In my entire life, I have only once had to pull off the road when listening to the radio because something I hear so upsets me or pisses me off that it affects my driving. (That would be on 9-11 when the first tower fell.)
Until yesterday. On yesterday's Kojo Nnamdi Show, one of the wonderful NPR shows from DC's own WAMU, it was once again time for the DC Politics Hour with Kojo and Jonetta, as in Jonetta Rose Barras. At about forty-two minutes into the broadcast, Barras derails into a pretty spectacularly bad diatribe about the bill that D.C. Council member Phil Mendelson introduced this week, which would require restaurants with 10 or more locations to provide their customers with nutritional information on the food they serve. (Discussion begins at about 39:20)
After she blithely asked the host if she could be "crude" for a moment, this is the "discussion" that followed:
(Barras:)"I mean these people that, if you have to be concerned that much about what you're eating, don't go out. It's like smoking-- if you're worried about getting smoke in your hair and on your clothes and everything, don't go! Stay home! Prepare your meal at home! Don't make everybody suffer because you need somebody to carry you around... a little..."
(Nnamdi:)(laughing) "I said you couldn't be crude..."
(Mendelson:) "How are you suffering by having this information, and if you don't want it, don't pay attention to it. But some people want it-- and it's a guessing game right now...--"
(Barras:) "But I think it's not the point of the government. I think the government shouldn't be in my plate, or even in my restaurant, expecially since you don't want to be with the school lunch menu..."
(Nnamdi:) "I'm assuming that when you go to the supermarket you do pick up the box to see how many calories, how many grams of fat, et cetera on the products you buy..."
(Barras:) "I certainly know generally what that is..."
(Nnamdi:) "Why should this be any diefferent?"
(Barras:) "Because now you're in a restaurant where food is being prepared for you, and if you are worried about fats, trans fats, saturated fats, all of the fats ... cook it at home."
(Nnamdi:) "See, that's why Jonetta's not in the restaurant business."
I have no problems with Barras expressing her political views. I have no problems with her providing the strident opposition she's known for on the issues we're all vested in in the DC area.
What I do have a problem with is that she derailed into a rant that in essence says that people like me are a gross imposition on the public at large. I have news for you Ms. Barras: PEOPLE LIKE ME ARE THE PUBLIC AT LARGE.
Since she's worried that people like diabetics and people who have to watch their fat grams are going to ruin her time out at whatever restaurant she happens to be frequenting, I'd like to share a few statistics with her:
The American Diabetes Association cites that 9.6% of the American population over the age of 20 has diabetes. This instance is markedly higher in the African American population, averaging 13.3 percent.
In terms of watching fat grams and salt intake, one of the main recommendations for people with heart disease or stroke considerations like elevated cholesterol and blood pressure, we turn to statistics from the American Heart Association: approximately 35 percent of the American population suffers from high cholesterol, which can lead to heart disease. Approximately 33 percent of the American population has high blood pressure, which can lead to heart disease and stroke.
These diseases are only the tip of the iceberg. Many more Americans deal with many other diseases that necessitate the access to this information.
If Ms. Barras is trying to make a point by hyperbole, I'd like to fire back a volley or two in the same manner. Already we're talking about at the very least, one in ten people who need the information she's ranting about in order to manage their disease. These are people who, in her opinion, should refrain from business or pleasure in public at restaurants. People who should not get to spend time with friends and family and support the businesses of the District.
What would happen if even one tenth of the population stayed home as she said? Considering that the National Restaurant Association estimates that the restaurants in DC generated over 2 billion dollars in revenue in 2006, that's at least 200 million dollars lost to the restaurant industry right there in one year. Not to mention that their families will be staying home with them. More losses. 30 percent? 667 million per year. Sounds ridiculous right?
Not as ridiculous as someone who is supposed to be as well-educated and professional as Ms. Barras making asinine statements like the ones above on a publicly funded National Public Radio program.
Ms. Barras should have a llittle more empathy for the amount of work it takes to control these problems. Infinitely more work than she can imagine I would guess. Counting carbs, counting calories, counting fat grams, counting salt intake: it's a full-time job. If that process gets sabotaged, people could die. It's that simple. (This is unfortunately NOT hyperbole.) Why not make it a little easier to manage-- it will relieve some if the pressure on healthcare in the long run and provide business that pays into the DC coffers.
The proposal under fire, by the way, has as a provision that it applies to resraurants with ten or more locations. These types of restaurants generally already provide nutritional information to their clients as a service, so this wouldn't inconvenience anyone unnecessarily.
Shame on you, Jonetta Rose Barras, for opening your mouth without thinking. Or even more shame on you for thinking and then opening your mouth. It may be your opinion, but in my mind it's you who needs to stay home if you can't operate on a higher level than a two-year-old crybaby. Stick to the issues, and leave hyperbolic vitriol out of it.