Mike Bloomberg's Worthless Big-Gulp Ban: 60,000 Pissed Off New Yorkers Can't Be Wrong

banpepsi.jpg
James King
As we noted in a prior post, under Mike Bloomberg's proposed "Big Gulp Ban," you could buy all the Pepsi in that truck -- as long as you buy it from the grocery store on the left, and not the Mexican restaurant on the right.

As you know, Mayor Mike Bloomberg's idiotic plan to ban soda served in containers larger than 16 ounces makes precisely zero sense; relegating adults to children incapable of making their own decisions aside, the plan will do nothing but hurt New York businesses -- all while doing absolutely nothing to trim Gotham's waistline.

Sadly, Mayor Mike's dumb idea could become a dumb reality unless New Yorkers speak out, which they have -- New Yorkers for Beverage Choice, a group opposed to Bloomberg's thinking it's his job to tell us what we're allowed to eat, has circulated a petition opposing the mayor's plan, which now has the signatures of more than 60,000 New Yorkers fed up with Bloomberg playing food cop.

Further reading on Bloomberg's selective/hypocritical persecution of shitty foods:

-Harlem Walking Tour Reveals Why Mike Bloomberg's An "Idiot"
-Mike "Everything In Moderation" Bloomberg To Preside Over Hot Dog Eating Contest Weigh-In

So far, the group has collected a total of 62,344 signatures, and hopes to collect even more before the plan faces a public hearing in front of the Department of Health on July 24.

"These numbers are a testament to the fact that New Yorkers feel this proposal is arbitrary, ineffective and overzealous," Eliot Hoff, spokesperson for NYBC says. "New Yorkers just aren't going to accept government dictating what they are allowed to drink, and in what quantities. It's not what New Yorkers want or need. And you have to wonder what's next - popcorn? Pizza?"

Bloomberg's stupid plan would prohibit restaurants from serving "sugary beverages" like soda in containers larger than 16 ounces. The plan makes the jump from nanny-state-ish to idiotic when grocery stores, bodegas, and other businesses located just feet from the restaurants where the ban would be implemented are allowed to sell sugary beverages in whatever size containers they want.

In other words, if you get a slice of pizza from a restaurant located next to a grocery store, and want a soda in something that's slightly larger than a baby's sippy cup, all you need to do is walk a few feet to get your super-sized beverage.

Last week, we accompanied City Councilwoman Melissa Mark-Viverito on a walking tour of a Harlem neighborhood to see how the ban would potentially impact businesses. One of those businesses is Crown Fried Chicken -- which is located directly next to the Mi Parada Grocery Store -- where owner Nal Barak tells the Voice that if Bloomberg gets his way, he wouldn't be able to sell the majority of the drinks in his cooler.

"I don't like this law," he says. "If [the mayor] cares about the health [the ban should apply to everyone, not just restaurants]."

Barak says he doesn't necessarily disagree with banning big sodas, noting that "sugar is no good for nobody." But he's angry because the ban will drive business away from his store and over to the bodega that's right next door. Several other restaurant owners in the neighborhood echoed Barak's concerns.

"Instead of helping us through this recession, the mayor's misguided proposal will target the small business owner with additional regulations," Henry Calderon, president of the East Harlem Chamber of Commerce, says. "Mom and pop shops are struggling to survive, we cannot force them to act as mother and father to their customers, policing what they eat and drink."

Even City Councilwoman Letitia James seems to think the mayor's plan is about as stupid as the rest of us do.

"We all want a healthier New York, but this just isn't the way to go about it," James says. "My constituents and people across this city understand the need for real solutions that take into account the socio-economic landscape of this city and the complexities of people's food choices. We need better education and funding for health programs, not gimmicks."

In addition to the 62,344 individual members, 675 businesses have also joined the coalition of those opposed to Bloomberg's stupid idea.

Click here to find out how you can let the mayor know just how dumb his plan really is.

