The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
© Copyright 2013 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Judge strikes down NYC sugary-drinks size rule
By JENNIFER PELTZ NEW YORK©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.
35 Comments
Login to comment
nath
Sadness. I was totally in favor of this, seemed like a good idea.
jeff198527
Why do so many people approve of the left-wing nanny-state?
Surf O'Holic
Score one for reason. Bloomberg thinks he's king. Dismember the Nanny state and her cronies.
nath
Obese people Wrecking it for the more conscious person with will power.
TheQuestion
Just another reason I don't want government providing health care. When the government has a vested interest in your health, personal choice becomes a liability. If someone wants a 48oz Coke, a pack of cigarettes, and 3 gas station hot dogs then let them go at it, just make them pay their own medical bills.
globalwatcher
Right on. This is all about America-The Liberty.
The government cannot tell us people what to eat, drink. If you want to die young with obese, it is your choice. If you want to live longer, then you know what to do. Keep the government out of our life.
Lizz
Smokers and the obese already are charged more by the private insurance companies and will be paying much higher premiums even under Obamacare. Taking a law that permits regulators to control chronic diseases and apply it to whatever the mayor doesn't like was what is a huge overstep of government authority.
cleo
And this is bad because why?
sailwind
Well it could be worse. In America, one of the concerns we have in feeding even the poorest Americans is how big their soda is and now trying to "ration" it.
FruitsBasketFan
I cannot believe right wingers are actually glad that it went down.
I was surprised Blomberg even supported supported this since he is a republican turned into independent.
Of course, even if it went affect it still gave the customers the rigjt for refills (which most countries do not and thus have lower levels of obesity).
lostrune2
It'll probably reversed in appeals. The city already banned trans-fat and smoking in restaurants, and those passed thru fine in terms of law.
smithinjapan
Just when the US was taking a step forward. Anyway, hopefully Bloomberg wins in the appeal.
SuperLib
As long as we all pay into the same healthcare system, I'm all for it. Getting a sugar free drink is habit forming after about 2 weeks and you'll never go back.
sailwind
May have passed fine in terms of the law, but I'm pretty sure that it killed a lot of business from customers who used to be able to smoke and also from customers who want to enjoy a truly calories be damned meal once in a while. I'm curious if any one knows how many restaurants and bars in NYC that were tottering on the edge of going out of business actualy ending going under because of big government nanny state idiocy..
Surf O'Holic
More reason to stay far, far away from that despotic hell known as NYC. Bloomberg is a nanny-state totalitarian.
SuperLib
I'm all for that. Until it reaches a point where obesity is an epidemic. Which it is. It's not about "one in a while," it's about a lifestyle choice where we lead most of the entire world in fat. So you're not fooling anyone. And you can thank business for some of that. At a local pizza shop it's $1.70 for the large drink or $1.75 for the extra large. They literally make you feel stupid for buying a smaller size. Hail job creators. And those who simultaneously complain about the cost of heath care.
globalwatcher
LOL. Someone really does not understand American value-Liberty. Maybe he/she wants to be told what to do in life (many do), or does not understand how to handle it with personal responsibility. I found that he/she is a loser in life with no inner security.
Lizz
Just when the US was taking a step forward. Anyway, hopefully Bloomberg wins in the appeal.
Is it banned other places ? A huge step forward would be the mayor spending gobs of money and time addressing the problem of 80% of New York high school graduates not even being able to read at a basic level instead of on food police.
It is a huge overstep of governmental authority. The only public health issues we might talk about them addressing would be those who afflict others not involved. Like coughing on a crowded bus when you have TB; or in the case of restaurant bans, protecting consumers who cannot tell whether unlabeled foods contain trans fats—and, in turn, cannot make the choice to avoid foods which can cause health issues in even small amounts.
It’s a total joke as to enforceability. All you have to do is buy two, or get a refill, or whatever. It’s just a hassle maneuver that also costs more for those who dare drink something that apparently Mr. Bloomberg does not care to drink.
It is not even logical. The danger to anyone’s health over drinking a given 32 oz soda is far less than smoking a cigarette, smoking a joint, having anonymous sex, driving a race car, having a drink of hard liquor, or for that matter drinking something you are allergic to. Yet none of the above is against the law.isoducky
What Bloomberg was attempting had good intentions but really was just a band-aid over a bigger problem. I worry about the stress to the public health system if many Americans continue their normal eating habits, but passing 'nanny-laws' is the wrong way to go about it.
If I Bloomberg I would attack the issue financially and positively. Give a small tax credit to any business who offers NYC approved portions of snacks, sugary drinks, and anything they want to control. Then give a little bonus if said restaurants can generate 45% of their total revenue from selling these NYC approved portions.....Watch the menus change, watch new restaurants who want to save money only sell NYC style menus, and finally watch the synonymous substitution effect of portions sizes across the nation as more states adopt similar measures.
