On Dec. 27, 2008, the “Los Angeles Times” published an article written by Jerry Hirsch entitled “Stepping up to the plate for more food regulation.” Hirsch details the push by schools and local and state governments in the regulation of trans-fat and the mandate of nutritional facts labels.
The article notes that “Restaurants are being told to list calorie counts on their menus. Schools are banning bake sales, and cities are outlawing new fast-food restaurants in some neighborhoods.” According to the most recent obesity figures, these moves aren’t surprising. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports that about 1/3 of all U.S. adults (33.8 percent) and approximately 17 percent (or 12.5 million) of children and adolescents aged 2-19 are obese. West Virginia has the highest obesity rate at 32.5 percent and Colorado has the lowest obesity rate at 21.0 percent.
According to Hirsh’s column, “New York City, Philadelphia and California have banned trans- fat. Several local health departments…want the federal government to reclassify salt as a food additive, a move that would pave the way for greater regulation.” The column also notes that in 2008, “Los Angeles [approved] a one-year moratorium on new fast-food outlets in a 32-square mile area of South Los Angeles that is home to 500,000 residents.”
Since 2008, two important developments have occurred regarding food and healthy eating habits.
Firstly, according to a press release from the Office of the First Lady on Feb. 9, 2010, Michelle Obama announced “Let’s Move.” The initiative’s objective is to solve “the challenge of childhood obesity within a generation so that children born today will reach adulthood at a healthy weight” [through] “collaboration among the leaders in government, medicine and science, business, education, athletics [and] community organizations.” “Let’s Move’s” objectives are to help parents make healthy family choices, work towards serving healthier foods in schools, increasing access to healthy, affordable food and encourage an increase in physical activity.
Secondly, while the United States Department of Agriculture revamped the food pyramid in 2005 and again in 2011, the School of Public Health at Harvard University issued a press release entitled “Healthy Eating Plate” on Sept. 14, 2011. The release noted, “Harvard’s Healthy Eating Plate fixes the flaws in the USDA’s My Plate.” The press release also notes that “‘the Healthy Eating Plate’ is based on the latest science about how our food, drink and activity choices affect our health—and are unaffected by businesses and organizations with a stake in their messages.”
Like with all issues, this raises an immediate question of “should the government regulate our eating habits?” and begs the more general argument of “what should be the role of government in the life of the individual?”
There is a fundamental difference between information and recommendations, and regulation. Information and recommendations imply that there is a choice to be made, and that you have the information necessary at your disposal to make a choice. Government (whether it is at the municipal, county, state and federal level) should not attempt to regulate what people can and cannot eat. The government can, however, create programs and services—such as Mrs. Obama’s “Let’s Move” initiative and Harvard’s “Healthy Eating Plate” — that are geared towards informing individuals about healthy eating habits and recommends both daily meals and fitness regimens.
In his written testimony to the House Government Reform Committee hearing on “The Supersizing of America,” Marshall Manson, vice president of Public Affairs for the Center for Individual Freedom noted that “Congress cannot possibly be expected to legislate effectively against obesity. There are too many causes and too many problems for a…Congressional solution. Nor is it feasible for Congress to instruct a federal regulatory authority to fight obesity through rule-making. Further, scientific understanding of human nutrition, diet needs and the causes of obesity improves constantly. The government is ill-equipped to understand and integrate these advances into its legislation or regulation.”
Manson’s written testimony makes two valid points. Obesity in America is too complex a problem with ever-changing variables that would be, at best, difficult to legislate. The pace of advancements would require Congress to enact legislation at the rate of at least one per calendar year. If Congress can’t enact annual balanced budgets within a given time frame, what makes one think that they can enact legislation regulating obesity and eating habits in a time frame reasonable enough to keep up with scientific advancements?
Further, for Congress to instruct the Food and Drug Administration or the CDC to ensure that legislation regulating obesity and eating habits are enforced would add an un-necessary burden on either of these agencies, as they each already have responsibilities that they struggle to meet, with the CDC failing to stay ahead of advancements in vaccinations and disease control, and the FDA failing to pinpoint and effectively control food contaminations.
And while some might contend that the government can create a new agency to facilitate this function, I remind you that our federal government cannot balance their budget and has a debt in excess of $10 trillion, and therefore has no funding to start an agency to regulate eating habits.
The role of government is to provide for order in society. That means—among other things—a well-regulated militia, protection of the rights of the individual and enforcement of punishment and penalties in the event that laws are not adhered to.
With the economy in shambles, the jobless rate at record highs and the national debt at the highest it’s ever been, the government need not be concerned about what I am putting in my mouth and should be worried about whether or not I can find a job to pay taxes and yes, buy food that I want to eat.