My Voice Nation Help
10 comments
Tworks
Tworks

I had been struggling to lose weight for over 10 years, nothing at all worked. I lost eight pounds in 11 days and have by no means felt greater. Cannot wait to find out what happens after the full 11 day cycle! - www.reviewsalert.com/truth-about-six-pack-abs

Clk
Clk

What an idiot. That ban would not be effective except to move our country closer to be socialist. If this country wants to put a dent in our obese, unhealthy society then they need to put regulations in place for the food/beverage industy to either educate the public about what they are eating or stop letting companies chemically engineer everything and labeling it as "natural". White bread (and most people get fooled by wheat bread that is not 100%), potatoes, etc all turn to sugar. Are they going to ban ice cream, pizza, etc. and no one knows what McDonalds food actually is. And for whoever suggested buying 4 drinks instead of one 1 big one. Is the government going to be responsible for recycling the containers- NO! I drink 1-2 large diet drinks a week (and I am aware of how bad artificial sweeteners are) and when I do I want a 36 or 44 ounce one. The rest of the week I drink insane amounts of water that is probably contaminated and has stuff "added" to it. I don't need government telling me what to eat or drink- educate us and let us make our own decisions.

Jw Frogen
Jw Frogen

When did New York become Nanny York?

Broccoli
Broccoli

Isn't it relevant to mention that New Yorkers for Beverage Choices is organized by the soda industry, as other news outlets have been reporting for weeks? http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/02/nyregion/in-fight-against-nyc-soda-ban-industry-focuses-on-personal-choice.html?pagewanted=all What has become of the Village Voice? This blog post is juvenile, poorly written, and serves not the public but the corporate bottom line. It's almost as if this post were conceived for no other purpose than to endlessly repeat the trite and tired "nanny state" attack. Bo-ring.

James King
James King

Just so we're clear: by "less easy" you mean "harder," right? Look, if you think you need a 70-year-old billionaire to tell you how to eat, then that's you're problem. I don't. And if a few fatsos can't make the jump to diet, that's on them. I lost 15 pounds about five years ago by simply drinking diet soda instead of regular. That's literally one of the only dietary changes I made -- and Mike Bloomberg didn't even have to tell me to do it. I realize how bad soda is. Believe me, I do. But all Bloomberg wants to do with his whole over-reaching health initiative is ignore the personal responsibility problem -- which if you ask me is much more alarming than the obesity "epidemic" -- by treating people like children. Have you seen Idiocracy? We're halfway there -- and Bloomberg isn't helping.

Daniel
Daniel

"Letitia James seems to think the mayor's plan is about as stupid as the rest of us do."  As stupid as the rest of us do?  Jeez, when did the Voice become the NY Post?  I, and many other New Yorkers, in fact support the ban, which, if it works to keep a few people from ODing on slurpees, will maybe help reduce the obesity epidemic, and therefore slow down the rising costs of medical care, WHICH WE ALL PAY FOR. So what are you talking about, King?    And seriously, if people want 48 ounces of freaking soda, let them buy four cans--BAM--benefit to the sky-is-falling business community.  The point is to make it less easy for people to be steered towards enormous and unhealthy beverages.  This is a good thing for all New Yorkers.

Ted
Ted

Reply to Daniel - Read some history.  When you give up your individual right to make bad choices, you open the door to letting someone take away your right to make any choice.  And why do you think the left pushes for government-run health care?  It's to provide cover for the very thing you say: We (the taxpayers) all pay for your lifestyle, so therefore you will live the way the government tells you to live.  Welcome to the soft tyranny, aka the nanny state.  The distance between telling you how much soda you can have at the Multiplex Cinema and telling you what car you can drive, and how far, or where you will work and for how much, or even what time to go to bed, isn't very far.  And after that, if you want to see what a hard tyrrany looks like, you'll get a first-hand look when you try to say "no" to nanny.  If Mike Bloomberg wants to go around acting like my 80 year-old grandmother, he should at least dress like her.  Until then, he should shut up, do his job by cutting crime and cleaning the streets, and lay off my snacks when I'm at the movie theater. 

michael1201
michael1201

Apparently giving up our right to make a bad choice, for example not have medical insurance. Is not a right we have. So if we don't have the right to choose not to be insured and not be penalized for it, whats so wrong with taking it a step further and forcing us not to drink stuff thats bad for our health. 

Lance Boyle
Lance Boyle

As long as I can still get a 48-ounce tumbler of gin, everything'll be fine.

Now Trending

From the Vault

 

Loading...