As holder of an Honours Degree in Politics and self-confessed West Wing obsessive, I can claim to know just a little about US politics. Now, there is an argument that a little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing, but let’s skip over that minor detail for the sake of this particular blog.
A combination of diverse, yet related issues has reduced me to the point of wanting to book the very next flight across the pond, find a number of the so-called leaders of the free world/captains of global industry and beat seven shades of stupidity out of each and every one of them. This reaction is in response to some recent news from the US political scene.
The first is a via a clever piece of writing by Martin Luz in the Huff Post about the ensuing sugar tax battle. He talks about the war between the sugar refiners, food manufacturers and retailers and the increasingly large number (in more senses than one) of Americans try to understand why obesity is such a problem. Within this is the role Coke is playing, using its massive Social Media PR budget to fuel the war of words and demonstrate that fructose really isn’t any worse than sugar which, as Luz so eloquently puts it, is “like saying heroin is no more addictive than cocaine”. The potential for social media to play such a major role in dictating both social policy and consumer behaviour in a single campaign is fascinating while being, at the same time, saddening for a subject that should be a no-brainer for any rational thinking person.
Next up is the latest and, despite the spin, apparently fruitless efforts by Barack Obama to convince Congress that the health of one of the largest populations in the world really does matter more than the shareholders in the medical insurance, hospital and pharma sectors – a point supported by civil rights campaigner, the Revd. Jesse Jackson. For a moment, the rest of the world held its breath, believing that he might succeed where his Democrat predecessor, Bill Clinton, had failed. He may yet, but only through a legislative loophole. Again, to many, US healthcare reform would seem a no-brainer.
And finally comes the recent announcement by the Environmental Protection Agency that it is going to delay the implementation of emissions regulations for stationary sources and raise the previously agreed thresholds after it had received deputations from Senate Democrats. Apparently, the Democrats are trying to pre-empt a move by the Republicans to block the legislation altogether. The most telling comment, however, is from “industry officials” who claim that “regulating emissions such as carbon dioxide with the Clean Air Act could be overly burdensome to many energy-intensive sectors” and trotting out the “increased costs=lack of investment=lack of job creation” argument. To which the response of any right-minded individual who cares about their health or that of the planet would be “Diddums! It’s about time responsibility outweighed fiduciary”.
Which leads me back to my favourite TV programme. West Wing is a superb look behind the scenes of the White House during the Clinton era – even predicting Obama’s candidacy some four years before it became a reality. Through it’s insight I’m under no illusions about how complex major legislation creation actually is. However, for the keen observers amongst us, I think it presents a a far greater and more fundamental into the US’ relationship with sugar, obesity and its approach to healthcare. Pick an episode, any episode. Watch no more than 10 minutes and note in how many meetings there is an array of pastries, muffins and other sugar-ridden foodstuffs liberally placed on conference tables or the Oval Office sideboards. Can you begin to imagine just how much Danish was consumed during the inconclusive 7-hour White House bi-partisan health ’summit’? Constructive debate? It’s a miracle those locked in the room didn’t succumb to diabetic comas… or maybe they did.
