New York City became the first U.S. city to ban soft drinks of more than 16 ounces. The ban was approved Thursday. Mayor Michael Bloomberg advocated for a ban to help reduce obesity by having people drink fewer calories.

The ban highlights a tension between a consumer’s freedom of choice versus the government’s interest to keep health-care costs down. While the intentions of the ban are noble, the ban itself is an overreach of government power.

The ban targets any beverages which contain a “caloric sweetener.” This bans ingredients like high fructose corn syrup, plain sugar, honey and drinks containing less than 50 percent milk. Zero calorie drinks, drinks sold in grocery stores and alcoholic drinks are unaffected by the ban.

Banning sugary drinks is supposed to help reduce America’s growing size. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention finds approximately 30 percent of Americans are obese. Another nearly 30 percent are overweight, but not obese.

A report in the Journal of Health Economics finds $190 billion per year is spent on the nation’s obesity-related health-care costs. Health insurance subscribers and taxpayers, to a degree, help pay for the additional care obese people require.

Jamie Oliver, a celebrity chef and advocate for healthier eating, applauded the ban. “We hear a lot about how we shouldn’t be ‘nannying’ people with laws about how they live their lives,” he said in a statement on his website. “We are way past the point where (we) can trust people to make better choices. We have to help them make better choices.”

Some will argue the government has little business making choices for us. A poll conducted by The New York Times in August found 60 percent of New Yorkers thought the ban was a bad idea. Bloomberg told Matt Lauer on Today, “We’re not banning you from getting the stuff. It’s just if you want 32 ounces, the restaurant has to serve it in two glasses. That’s not exactly taking away your freedoms.”

New York City has had a history of using policies to curb people from making poor eating decisions. It was the first to mandate calorie counts be posted at fast-food restaurants.

There’s no clear evidence posting calorie information matters. In 2011, Stanford University studied the effect of posting calorie counts at Starbucks. The study found people consume 6 percent fewer calories because they tend to “buy fewer food items, and switch to lower calorie food items.”

Research is yet to be done on whether or not stopping people from having large-sized drinks will make a difference. There are many other behaviors which are considered unhealthy, so it’s unclear whether or not New York will do more to regulate restaurants and the foods we eat.

It is undeniable that America has an obesity problem that must be fixed. The costs obesity has on our health-care system and our society will be significant. Bloomberg is trying to fix this problem through regulation.

Cities like Syracuse are trying to promote activity through campaigns like “Healthy Monday.” Most recently, signs have been posted throughout the city to outline several 1-mile running routes. Boston’s Mayor Thomas Menino challenged the city to lose 1 million pounds this year. Boston now offers free nutrition tips and maps with walks and runs. These programs are depending on initiative from the individual, rather than through regulations.

Ideally, we want effective policies that create measurably better health. Regulations like New York’s ban on sugary drinks are designed to do this, but will likely cause more anger and dislike for government. The ban is not likely to measurably change the behaviors or obesity rate of city residents.

Harmen Rockler is a senior newspaper journalism and political science major. His column appears weekly. He can be reached at horockle@syr.edu or followed on Twitter at @LeftofBoston.

Published on September 17, 2012 at 3:07 am