Food Ban Definition:
When a national or state government, or other institution prohibits certain meals based on nutritional value. The attempt to increase healthy sustenance intake and decrease unhealthy foods.
Some might call it the Nanny State, while others might say it is big government once again regulating a part of society that it has no business in. In short, this is another situation of American citizens' rights being encroached upon by politicians and Federal officials.
Ever since Michelle Obama took up her campaign against obesity the government has been acting like food Nazis. From the fast food restaurants to the school cafeteria the Federal and state governments are further expanding their power. Fried foods, for instance, were banned from work meals by the NYC Health Department. [1] In addition to that, legislation was introduced in New York that would eliminate Happy Meals and other similar fast food staples. Fast food restaurants that offer toys with food would be required by the bill to "make sure the meals are 500 calories or less and have low fat and low sodium totals." [2] Furthermore, establishments who do not obey could be fined up to $2,500. [3] Then there is the FDA:
...many restaurant diners will soon know more about what they are eating under menu labeling requirements proposed Friday by the Food and Drug Administration. The requirements will force chain restaurants with 20 or more locations, along with bakeries, grocery stores, convenience stores and coffee chains, to clearly post the amount of calories in each item on menus, both in restaurants and drive-through lanes. The new rules will also apply to vending machines where calorie information isn't already visible on the package. The calorie counts will apply to an estimated 280,000 establishments and could be on menus by 2012. Required as part of health overhaul legislation signed into law last year, they are designed to give restaurant diners information that has long been available on packaged goods cooked at home. [4]
The government must think that people are so dense that they need to help the poor morons by regulating the food. It is not the Happy Meal's fault that one can get fat by eating it, just like it is not the gun that kills, but the individual holding the gun who does. McDonalds is not the one making everyone overweight, it is people's choices that determine whether it is healthy eating or fast food. McDonalds would be fine in moderation, but many do not seem to grasp this idea.
Along with the "calorie menu for dummies," packed lunches from home are no longer allowed in Chicago public schools. At one particular Chicago public school, Little Village Academy, the Principal has stated that it is her intention to shield students from their own bad food choices. Unfortunately, the plan has failed. Most students do not even eat the improved nutritional quality meals at Little Village, because they taste bad. The school "has seen a drop-off in meal participation among students." ". . . dozens of students took the lunch but threw most of it in the garbage uneaten." [5] However, as Bruce McQuain stats, the "bureaucratic insistence becomes a little clearer" when one "follows the money:"
Any school that bans homemade lunches also puts more money in the pockets of the district's food provider, Chartwells-Thompson. The federal government pays the district for each free or reduced-price lunch taken, and the caterer receives a set fee from the district per lunch. [6]
Here again government fails. They might have fixed one problem, but they generated a whole new one, with a dash of corruption. Instead of outlawing home-made lunches; establish healthy food courses. Teach children about healthy foods, and how to prepare nutritional meals. Also, introduce them to the word "moderation." Inform them that, in the happy medium, McDonalds and others like them are acceptable, but eating there continually, would make one the size of a big cow barn. Drug testing 11-year-olds and targeting drinking games will not establish this moderation principle in their minds.
Nevertheless, government never seems to understand that it is not their business to regulate what we eat. Also it appears that economics is not the government's strong point either as shown by Los Angeles City Council's decision to ban new fast food restaurants:
New stand-alone fast food restaurants have been banned from setting up shop in South Los Angeles, due to rising health concerns by the city council. [. . .] The Los Angeles City Council thinks South Los Angeles and South East Los Angeles need new choices as these regions face an over-concentration of such restaurants. [. . .] [The] new plan bans new so-called "stand alone" fast food restaurants opening within half a mile of existing restaurants. Such stand-alone establishments are on their own property, but those same restaurants are OK if they're a part of a strip mall, according to the new rules. [. . .] The city says around 72 percent of restaurants in South L.A. are fast food establishments, which is much higher than West L.A. and countywide averages which range in the 40s. [. . .] That might have something to do with the high unemployment and low incomes in the area. [Many] complain that 72% of the restaurants in the area are fast food compared to West LA's concentration being in the mid-40s, but the obvious explanation is that higher income areas can support higher-priced restaurants. [7]
What smart business man is going to launch an Olive Garden in an area where most of the populace will not be able to afford the food? Banning new sources of employment is probably not the best action to take when there is high unemployment. Likewise, seizing a five-year-olds Happy Meal will augment, not decrease the desire for one. Perhaps local and national administrations should remember what happened when alcohol was made illegal.
Food bans represent an infringement on the rights of the consumer. Finally, government has no right to intervene in such matters. Education rather than prohibition, should be established. In short, the Founding Fathers would never have allowed such actions to be taken by the government.
God Bless . . .
~EGOE~OUT~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[1] "Food Police Part II: NYC Could Soon Ban 'Happy Meals'" The Blaze
[2] Ibid
[3] Ibid
[4] "Nanny State Alert #412: FDA Proposes Calorie Counts on Menus" The Blaze
[5] "Nanny Goes to the School Cafeteria" by Bruce McQuain, Questions and Observations
[6] Ibid
[7] "Banned: New Fast Food Restaurants in South L.A." The Blaze
Log in to comment