No Vice Taxes – Why Is Food Policy So Classist?

I’ve written about my family on these boards before, but in the past few days, they have journeyed from our tiny town in Montana to visit me in Los Angeles, where I currently reside. My mother and youngest sister were walking down the street with me. We were in the park and sat down on a bench to rest. My sister was drinking from a juice box that, from the label, it was very clear that she was drinking Hi-C. A young woman (with her own toddler) was strolling by and felt compelled to let my mother know that Hi-C contains high-fructose corn syrup and is BAD for you. When my mother told her to mind her own business, the thick Midwest accent gave her away as a ‘yokel’. The woman went on to state that Hi-C is not sustainable OR organic, and is detrimental to my sister’s health. Thank God this didn’t happen the day before, when we were in the same park with Kool-Aid!
Today, on my nightly news, I noticed a segment that placed a huge amount of blame for current healthcare costs on obesity and also suggested that a “vice tax” on unhealthy food, especially soft drinks and liquids in particular, could be foreseeable. These two incidents to me really get at a crucial aspect of current nutrition and food policy, and one that policy makers seem really loathe to address – and that is the classism inherent in the decisions being made about food.
Food policy in the US is messed up – I have no argument there. However, I really think vice taxes are a terrible idea. The products that would be taxed – those containing the dreaded high fructose corn syrup, trans fats, ect. – are also some of the cheapest foods out there. These low-grade, easy to produce ingredients make it so. So it logically follows that these foods would become staples of the middle and upper classes, as opposed to the better off. And that’s exactly what has happened. Your far more likely to enjoy McDonalds and Coke and Twinkies if you don’t have the money to buy anything else (or don’t live in an area where alternatives are available). There’s a great scene in Food, Inc. (which is actually quite good) where a woman explains to the camera that for the price of a small order of produce, she could buy a large order of meats and other, less nutritional foods and feed her entire family.
Yes, I have heard it repeated that being vegan/green/organic does not have to be expensive. And I’m sure that that is true. But I haven’t seen it. For a week of groceries at Whole Foods takes almost my entire paycheck, whereas at Shoprite with non-organic versions, it’s a lot less. Guess where I shop. It’s also an issue of privileged availability. I eat better here than in Worden, where if it’s not available at a fast-food place, Wal-Mart, or a local corner store, YOU DON’T EAT IT. And that’s the way it is. But still, a huge amount of guilt and blame seems to be getting laid at the feet of consumers, who are made to feel terrible for makes choices that better fit their budgets. And I don’t get it.
I understand that the environmental/green/sustainable food movement is important – and I support it. I love the idea of CSAs and revamping American food policy to better support nutrition and helping people make better choices. But those problems should be laid at the feet of the policy-makers, not people who are doing what they can do within their means. Making a judgment about a family letting a child drink Kool-Aid or Pepsi or eat packaged cookies is a classist action, and ultimately a really feel-good exercise in making oneself feel superior. Spare the sympathy, I say, and take up the fight with the people who can change the policy, not those affected by it. And no to vice taxes.