Congress targets video games, but to what end?

Ratings on video games are pointless. Aren't there other things Congress could focus on?

Dave Rosenberg Co-founder, MuleSource
Dave Rosenberg has more than 15 years of technology and marketing experience that spans from Bell Labs to startup IPOs to open-source and cloud software companies. He is CEO and founder of Nodeable, co-founder of MuleSoft, and managing director for Hardy Way. He is an adviser to DataStax, IT Database, and Puppet Labs.
Dave Rosenberg

A new bill in Congress would add cigarette-like warning labels to video games. California Congressman Joe Baca (D-Calif.) introduced legislation that mandates all video games with an Electronics Software Ratings Board rating of Teen or higher to be sold with a health warning label.

The video game industry has a responsibility to parents, families, and to consumers--to inform them of the potentially damaging content that is often found in their products. They have repeatedly failed to live up to this responsibility. Meanwhile, research continues to show a proven link between playing violent games and increased aggression in young people. American families deserve to know the truth about these potentially dangerous products.

We must hold the video game industry accountable and do everything in our power to ensure parents are aware of the detrimental effects that violent games can have before making decisions on which games are appropriate for their children to play. I am proud to introduce the Video Game Health Labeling Act of 2009, and am hopeful my legislation can work to stop the growing influence of violent media on America's children and youth.

California is talking about issuing IOUs to teachers and for tax rebates, and I find it truly mind-blowing that one of our congressmen would be putting such effort into what is clearly a useless exercise.