And the consumer doesn’t know what foods contain this poison and what foods do not. And if I have to pay for everyone else’s healthcare, then I have the right to tell you what not to eat, how much to weigh, to wear seatbelts, etc. Too many fat people around! - Craziness - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 1:55 pm: I say let’s just ban the fat people….it will lower the insurance rates in the state for everyone…oh but wait a minute so would people staying physically fit…hmmm a dilemma….hey wait a minute sitting on your couch watching TV makes you fat, let’s ban that….so does messing around on the internet…let’s ban that as well….watching sporting events or at the old ballgame and enjoying a beer can make you fat…alright..let’s get rid of alcoholic beverages…while we’re at it let’s ban smokers from the state after they are at high risk for heart disease and stroke…at the end of the day we won’t have to worry about banning stuff, we won’t have any residents left…light one if you got one and if you’re off the clock grab a drink - heck who knows how long it will be before all that is banned…let’s just tax the heck out of all those porducts and use the money for the state pension system…oh but there won’t be anyone left to buy the products, so revenues will…that’s another issue - zatoichi - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 2:22 pm: Onions rings and fried cheese sticks taste great, but they are not a daily food source. If California school systems do not want Jamie Oliver maybe he can come here for the entire state. You have to eat the trans fat for it to have an effect. Last I knew most people need their hand to get the fat to their mouth. There are plenty of foods with no trans fat. Think it is my choice what I eat. - wordslinger - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 2:22 pm: –All public employees who receive healthcare benefits from their employer shall be prohibited from eating any foods with transfats, smoking or drinking.– Something like that is already going on in the private sector. Smokers at some companies are being required to kick in more for their health insurance premiums, or getting reductions for quitting. And they have to submit to testing for it. These things are being driven by healthcare costs, not some goo-goo dreams of Utopia. - Cincinnatus - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 2:40 pm: Wordslinger, Yesterday, you said that I was the one without a sense of humor… - wordslinger - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 3:06 pm: Cincy, were you joking? My apologies. But the libertarian puritanism on this subject is just too precious. Science and knowledge have advanced. Years ago this stuff was thought to be relatively benign, now it’s known to be a killer, a huge contributor to the nation’s biggest killer, heart disease, one that costs everyone a boatload of money in their healthcare premiums and medical costs. There are reasonable alternatives to it. Get rid of it. To call it Nanny-statism — or a business killer — is a joke. There’s plenty of junk that used to be in the food chain that’s now banned because of an increase in knowledge. And Knowledge is Good, as they said at old Faber. The Illinois legislation is just jumping on board a train that’s already left the station anyway, driven by science, doctors and the private sector. - Anonymous - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 3:32 pm: wordslinger: “The Illinois legislation is just jumping on board a train that’s already left the station anyway, driven by science, doctors and the private sector” If the trains has already left the station, then why do we need a law now?? - Cincinnatus - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 3:35 pm: Cincinnatus’s Laws on Liberals: 1.) No good intention goes unfunded. 2.) No bright idea goes without a law. - Cincinnatus - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 3:42 pm: Personally, I don’t care if they ban transfats. I have always preferred butter to margarine, and lard to vegetable oil anyway. Try the duck fat fries at Hot Doug’s to see why… - Nuance - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 3:50 pm: Where can I apply for the new Trans Fat Police force? Sorry, just had to ask:) - wordslinger - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 3:59 pm: Anon, perhaps bandwagon would be more clear than train. Get some credit for something that’s already happening, anyway, without your input. Never happened before in a state legislature, I assure you. - 3rd Generation Chicago - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 4:34 pm: I think trans fat should be banned in schools, and well ahead of the restaurants, movie theaters, cafes and bakeries others. Kids aren’t going to ask what is in the school food, nor do they really care. They are not capable of making their own descisions. As far as the non School venues, the nutrition labels should be posted so adults can make up their own mind. So I am split on this yes for schools, and no for the other venues, provided they give nutritional information, or label “contains trans fats” - cermak_rd - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 4:40 pm: 3rd Generation Chicago: “Kids aren’t going to ask what is in the school food, nor do they really care. They are not capable of making their own descisions.” Kids are certainly capable of deciding what they will and won’t eat! Haven’t you ever tried getting a child to eat something they consider repulsive (like brussel sprouts)? And school lunches had to change to have stuff like pizza and nachos (both of which can be made more healthful by a good cook), because the kids will actually eat it. - Wensicia - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 5:05 pm: “..would ban artery-clogging trans fats in food served in restaurants, movie theaters, cafes and bakeries or sold in school vending machines..” But, you can still walk into any supermarket or corner convenience store and buy products loaded in trans-fat with your LINK card! - Cincinnatus - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 5:14 pm: Oh, yesterday’s topic Wensicia! Maybe that’s the way to cut down on expenses associated with LINK. Only approved heathy free-range, class 7 vegan (cannot eat anything that casts a shadow) food can be purchased. I’m in! - amalia - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 5:57 pm: I am seriously concerned about the alternatives, their widespread use, and the posting of the use of alternatives to alert customers. For anyone with Soy sensitivities, the flashy showing of massive tanks of soy oil as a trans fat alternative puts our intestines in fear. Soy oil is less expensive because it is more widely available than, say, sunflower seed oil, but many of us cannot take it. nor would we like peanut oil, another legume oil that is used to fry french fries at Five Guys, for example. legume sensitivities are very real and peanut oil and soy oil cannot be consumed by some people. if legume oils are used, I cannot eat much without getting immediately sick. many people cannot eat it. what are the alternatives? how will we teach businesses how to bake and fry with other things? will use of soy and other legume oils be posted? sorry very powerful soy industry, I wish I could use your products, but I cannot. I don’t want to keep with trans fats, but I am concerned. farmers of Illinois, please start growing sunflowers!!!!! you will make more money selling those oils!!!! - K3 - Thursday, Apr 14, 11 @ 6:52 pm: I was a pro smoking ban person but this is going too far. people need to make their own choices - Mark Peysakhovich - Friday, Apr 15, 11 @ 12:48 am: Rich, I think the way the bill reads, government and schools are exempt permanently. Only place they’re mentioned is legislative intent, basically the “should” rather than “shall” part…. Glad to see trans fat restrictions but sad that government talks the talk and stops there while making businesses do it! McD’s wull have to be trans fat free but the Rathskeller won’t!!! - late to the party - Friday, Apr 15, 11 @ 9:47 am: I voted yes, but with caveats. I think trans fats should be banned from schools and properly labeled and taxed at restaurants and grocery/convenience stores. Also, for those who say let the public make their own choices, they first must know they have a choice. Without proper labeling or proper education, which will require some sort of government mandate, people will be and are unaware that harmful trans fats are in their food. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.