Win or lose, San Francisco and Berkeley soda tax measures are public health triumphs

printer friendlyprinter friendly

For advocates of public health policy, the sands of time could fill the Sahara Desert.

At least it seems that way as months, years, decades go by before structural and institutional changes are made to improve the health and save the lives of people throughout the nation.

These drawn-out battles have surely taxed advocates' patience and faith in the system. Typically, they've been David vs. Goliath fights with advocates being exponentially outnumbered in funds, political clout and other essential resources. They've involved countless numbers of defeats, both large and small. And at times they've been up against public opinion.

In 2012, I wrote about how change takes time shortly after Johnson & Johnson announced plans to remove a host of harmful chemicals from its products by 2015, becoming the first major company to make such a commitment. It was a change environmental health advocates had sought for nearly a decade — a battle we sometimes highlight as a case study in our media advocacy trainings.

I was reminded about this important lesson when I attended a rally last week that was held by supporters of Berkeley's sugary drink tax initiative, just minutes before it was unanimously approved by the city council for the November ballot. The measure proposes a 1-cent-per-ounce charge to distributors of soda and other sugary drinks and is similar to a bill across the bay in San Francisco. Following the defeat of two soda tax measures in nearby Richmond and in the southern California community of El Monte, where it was voted down after a $2.7 million campaign by the soda industry, supporters of the Berkeley and San Francisco measures face formidable odds.

berkeley vs big soda

At the rally, with its small but enthusiastic band of supporters on the steps of City Hall donning black T-shirts that read "Berkeley vs Big Soda," I heard both timid and boisterous voices giving heartfelt personal testimonies and summoning support for the tax proposal. I was hopeful the proposals would pass, but cautiously optimistic.

But then I remembered the Johnson & Johnson announcement of two years ago, and also the recent news that the board of the Golden Gate Bridge District voted unanimously to approve a $76 million cable net suicide barrier, a topic I've blogged about numerous times. For at least two decades, advocates for the barrier fought to help put an end to the more than a thousand suicides that have occurred at the bridge since it was built. Over the years, they employed a number of strategies including media advocacy to reframe the conversation and address the myths and stigma of suicide. They proved that fostering increased dialogue about suicide and mental illness would eventually lead to increased public support, and eventually, the board's vote on June 27 to approve the funds.

I think that if a soda tax measure were to pass anywhere, it would be Berkeley and San Francisco. These victories would surely lead to similar measures in other cities throughout the country as more communities and their leaders raise their voices in support of policies that make industry and government more accountable for their health. Eventually, one public policy at a time, we will stem the tide of diabetes and other nutrition-related diseases. It just takes time.


safety (1) news monitoring (1) Aurora (1) ssb (1) SB-5 (1) measure N (2) Berkeley (2) Sam Kass (1) election 2016 (1) target marketing (9) values (1) HPV vaccine (1) ACEs (2) mental health (2) Donald Trump (2) media (7) inequities (1) Rachel Grana (1) food (1) tobacco industry (2) auto safety (1) FCC (1) cannes lions festival (1) food industry (4) public health (71) liana winett (1) Joe Paterno (1) communication (2) sexual assault (1) obesity (10) American Beverage Association (1) healthy eating (1) food swamps (1) Telluride (1) water security (1) childhood trauma (3) cancer prevention (1) cosmetics (1) new year's resolutions (1) chronic disease (2) food access (1) junk food marketing (4) Big Soda (2) children's health (3) Chile (1) journalism (1) PepsiCo (1) gender (1) regulation (2) industry appeals to choice (1) Bloomberg (3) public health data (1) adverse childhood experiences (3) government intrusion (1) media advocacy (23) food and beverage marketing (3) Oglala Sioux (3) Penn State (3) Michelle Obama (1) strategic communication (1) Texas (1) Amanda Fallin (1) framing (14) San Francisco (3) Coca-Cola (3) online marketing (1) messaging (3) media bites (1) Sandy Hook (2) personal responsibility rhetoric (1) apha (3) food justice (1) reproductive justice (1) gun control (2) Twitter for advocacy (1) news strategy (1) soda tax (11) junk food (2) youth (1) Twitter (1) paula deen (1) summer camps (1) SB 402 (1) Black Lives Matter (1) white house (1) collaboration (1) health care (1) soda (12) education (1) news (2) weight of the nation (1) food marketing (5) genital warts (1) Colorado (1) child sexual abuse (5) sanitation (1) Tea Party (1) childhood obesity (1) cap the tap (1) childhood lead poisoning (1) political correctness (1) childhood obestiy conference (1) Proposition 47 (1) beauty products (1) public health policy (2) cancer research (1) cervical cancer (1) SSBs (1) Wendy Davis (1) community organizing (1) language (6) Gardasil (1) prison system (1) democracy (1) media analysis (6) Catholic church (1) food environment (1) community health (1) Measure O (1) tobacco (5) front groups (1) indoor smoking ban (1) elephant triggers (1) filibuster (1) digital marketing (3) prevention (1) alcohol (5) SB 1000 (1) news analysis (3) california (1) Food Marketing Workgroup (1) Dora the Explorer (1) suicide nets (1) emergency contraception (1) suicide prevention (2) Nickelodeon (1) sports drinks (1) Big Tobacco (3) Connecticut shooting (1) corporate social responsibility (1) equity (3) McDonald's (1) Let's Move (1) choice (1) structural racism (1) environmental health (1) advocacy (3) Oakland Unified School District (1) naacp (1) sexual violence (2) Richmond (5) Marion Nestle (1) marketing (1) sugar-sweetened beverages (2) Bill Cosby (1) default frame (1) sugary drinks (10) Happy Meals (1) suicide barrier (2) Big Food (2) physical activity (1) sexual health (1) social media (2) community (1) gatorade bolt game (1) racism (1) abortion (1) breastfeeding (3) violence prevention (8) seat belt laws (1) tobacco tax (1) cigarette advertising (1) tobacco control (2) Community Coalition Against Beverage Taxes (1) soda warning labels (1) nanny state (2) Johnson & Johnson (1) social justice (2) race (1) Campaign for Safe Cosmetics (1) built environment (2) Proposition 29 (1) social change (1) communication strategy (1) sandusky (2) news coverage (1) world water day (1) prison phone calls (1) violence (2) nonprofit communications (1) institutional accountability (1) stigma (1) privilege (1) obesity prevention (1) social math (1) product safety (1) women's health (2) Whiteclay (4) water (1) paper tigers (1) soda taxes (2) Pine Ridge Indian Reservation (2) childhood adversity (1) Golden Gate Bridge (2) sexism (2) personal responsibility (3) beverage industry (2) soda industry (4) food deserts (1) Merck (1) Pine Ridge reservation (1) Newtown (1) vaccines (1) Citizens United (1) george lakoff (1) snap (1) El Monte (3) community violence (1) health equity (10) junk food marketing to kids (2) campaign finance (1) diabetes (1) community safety (1) gun violence (1) diabetes prevention (1) autism (1) authentic voices (1) Jerry Sandusky (3)
  • Follow Us On Facebook
  • Follow Us On Twitter
  • Join Us On Youtube
  • BMSG RSS Feed

get e-alerts in your inbox: