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.


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

get e-alerts in your inbox: