Soda dispenser machine featuring Pepsi products on display in Miami Gardens, Florida, Monday, March 27, 2022 (AP Photo/Wilfredo Lee)
If governments can help people make better decisions about their health, wealth, and well-being, should they do so? Who decides what is “better”?
The Denver City Council recently passed an ordinance that prohibits restaurants from offering sugary drinks on children’s menus. Families may request other beverages, but children’s menus may only list water or milk. Researchers found that when Walt Disney World removed sugary drinks from children’s menus, most children chose from the default options rather than ordering drinks that weren’t on the menu. City Councilman Chris Hynes believes the new requirements will help reduce obesity by making healthier choices the default.
He described the ordinance as a “nudge” similar to the Colorado law that requires grocery store shoppers to bring their own bags or pay a fee to purchase paper bags. A “nudge” in the right direction is what Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein, authors of Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness (2008), call a “nudge” in the right direction, without overt coercion. It is a way of explaining policies that change the behavior of employees. Governments and employers will change the “choice architecture” to direct individuals to save more, eat better, exercise, get vaccinated, and use less energy and water.
For example, rather than asking employees if they want to participate in a savings program, employers automatically enroll employees. Employees can opt out if they wish, but most do not. Utility companies send customers reports comparing their energy usage with neighboring countries and encourage them to be more energy efficient. Hotels are also using similar peer pressure messages to encourage towel reuse. The Affordable Care Act requires chain restaurants to display calorie information on their menus. Congress hoped customers would weigh their calorie options and potentially lose weight as a result. For similar reasons, several states and now the city of Denver are mandating how restaurant kids’ menus are designed to reduce sugar-sweetened beverage consumption.
Human societies have always regulated the behavior of their members through social norms, laws, education, shame and honor, and other means. Thaler and Sunstein refer to these policies as “libertarian paternalism” because individuals (with the exception of restaurateurs) technically still have a choice. After all, it’s for our own benefit. These elites know what’s best. Or is it?
Denver City Council is right about sugar. Milk contains half the amount of sugar in the form of lactose compared to the plant-based sugars (fructose and sucrose) found in juices, lemonades, and sodas. However, milk is higher in calories and also contains more fat than prohibited alternatives. To reduce obesity, councils are trying to encourage children to avoid sugary drinks and opt for drinks that are higher in calories and fat.
Similarly, the Colorado Legislature is using its wisdom to encourage shoppers to ditch single-use plastic bags and switch to less environmentally friendly alternatives. Banned Plastic bags take longer to decompose than paper bags, but paper bags require much more energy and water to manufacture than plastic bags, and (because paper bags are heavier) also take more energy to transport. and produce more toxic chemicals. Heavy multi-use plastic bags need to be used 10 to 20 times to match the carbon footprint of single-use bags, and cotton bags can be used more than 7,000 times before becoming a more environmentally friendly option. need to do it. Multi-purpose bags that are rarely used and end up in landfills are much worse than flimsy bags.
Government-recommended LED lighting is more efficient and has a longer lifespan than banned incandescent lights, but it significantly increases light pollution. Light pollution not only wipes out stars, it harms wildlife, disrupts human circadian rhythms, impairs the immune system and increases the risk of diseases such as cancer. Brighter doesn’t necessarily mean better.
Milk or lemonade? Paper or plastic? LED or incandescent? There are no right answers, only tradeoffs. However, politicians insist that nudges are not imposition, as they impose their preferences on the people. Picking the surface doesn’t justify using the word “libertarian” to describe what is clearly nothing more than regular old paternalism. These elites believe that parents, shoppers, and business owners cannot be trusted to weigh costs and benefits for themselves. They must be manipulated by their superiors.
But for how long? Populist sentiment and distrust of institutions are on the rise. Anger over the government’s overreach during the coronavirus pandemic persists. This self-interested approach is bound to provoke a backlash.
Krista L. Kafer is a weekly columnist for the Denver Post. Follow her on Twitter: @kristakafer.
Sign up for Sound Off for a weekly roundup of columns, editorials, and more.
To submit a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or review our guidelines on how to submit by email or mail.
