Upload
taylor-brooke-pearson
View
234
Download
6
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Taylor Pearson
Small Government, Big Benefit
The government has always played a very strong role in the laws of the United
States and in the lives of people who live in this country. At times in history, the
government has been too strict on its people and at other times it has been too lenient.
These leaders have, however, failed to achieve a successful medium between these
two treatments. The situation is similar to this one when dealing with most everything
that the government has any type of control over. Although there are opposing sides
which either argue for strict government regulation of the diets of its people or no
government regulation at all, a middle ground should be explored and examined by the
government itself regarding this topic. Nutrition in America is a very touchy and sensitive
subject to talk about. Because of the ready availability of certain types of foods in the
United States, consuming these foods and beverages have become widely accepted by
the general American population. The distribution and consumption of these foods,
however, is still a very debatable topic because of the range of views on the subject of
the American diet and how it should be controlled.
Everyone who is debating about this topic has his or her own opinions on
government regulation of diets through marketing (or lack of marketing) and these
opinions differ based on the types of people that are included in the group. Although
there is research and evidence that suggests that obesity is related to other diseases
such as diabetes, heart disease, and certain cancers, most Americans who are
overweight or who do not want to change their current lifestyle claim that there are
alternative causes of these diseases and health issues; they claim that these diseases
are not related to the way in which a person eats and drinks on a daily basis (Malanga).
Taylor Pearson
These people are convinced by their theory that what they are doing is not causing any
harm, so they do not change their lifestyles; It is at this point that the government feels
like it has to step in to intervene. The trouble with the government getting involved in
the situation is that when the government comes to a situation as controversial as this
one, they start to go over-board with their involvement in the problem while trying to
correct it completely all at once. The government seems, also, to cut off all of the things
that they think are sources of the problem at once as well. There is, and never really
has been, any balance in the system of the government when it comes to this type of
issue. People come up with their own theory to make themselves feel like they are still
in the right, the government recognizes that there is a problem, so it enters the situation
without thinking out or planning for a legitimate solution to the problem; it places into
and enforces rules and regulations that are possibly too strict for the people in the
nation, and so the people turn the opposite way against the government’s regulations.
When this happens, the cycle just starts over and keeps repeating itself throughout
time, and this cycle does not help anyone in any way because the problem never really
finds a resolution this way. The view of these types of people who try to come up with
and research their own theories to make themselves feel better about continuing what
they are doing are on the “no government involvement” side of the argument about the
regulation situation.
The government’s view on this problem is mostly focused on trying to better the
citizens who live in its designated country; this is what the government says to the
people that it strives to achieve, at least. The United States government is on the side
of the argument which stresses strict, enforced regulation of food and beverages that
Taylor Pearson
the public is able to purchase and consume. The government claims to try and cut
down on the exponentially increasing rates of obesity in America today by setting more
strict rules and regulations on the foods and beverages that can be consumed and sold
as well. The most current example of this today is the fact that the government has
attempted to restrict certain convenience stores by how large the soft drinks that they
sell can legally be. This, however, is not a very rational solution to the problem of
widespread obesity. First of all, the law would not limit the number of soft drinks that the
customer could buy at the convenience stores. Also, the law would not be enforced in
every single store in America, so the overall effect would not be that great in the grand
scheme of things and in the long run. Overall, this so-called simple solution to the
larger more complex issue at hand would not be a significant help in the search for an
end to diseases related to diet. The government also blames the companies
themselves who produce the unhealthy products which contain unhealthy ingredients
(Pettypiece). Because of this fact, to keep with the claim that it is trying to keep the
rising rates of obesity and related diseases down, the government would need to
regulate the portion sizes, the type of foods and beverages, and strictly regulate which
ingredients can actually be put into the products that are being sold to consumers by
significant companies.
Another voice in the argument of government regulation or no government
regulation are those citizens of the country who simply do not want anyone to tell them
what they should and should not eat and drink, especially people who they have never
even seen in person or maybe not even at all their lives. One portion of this sub-group
is healthy Americans who simply do not want the government’s hand on their food
Taylor Pearson
because they feel that most foods are naturally healthy and do not need anything added
or taken away from them in a failed attempt to solve the issue. These people think that
they are able to take care of themselves and their diets without the help of the
government’s voice in their lives. This group of people also feels that the country was
founded on the individual freedoms of the people who live in America and that the
allegations of diets causing diseases are not at all grounded in science. They utilize the
argument that the government does not regulate things like skydiving, surfing, or
swimming, which could also harm people, so these independent Americans feel that
their individual diets should not need to be regulated either. This group of people feels
that their constitutional rights on which the country was founded on enable them to
control themselves the things that they do and put into their bodies when it comes to
food and (drink Malanga). This group of people is also on the side of the argument that
claims that no government regulation of food and beverages in the United States is the
best way to handle the whole issue.
With all of these things being said and all of the groups having their opinions
based on who they are, what their responsibilities they have, what their individual
experiences are, and where they are in their lives, there is another possible solution that
should definitely be explored in order to keep the peace with each and every one of the
different groups of ideas and opinions. There is a middle ground that could be
reasoned in a way that the government is tackling its cause of feeling the need to
protect or guide its people and that could also allow for the people in the country to
make some decisions for themselves so that they can feel the freedom that they wish to
feel because it is granted to them in their constitutional rights. This compromise could
Taylor Pearson
include the government giving out more information freely about nutrition and how
important it is, while not imposing on anyone’s life in the process. This approach to the
overall issue is more guiding rather than demanding, and people respond much better
to this type of guidance than to being ordered to do something or to having something
abruptly taken away from them. Also, the government could satisfy the need to regulate
the companies that produce products by doing much as it does now and conducting
even more inspections of these companies and telling the companies that they are not
allowed to put over a certain percentage – into each individual product – of the
ingredients that have been proven to be dangerous to humans if consumed in large
amounts over a period of time. Some regulation but not too much would be a perfect
medium that fits between the opposing arguments. With this solution put into effect,
those people who feel they should not have to change their diets would not feel
pressured, they would only be aware of the healthier choices with the more accessible
information that would be encouraging, not pushy. With all of this being said, the
government should not be so strict that its people cannot have a say in anything that
they consume regarding foods and beverages, not too lenient in that the people would
be able to consume whatever they feel like consuming with no information about what
they should be doing, but rather, it should be a guiding resource that helps the
community as a whole to stay informed about nutrition and keep itself healthy with a
little motivation.
Taylor Pearson
Works Cited
"Center For Individual Freedom." CFIF.ORG.
3 June, 2004. Web. 21 September, 2012.
Malanga, Steven. “The Washington Diet.” City Journal: Spring 2011, 21.2: n. pag.
Web. 21 September 21, 2012.
Mckay, Betsy. "What Role Should Government Play in Combating Obesity?" Wall
Street Journal (2012): n. pag. WSJ.com. The Wall Street Journal, 18 Sept.
2012. Web. 27 Sept. 2012
Pettypiece, Shannon. "Obesity Epidemic Needs Government Rules: NYC Health
Chief." Bloomberg. N.p., 18 Sept. 2012. Web. 21 Sept. 2012.
Ross, Darrell W. "Thoughts on Government Regulation & the Natural Organic
Whole Foods Industry." Ezine Articles. Ezinearticles.com, 07 May 2009.
Web. 27 Sept. 2012.
Scott-Thomas, Caroline. "Most Americans Are 'pro-regulation' on Food Safety â
Regardless of Politics, Study Suggests." FoodNavigator-USA.com. FOOD
Navigator-usa.com, 2 Aug. 2012. Web. 27 Sept. 2012