Immunity for negligent businesses is a bad idea

I’m a big believer in personal responsibility.

If I decide to visit a theme park in the middle of a pandemic — and catch a virus after voluntarily cramming my body into the Tower of Terror with 20 other people — that’s on me.

But if my father, who’s confined to the dementia ward of an assisted living facility, contracts the virus after a worker there tells her boss she thinks she has the virus — and that boss tells her to come to work anyway — that would be on the facility.

That’s really not so complicated, is it?

Everyone bears responsibility in life.

Yet politicians in Florida are talking about giving businesses a pass on that responsibility with “immunity” measures to protect businesses from lawsuits.

In a nutshell, it means they want to deny the chance to hold a business accountable for its actions.

The business lobby has been salivating over immunity long before this coronavirus came along. The pandemic is just a convenient cover.

You know the saying:

Try to use the fear and anxiety over a virus that killed 100,000 Americans and crippled the economy to pass laws lobbyists have been craving for decades.

It’s an attempt to chip away at your constitutional right to access the one branch of government ( judicial) that often keeps check on the other two.

The rush to grant businesses immunity is happening all over. Republican leaders in both congressional chambers have said they want it. And now Florida legislators are pushing for it as well.

Just look at all these self-professed constitutionalists displaying their disdain for the one branch of government the Founding Fathers never wanted them to control.

In Florida, Sen. Jeff Brandes, R-St.Petersburg, is leading the immunity push, saying he wants to create a “safe harbor for businesses that are following the statewide guidelines for dealing with COVID at their respective business,” according to WFSU.

Brandes suggested that, without such protections, “Businesses simply will not reopen.”

First, I simply don’t believe that. Many already have. Second, if a business truly won’t reopen unless promised it won’t be held accountable for its actions, you might ask yourself whether that’s

a problem.

Legislators are reportedly considering immunity for all manner of business — including nursing homes, where more than a third of Florida’s COVID-19 deaths have been reported.

This comes even after Gov. Ron DeSantis blamed a South Florida nursing home — where seven people died — for allowing infected workers to enter. The governor said the facility “was clearly noncompliant, negligent and it did cost those residents their lives.”

Think about that for a moment. The governor says the facility’s actions were so errant it cost people their lives … and the response from lobbyists and lawmakers is to try to the industry’s responsibility.

Keep in mind: This is a state with a terrible track record for regulating senior centers. Years ago, former Gov. Rick Scott ousted the state’s top nursing-home watchdog after the industry complained he was advocating too fiercely for vulnerable residents.

So the state’s legislative and executive branches already take a lax approach to regulation. And now lawmakers want to restrict your ability to pursue justice and accountability through the judicial branch as well.

Obviously, the devil will be in the details. I asked Brandes if he could share written specifics of what he had in mind. He did not respond.

But the state’s lead lobbying group for nursing homes wrote the governor last month to ask for “immunity from any liability, civil or criminal” for a variety of reasons, including any act the facility committed “in good faith.”

Let’s pause here to allow an entire military convoy to drive through that loophole.

You don’t have to be a lawyer to know that every business ever sued for anything could argue any action taken was “in good faith.”

We often hear the argument that businesses are already acting responsibly. Wonderful. Then you shouldn’t have any problems.

Now, I know it’s sometimes popular to bash lawyers and lawsuits. And sure, some of the former are sleazy and some of the latter are frivolous. But you don’t restrict an entire citizenry’s ability to seek justice because of maddening anecdotes.

Much like the Founding Fathers, I’m a staunch defender of your right to access this key branch of the government — especially when politicians in the other two branches do such a cruddy job.

Heck, I have more faith in a jury of my peers than I do politicians on the payroll of special interests.

For years, companies like Disney and Publix have teamed up with malpractice- and corporate-defense firms to funnel millions of dollars into campaign accounts and “justice reform” efforts.

That’s why judges and juries should make the call about what happens in court. Not politicians.

If politicians want to give up their own rights to access the courts, fine. But they have no business forcing you to give up yours.