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.

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

get e-alerts in your inbox: