My post "Are Cities/States Wrong Plaintiffs in Lead Paint Suits" is stirring up a hornet's nest - and on a Saturday night when we should be getting into trouble. Here are some of the responses, off the record, of course.
**********************************************************************************************************
The real issue why cities/states have not fared well in these public nuisance mass torts is that they continue to ignore pressing the landlord issue. In many areas, the addresses of those poorly maintained properties are known and the laws are in-place to have the lead-safe work done. At some level, everyone knows this and knows it's the long, expensive way to sue the former lead paint companies to fix this. So, nothing really gets done in terms of litigation.
Take this out of the court houses and the problem will be addressed quickly and cost-efficiently.
***********************************************************************************************************
Girl, wealthy parents won't take up the cause of what they see as a poverty issue. The reality is, though, that lead poisoning, especially from lead pipes, is an equal-opportunity disease. Because this is perceived as only affecting the poor (read: powerless) cities/states don't get much support on pressing these suits.
************************************************************************************************************
It's the economy, stupid. The community will is not behind an issue like lead paint which seems to be well under control. The issue is jobs. In the 2 states which have gone high-profile in the lead-paint litigation front - Ohio & Rhode Island - the economic climate is bad and getting worse.
*************************************************************************************************************
Any other comments are welcome (mgenova981@aol.com), on or off the record.
Comments