When Mayor Bloomberg first conceived his large-soda ban in 2012, he probably knew that there would be backlash from the beverage industry; that may have been why the bill bypassed the City Council was sent directly to the Board of Health. And although the mayor’s desire to have the regulation go into effect as quickly as possible was an earnest attempt to curb obesity and the host of diseases with which it is associated, one of the policy’s biggest weaknesses was that it addressed a symptom of the problem, rather than the root cause.
I do agree with Bloomberg’s sentiment that consumers should be aware of the food and drinks they purchase, especially if they have been proven to be unhealthful. While it is true that increased fast food and soft drink consumption over the past decades has contributed to a higher prevalence of obesity, I believe that ultimately, the consumers’ choices at the grocery store and in restaurants are a much more powerful tool than an arbitrary (albeit well-intentioned) ban on high-calorie foods or big-cup sodas. For people who are used to having a large, 24-oz. soda with burgers and fries every week, for example, having to change their habits can be seen as a displeasure and can be very confusing if the reasoning behind the regulation is not well-understood.
Furthermore, even amongst the people who know the science behind why overconsumption of sugar and artificial flavors can be detrimental to health, there are many for whom swearing off the foods that they enjoy so much is a very difficult process. Additionally, an easy workaround exists for those who want more soda – they can simply buy another drink. Even though the regulation calls for serving sizes to be capped at 16 fluid ounces, there is no rule preventing customers from buying multiple servings should they want to.
Thus, a program aimed at reducing consumption of unhealthful, empty-calorie foods and beverages by educating and advising overweight New Yorkers might yield better results. Such a program would not only decrease the amount of soda being consumed, but also indirectly decrease the power of the beverage industry over consumers and policymakers without explicitly imposing legal restrictions that could lead to protracted legal battles. Though Bloomberg’s ban was a noble effort that was practical in theory, executing and enforcing such a regulation in the more than 24,000 restaurants scattered throughout New York would likely have carried a very high benefit-cost ratio. By targeting the consumer base instead, the same problem could likely be resolved in a more financially efficient and less labor-intensive manner.
