A New York City mayor known as Michael R. Bloomer proposed a ban of sugary drinks that contained for than sixteen ounces. This was approved by the Board of Health in New York City in September 2012 and was to take effect in 2013.
Mayor Bloomer proposed a sale ban of the aforesaid sugary drinks. This was, however, to take effect in restaurants, theatres, delicatessens, and food carts but would not affect grocery and convenience stores where drinks in large bottles are sold. Additionally, other drinks like milk-based drinks, fruit drinks, alcoholic beverages, and diet sodas were not banned.
On 11th, Marc 2013 Justice Milton A. Tingling jr. of the New York Supreme court abolished the proposal. This was a day before it took effect. Justice Tingling jr. said that he found the ban to be “arbitrary and capricious.” This is because, first, the ban did not apply to all sugary drinks; instead, the milk-based, fruit and alcoholic drinks were not affected. Secondly, the bad was only to be enforced in certain places like restaurants but would not affect the sale in convenience stores. Additionally, even in the affected areas, consumers were not restricted to the number of small bottles to buy. This, in effect, means that one could get more than the regulated sixteen ounces.
Claim
The writer feels that Mayor Bloomberg has gone too far with the proposal. He appreciates that the mayor has previously come up with plans which he feels have been of great help to the residents of New York City. Some of these developments include the outlawing of smoking in public places like restaurants, bars, and workplaces; banning of trans fat in restaurants and a requirement by restaurants to post calorie counts on their food. He, however, feels that the government should not get into reinforcement, instead should stop at promotion and that too much babysitting and bans may cause people to revolt. The writer, therefore, feels that instead of the proposed ban, the mayor’s administration should focus on education programs that would educate and encourage people on good and sound choices relating to their health (Thomas, 2019).
My opinion is that we can combine both approaches in the effort to fight obesity. Setting policy alone cannot eliminate sugar intake unless we educate the masses as to why they should reduce sugar intake. I would suggest that the government should start with the education and enhancing campaigns, and the ban could follow later.
Ground
The writer observes that the rate of obesity has slightly gone down among students in elementary and middle schools. He attributes this to the administration’s effort to avail healthier lunches in the eating places by giving low-calorie drinks, salad bar, and water fountains.
Additionally, he advocates for more rigorous campaigns against obesity. He adds that a regular reminder of the effect of a sugary drink would help people make informed choices. The writer seems to approve the introduction of adult exercise and the expansion of fresh produce vendors programs.
Warrant
The writer gives an example of an advertisement that shows that a walk from Union Square to Brooklyn helps one burn twenty-ounce soda.
Daniel E. Libertarian
Claim
Daniel E. Libertarian also feels that the mayor should work toward the ban on obesity, which presents in various dimensions. Obesity is an energy imbalance condition where one takes it more calories than we spend, resulting in the storage of the fats. He claims that humans have evolved with the liking of sugar with the evolution of the food industry.
Ground
Libertarian seeks available options in fighting obesity. He says we could do nothing and hope that scientists will discover a cure for diseases that obesity-related, which he feels may take longer, and the effects are dire. A better and popular option, he proposes education and campaigns to the public to help them make informed choices. This he feels, has not very successful. The third option that Libertarian proposes is to regulate what people eat and, more importantly, encouraging more intakes of natural foods. He sees Mayor Bloomberg’s proposal as a tiny step towards the restoration of the environment’s natural part ( Ivey, 2016). He adds that the restrictions should not apply to adults but to children and youth who may not make rational and informed decisions.
I am opposed to the idea of imposing restrictions to the children only. I believe adults are more affected by obesity because of the slowed metabolic rate that comes with age and inactivity. The ban should, therefore, affect everyone.
Donald Marron
Claim
Marron feels that if the price of sugary products went high, we are likely to consume less of these products, and this could better out health and diets (Kiener, 2014). As a result, few people would fall sick, and therefore health costs could drop, and people would live healthy and long. I partly agree with his opinion; however, sugar is not the only contributor to an unhealthy diet and disease. As such, restriction on sugar alone will not fully solve the health issues in our society. We might need to consider other unhealthy products like salt, dairy products, and saturated fats.
Rebuttal
On the flip side, Marron says that high taxes on sugary products could lead people, especially low-income families into switching to other options that could be more expensive, unhealthy, and sometimes not as enjoyable and convenient. Another challenge he sees is because it is hard to point out the sugar-dose relationship between sugar and obesity. This relationship differs among different individuals. It therefore makes it hard to increase taxes on sugar and sugary products (Kiener, 2014). He additionally wonders whether it’s the government’s role to impose taxes. He says that some people are opposed to government influencing what they take by imposing taxes.
Andrew Fizer, Berkeley
Claim
He feels that the government does not have a right to determine what comes to his kitchen and, ultimately, what he eats.
Qualifier
He says that by taxing sugar alone among the unhealthy foods, it will be sending a wrong message to the public that sugar was the only product that people should avoid. It dilutes the importance of regulating other unhealthy food products like sodium, saturated, and high-calorie dairy products. He says that by taxing sugar, we may not achieve much in improving public health.
Rebuttal
In a rejoinder, Fizer feels that when individuals don’t take care of themselves, they end up getting sick, which raises the cost of health care. This cost is passed even to individuals like himself whom he feels has taken care of himself. He feels that he is made to pay for other people’s wrong choices when insurance costs go high. In light of this, he proposes a tax on sugar in an effort to restrict sugar intake by the public. He asserts that tax on sugar is likely to affect people who generally buy junk food. He sees this taxation as a good measure to curb individuals from making bad choices on food.
Erica Beaudoin, Portland
Claim
Erica Beaudoin claims that even though taxation on sugar is a good idea, there may not be a significant change in consumer behavior triggered by tax (Voon, 2014). He attributes this to rigorous branding and habits which have held consumers bound to sugary products.
Ground
He says the war on sugar can only be won when it is lead by manufacturers. He advises that companies should capitalize on the anti-sugar campaign to manufacture less-sugar drinks and then rebrand themselves as companies who are health conscious. This helps them avoid unpopular publications and attract lower and friendly taxes.
Jennifer Randall
Claim
Randall says that by high taxation on sugar, the state earns a handsome revenue that could be placed in the general funds, thereby benefiting the poor. She asserts that the revenue from the tax should be used to improve public health initiatives and address poverty-related issues. This will help the poor in society.
Works Cited
International United Business, Inc. How to Eat: A New Proactive Diet Approach for a Better Life. Xlibris Corporation, 2012.
Ivey, Joyce A. Divorcing Unhealthy Foods The “Appeasal”. Page Publishing, 2016.
Kiener, Robert, and CQ Press. Food Policy Debates: Should the Government Regulate Unhealthy Food? 2014.
Thomas, Michael. Unhealthy Food: The Ugly Truth About Eating Habits. Lulu P, 2019.
Voon, Tania, et al. Regulating Tobacco, Alcohol and Unhealthy Foods: The Legal Issues. Routledge, 2014.