The power of junk food companies in Washington

Here in London, you walk around different neighborhoods, you have open markets with fruits and vegetables. In a lot of urban food deserts, it's very difficult to find places like that.

S There's several cases where people have to take one or two buses out of their town to find a food store that has these fruits and vegetables. They get to this place taking two buses. Or even in urban areas, in urban centers, where supermarkets can be several blocks away, where there's a lack of access to readily available transportation. If you feel unsafe taking public buses, having to walk several blocks.

Can you imagine the very, very cold weathers in Minneapolis, for example, where there's freezing temperatures, a lot of snow on the ground? It's very difficult for people to actually physically move and walk to supermarkets that are far away, and transportation isn't often the most reliable. So that's what's really unique about these food deserts.

But how did this happen, how did it start that these huge global names got started in the U.S? Just give us something of the roots of this fast food industry in America.

And the fast food culture that started to arise, you also had television and radio, and just a list of all the other fast foods. That sort of mirrored the change in pace and lifestyles of Americans ...that were becoming more and more busier and having more disposable income. And, as you said, this sort of started very early.

In my research, I've looked at developing nations, and this is what they're really experiencing since the 90s and 2000s. But in the U..S, this happened decades before. And so there's been a lot more experience, a lot more opportunity for these industries to grow as economic powerhouses.

And have a lot of political connections. Which still goes on to this day and is now only starting to emerge in other emerging economies.

You know, on top of the things you've mentioned, the proliferation, the rise and rise of the motor car, more people having cars, therefore drive-through restaurants popping up.

Cooking for everyone. But that assumption sort of fell away, it stopped being the norm, and therefore, I'm guessing, the demand for fast food restaurants went up pretty significantly.

Am I right about that?

Working, dual income, not being at home as much. And so that was certainly a big contributing factor and the need for that quick meal outside of the home. Yes, absolutely.

You're absolutely right there.

Or in tobacco, whatever it is. A huge part of their success is the help they get from Washington, D.C. Political decisions So tell us how decisions made by politicians have helped. The likes of Coca-cola, McDonald's Kentucky fried Chicken and all the rest of them.

To companies that make these ultra-processed foods. So you have Democrats that are supporting this, you have Republicans that believe in free markets, the opportunity for industries to grow. And so there's always been a lot of congressional support.

Indirect support for these industries, and sometimes presidents partner with major industries. For example, under the Obama administration, which was highly committed to combating childhood obesity, the Obama administration partnered with Walmart, for example.

To work in these food deserts, and Walmart doesn't always sell the most healthy products. And I talk about this in my book as well. That in other countries, presidents often partner with these industries to achieve alternative social welfare and economic goals.

Every president wants to have employment, job opportunities. These industries provide that. There's always that incentive for presidents to use these industries and meet these alternative objectives while overlooking the broader health implications for their society.

I mean, was Washington tilting to support one, in effect, over the other?

And lobbyists are very expensive, which these major industries can employ, and this is very important. Lobbyists play such an important role in the U.S and so these corporations have that funding availability.

Whereas farmers or others that want to sell these healthier products don't. So there's a vast difference in resources that explains these differences in political influence.

And that, you know, people were writing about that, they were talking about it. As that shift happened, and people became more conscious of health and wanting to eat more healthily.

How did these companies respond?

Nutritional knowledge I always tell the story. I was on campus recently at my university, and a young lady that was behind me was thinking about buying a cookie. And I overheard her asking her friend.

Well, really should I do that? It's so high in sugar and fat. That mindset was absent when I was in college in the 90s. Young people today are more aware of the nutritional content of their foods.

And this is scary in corporations. You also have the innovations like soda taxes in California, where individuals, because of the politics surrounding the soda tax, are learning about how bad sodas are for you. We've seen data showing that there's been a decline in sugary beverage consumption.

Children in the U.

S All these factors are really concerning industries. And it's providing and incentivizing them to turn to other emerging markets, to really find those markets that have not seen that kind of nutritional awareness happen. We have to remember that this is something very new.

In a lot of the emerging economies around the world, in Africa, South America, Asia, and so we really, that's sort of what needs to be addressed and recognized.

That as people were getting more aware of healthy food, perhaps in the cities, then the companies, the big food giants, thought, okay. We need to target consumers who are less aware and find those in other, perhaps poorer, parts of America.

Where did they go?

Are often targeted through, for example, Spanish channels and marketing of McDonald's and other kinds of products. And I think that's where these industries are now. It seems to be focusing their attention on, rather than those that are more knowledgeable.

And don't live in these sort of urban, impoverished areas.

As well, and different labels for them. But these are stores that market where there's very cheap dollar or less chains, and a lot of these stores have moved into rural areas.

They've moved into suburban areas. Opponents argue that discount stores are quickly taking over poor communities where residents have limited access to fresh produce. Dollar stores do not offer fresh food.

