Limits proposed on fast-food restaurants (California, of course)

The Los Angeles Times ^ | Tami Abdollah

[2ndDivisionVet]

As America gets fatter, policymakers are seeking creative approaches to legislating health. They may have entered the school cafeteria -- and now they're eyeing your neighborhood.

Amid worries of an obesity epidemic and its related illnesses, including high blood pressure, diabetes and heart disease, Los Angeles officials, among others around the country, are proposing to limit new fast-food restaurants -- a tactic that could be called health zoning.

The City Council will be asked this fall to consider an up to two-year moratorium on new fast-food restaurants in South L.A., a part of the city where fast food is at least as much a practicality as a preference.

"The people don't want them, but when they don't have any other options, they may gravitate to what's there," said Councilwoman Jan Perry, who proposed the ordinance in June, and whose district includes portions of South L.A. that would be affected by the plan.

In just one-quarter of a mile near USC on Figueroa Street, from Adams Boulevard south, there are about 20 fast-food outlets.

"To be honest, it's all we eat," Rey Merlan said one recent lunch hour at a Kentucky Fried Chicken. "Everywhere, it's fast food everywhere."

Merlan said it wasn't likely that a limit on new restaurants would change peoples' habits, even though he thinks it's a good idea.

A Times analysis of the city's roughly 8,200 restaurants found that South Los Angeles has the highest concentration of fast-food eateries. Per capita, the area has fewer eating establishments of any kind than the Westside, downtown or Hollywood, and about the same as the Valley. But a much higher percentage of those are fast-food chains. South L.A. also has far fewer grocery stores.

[Gabz]

Nanny State Ping.........

[wbill]

Who’s to decide what foods are considered healthy among those that are not? ...depends on who has better lobbyists, as to who gets exemptions.

[Red Badger]

I wonder if they’ll include Starbucks?.................

[sionnsar]

legislating health.

And they won't stop until they control every single aspect of your life.

Totalitarianism.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[wbill]

Of course Starbucks will be excluded. They're a progressive thinking company....so the extra tall super latte with extra sugar and heavy cream has different calories than evil McDonald's burgers.

[bmwcyle]

Hypocrites in all they do.

[Madame Dufarge]

"The people don't want them, but when they don't have any other options, they may gravitate to what's there," said Councilwoman Jan Perry

Assertion presented as "fact."

And true to the template, these nanny-state stories always manage to dredge up some weak-kneed whiner who "thinks it's a good idea."

[libertarian27]

Thanks for the Ping

What a great law...now people won’t even have to leave their couch for fast-food, just call up for home delivery ;)

Unless they initiate ‘No-Delivery Zones’

[metesky]

Truth is people have already voted and fast food won in a landslide. If people didn’t want them, they wouldn’t exist. Is there some magic involved? Do Wendy’s, Sonic, Mickey D’s, etc., employ shamans to cast spells over folks forcing them to eat detestable food against their own free will?

[HoosierHawk]

"While limiting fast-food restaurants isn't a solution in itself, it's an important piece of the puzzle," said Mark Vallianatos, director of the Center for Food and Justice at Occidental College.

This is "bringing health policy and environmental policy together with land-use planning," he said. "I think that's smart, and it's the wave of the future."

The Center for Food and Justice?

[dighton]

.
“The people don’t want them.”

[John Jorsett]

"The people don't want them, but when they don't have any other options, they may gravitate to what's there," said Councilwoman Jan Perry

The people don't want them, therefore we must force business not to build more. The tragedy is, I think she actually doesn't know the inherent paradox contained in her viewpoint.

[CSM]

“a tactic that could be called health zoning.”

A shiver just went up my spine!

Thanks for the ping.

[MEGoody]

Merlan said it wasn't likely that a limit on new restaurants would change peoples' habits, even though he thinks it's a good idea.

It won't. They'll just drive farther, which will cause more carbon emissions. The left just keeps tripping itself up.

[papasmurf]

Man, I hate the “oughts”. Please, Lord, let me finish out my days back in the 60’s and 70’s”!

It just gets worse by the minute. Can someone check and see if they’re offering “Creative Stupidity” in Colleges now?

[papasmurf]

Side note:

Here's an interesting story on Starbucks sourcing coffee from China.

[papasmurf]

“Unless they initiate ‘No-Delivery Zones’”

Just the opposite, in fact. Several Counties in California have a “No Exclusion” law regarding home delivery of food.

I used to operate a small chain of Pizza stores in Cali., and was prohibited from excluding “bad areas” from our delivery service.

[calex59]

you can then purchase Fast Food Credits from someone who does not go to fast food places often.

Good idea, but I will call them Fat Credits, sounds better. I can start marketing them right away, all I have to do is say I don't frequent fast food joints and sell Fat Credits for $10 a credit.