Surf O'Holic
What Bloomberg and his lackeys can't get through their blunt skulls is that what someone else chooses to eat or drink(and how much) is NONE OF BLOOMY's BUSINESS! If I want to drink two or three liters of Cola(or anything else) with my meal, it's MY choice! That said, I don't make that my choice because I take care of my own health by my own choice. The people are not Bloomy's chattel, even if they do resemble beached whales.
SuperLib
And paying extra for healthcare because of other people's choices is my responsibility. You don't live on an island where your actions don't impact others. People who constantly play the personal freedom card need to get that through their blunt skulls. No one ever says, "I drink cola and it's my choice so I'm going to pay for the costs of my health choices MYself!"
badsey3
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_smaller_islands_in_New_York_City
Actually most do live on an island and most of New York state hopes it can stay that way. They can keep their tolls to themselves also.
jeff198527
Everything in moderation. How can a large drink every now and then hurt a person? If a person wants to weigh As much as a bus, it's their problem. Besides enacting these health laws now is like closing the barn door long after all the livestock have escaped.
Lizz
It isn't a problem specific to New York. I think most obesity is actually in the Western US where they may have a greater appreciation for the individual liberty argument. It would just have more weight if the health effects weren't spilling over into society in the form of higher insurance premiums and a greater share of public dollars going to Medicare and Medicaid.
TheQuestion
Then we're in agreement, scrap any talk about a single payer system. Glad we're on the same page.
Vast Right-Wing Conspirator
It:s nice to see a slapdown to the nanny statism that is infecting American politics lately. The good mayor needs to be reminded that he is the MAYOR, not the King, not the Emperor. His city has for more pressing issues that need his attention. This was obviously a publicity ploy that failed.
It is ridiculous to imagine a cash-strapped city hiring a new class of "soda inspectors", armed with measuring cups and clipboards. It would be a perfect job for busybodies and nosy parkers who like nothing better than to mind other peoples business.
If you want a 20 oz black coffee, you are OK. But if you order coffee with sugar, 16 oz limit. But, if you order the black coffee and add the sugar yourself, you are OK. What a joke.
SuperLib
People are trying to turn this into a "cola" issue but it's a much larger issue of health care costs. Keeping the blinders on and crying "nanny state" is a way to not talk about the diabetes problem and the costs associated with it. At least bringing up the issue, even if it fails, is a way for some people to finally see the link between their drink and the cost to society.
Vast Right-Wing Conspirator
As usual for a liberal, superlib underestimates the basic brainpower of the general public. Do you honestly think people DONT know that sodas are high calorie? Yet ironically under the Bloomberg Ban, even higher calorie drinks (hot chocolates, fruit smoothies) are allowed.
The problem isnt necessarily the legislation, although it is not needed. The problem is the clumsy, hamhanded, and useless way it is crafted.
Madverts
"It:s nice to see a slapdown to the nanny statism that is infecting American politics lately. "
I don't get the right wing paranoia. If you desperately need to drink copious amounts of soda then buy four cup-fulls dammit.
Did you guys have the same fart attacks back in the late eighties or early nineties when the Surgeon General slapped cancer warnings on cigarette packets? I'm betting you didn't....
It's on a par with gun "rights", it's getting to the point where certain citizens are actually showing reasonable doubt by their own actions that they can't handle personal responsibility.
Vast Right-Wing Conspirator
Madverts; I am confident that people already knew that cigarettes caused cancer by the late eighties or early nineties. Those warnings could safely be eliminated now, and were probably never needed in the first place.
It:s not paranoia, it:s a simple desire to be left alone. IF the Mayor wanted to promote health, there are many better ways to do so than a kneejerk campaign like this. Its all about publicity and not public health. As you said, people can just order two smaller drinks, So what does the law actually accomplish?
As for gun rights, the statistics prove that crime in general, and gun crime in particular, is steadily DEcreasing. By coincidence, this decrease is happening as more and more jurisdictions are deciding to allow citizens to carry weapons openly. Hmmm....
lostrune2
Most NYCers actually supported this; that's why they re-elected him.
badsey3
How long will it take the NYPD to start beating down the Super-Size scofflaws? These Super-Sizers are clearly out of control and should be punished, fined or imprisoned.
-and I thought 10Yen Man got the raw deal.
SuperLib
Oh my God....heh. The race to the bottom just kicked it into high gear:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/03/13/mississippi-bill-would-ban-restrictions-on-portion-sizes/
HonestDictator
I've actually stopped buying soft drinks made in the US unless they did not contain high fructose corn syrup sweeteners. As for controlling how large a soft drink people can buy its beyond ridiculous. People have to learn to make the right and healthy decisions for themselves or suffer the consequences of not doing so. I love drinking tea, juice and good old fashioned cool clear refreshing water (your best choice). Never had any severe kidney stone or cavity to speak of.
By the way, if you want a good Pepsi, Sprite, Coke check the ones made in Mexico and imported to the US. They don't use artificial sweeteners, just good old plain sugar, and it really doesn't taste all that sweet. Sobe also uses sugar but they use way too much.
badsey3
Pepsi/Coke with sugar are in the scratched-up (old style returnable) glass bottles.
Sidral Mundet (Apple) and Sangría Señorial (grape) ---> way better.