And they are usually stocked with highly processed items. Lawmakers in some cities, including Birmingham, Oklahoma City and Tulsa.

Have passed legislation prohibiting dollar stores from opening within a mile of each other. But communities are starting to push back in rural areas and suburban areas, mainly because of their threat to local food establishments.

That have been there for a long time. The threat that they pose to not employing as many individuals, the lack of access to fresh foods. But some communities have actually used state legislation to mandate that a percentage of the food.

Sold in these dollar stores or in Walmarts, have fresh fruits and vegetables. But I think the dynamic in these rural areas is the establishment of these big mega dollar stores.

So, in as simple language as you can, can you just explain what a preemption law is and how it works?

In what some are calling a power play at the state Capitol, lawmakers passed a bill to ban future taxes on sugary drinks. This after the beverage industry convinced more than a million Californians.

To sign a petition for a state ballot measure that would make it hard to raise any local taxes. Industries wanted to forbid the further emergence of any further soda taxes in the future. So one thing that happened.

Is that cities that were influenced by these industries threatened not to pay any tax if they were to force a soda tax? So state legislature in California were faced with a dilemma.

Where do we not get tax from the state or do we impose a soda tax? And, of course, that's just a decision that you have to acquiesce to. And this is a problem because it sets a precedent for other states in a federal system like ours.

And we saw this with Covid-19.

States behave radically differently on legislation. But we also have diffusion, where ideas and success of some industries and their success diffuses to others.

So this is the fear that we have on the soda tax issue.

Came in at nearly 173 billion dollars in 2019. That alone, you would think, would make the, you know, the United States population is, leaders say.

This is just costing us too much, it's putting too big a strain on the health care system. Therefore, we're just going to face down the fast food lobbies, the food and beverage lobbies.

Because it's in our own self-interest, if only in terms of the cost of this great health care burden. Given that, why does the fast food lobby not have a problem dealing with, as it were, the taxpayer lobby, who just doesn't want to keep paying?

For this massive health problem that is created by these products.

With, you know, adolescent health, with the poor's health. On the other hand, there's a lot of people within our government and in other countries to see this as an individual problem and not of the taxpayers problem.

In a lot of societies, this is what I call a contested epidemic, where it's individuals and acting irresponsibly. And the solution is trying to provide them with more information. And that we should not be using our own state resources to do that, and so that's the major problem that we have in the U.S.

Is two political forces that are going head to head on this issue. One thing that has really struck me is that the increase in childhood obesity, the increase in adolescent type 2 diabetes, type 2 diabetes was something we saw with older populations.

Now, the data shows, it's increasing dramatically in the U.

S in adolescents and teenagers. Despite all these vulnerable groups, we all thought that children would convince policy makers that something needs to be done on advertising.

Advertising to children that still nothing has been done in the U..S, and adults, of course. And the health implications associated with these foods.

2 in 5 of the population are, by the definition, the body mass index definition, obese.

And yet, on the other hand, you also do have a big strain in American culture, where people can be really fastidious about their food. And there's signs everywhere when you go for the healthy option and calories being advertised on some products.

Do you see this as being again political in the sense that it's a red state, blue state thing, where there's whole foods and healthy option menus in blue states?

Democrat states, and meanwhile, it's fast food and bans on even knowing what calories are in the food you're eating in Republican red states. And if that is right.

Is this one of these problems that just isn't going to be resolved? It's part of the culture war. Like wearing masks was. You're going to have one America that wants to get healthy, and he's actually pretty slim.

And another America that is not even allowed the information to get healthy, and he's going to remain grappling with this obesity problem.

You know again, New York, for example, was the first to have this mandated information on menus. In any blue state, you'll have more progressive commitment in red states.

It's really like you said. And this was reflected in COVId-19, where libertarian values of individual responsibility and rights that precedes everything, when it even to public health, to food.

And I think that's why you've seen in Florida, like you mentioned, that ban on anything that requires any kind of information on menus. And what is the solution to that? I don't think, honestly, that there is a solution, I think, that as long as federalism prevails.

That will always happen. Unfortunately, we're not in a situation where the central government has a strong influence on this, on providing regulations, it's a decentralized, federalist context.

Where state governments are in charge and governors play a leadership role.

On gardening and educating local communities. We also have climate change, which is in urban heating, which is going to incentivize the creation of green spaces and planting of trees.

And so the fear of, you know, the urban heating problem. In addition to nutritional knowledge, I think I'm optimistic that we will have better choices. What we really need, though, is more nutritional knowledge and working with communities.

So when I lived in Camden, New Jersey, which is a food desert, I think it's, I think, number one food desert in New Jersey. I was in a school board that educated families on how to cook properly. These are the kind of things that we also need in addition to these two other factors.

But I'm optimistic, I certainly think that we can overcome and achieve on that.

The executive producer, Maz Ebtehaj I'm Jonathan Friedland. Thanks as always for listening.