What is needed is a serious, forward looking attack on the environmentally unfriendly practices engaged in by major energy companies. But the RICO case brought against the tobacco industry was, ultimately, a more symbolic victory than a substantive one.
First, the RICO suit was a civil suit, not a criminal complaint (and thus the "convictions" referred to were really just civil judgments). There were no monetary damages, the appeals court having ruled out that form of relief. What the court ended up doing, six years after the complaint was filed, was to issue at 1700 page decision that spelled out all the bad things the tobacco industry had done in terms of misleading the public about the harmful impact of smoking and then order them not to do it anymore. Which didn't really mean much, since by 2006 pretty much everyone knew that smoking was harmful.
Second, the court did order the tobacco companies to engage in a messaging campaign regarding the harmful effects of smoking. That part of the order is still being litigated today, more than 16 years and the expenditure of millions of dollars in legal costs by the government. And its not as if the tobacco companies aren't already obligated to publish anti-smoking messages.
When the tobacco case was brought in 1999 I thought it was a great idea. But having seen what it produced (and what it could have produced given the limitations of the law), I don't think going down that route again is that great an idea. There are better, and more aggressive steps that the government should be taking (and that Bernie undoubtedly would support) to address current energy company behavior that harms the environment rather than their past efforts to cloud the issue.
= new reply since forum marked as read
