Jonathan Shenkin, Drill Sergeant

Dipstick of the week:

Bangor pediatric dentist and public health advocate Jonathan Shenkin, president-elect of the Maine Dental Association, says Maine should add soda to the short list of items that cannot be purchased with the taxpayer-funded food stamp benefit. If a federal waiver is granted, Maine would be the first state in the nation to prohibit soda purchases with food stamp dollars.

The reliably execrable Bangor Daily News begins its article by stacking the deck thusly:

Soda pop, the beverage of choice for hundreds of thousands of Mainers, is well established as a major contributor to dental decay, obesity and other health disorders.

Couple of things.

The phrase "the beverage of choice" is (unintentionally) important here, is it not? Shenkin wants to take choice away from adult consumers. If we cut right to the hart of the matter, there's no other way to put it.

Also consider that in his case, the nanny streak does run deep:

Shenkin was the driving force last year behind a city ordinance that banned smoking in vehicles when children are present. The measure since has been expanded into a state law.

That slippery-slope initiative, a gateway measure that will soon see the likes of him advocate the outlawing of smoking in people's homes, at least had the ever-so-slightly redeeming quality that it was intended to protect the health of minors. At least ostensibly. I still don't agree with it, but fine.

No such save-the-children excuse is evident when it comes to Shenkin's latest initiative, though. It's pure meddling — pure sticking-one's-nose-in-the-affairs-of-other-adults who make diet choices that Shenkin doesn't happen to like.

What's more, he's deliberately badgering a class of people that's least able and likely to defend itself against such high-minded but low-blow attacks on their consumer freedom: the poor. Shenkin is content to let everyone but the most economically disadvantaged decide what they enjoy eating and drinking. If he were sincere about this fight, he'd try to get soda banned for everyone (good luck, dude). Instead, he picks on poor people, who, by and large, don't closely follow the news, rarely organize, and hold very little political power. Nice. The hallmark of the bully is that he chooses victims who won't give him a black eye in return.

Finally, if Shenkin got his wish, ask yourself why would he stop there. (Answer: He won't.) Why not forbid the Untermenschen he's got in his crosshairs from having sugar in their coffee? From ever again eating a Mars bar or M&Ms? From consuming a hamburger or a bag of Doritos or a sixpack of Bud or any number of other enjoyable things that Jonathan Shenkin, that great humanitarian, deems bad for you?

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

P.S.  I heard yesterday that Maine prohibits the use of chocolate in bake-sale items. The person who told me said that everyone she knows ignores that particular law, but it's still incredibly odious and ridiculous if true. Anyone know more?

P.P.S.  I digress a bit, but here's one school (county? state?) that appears to have outlawed bake sales altogether.

At Davis Senior High School [in Sacramento], the old-fashioned bake sale is a thing of the past. School officials have forbidden students from selling homemade cookies and cupcakes to raise money for their campus clubs or favorite charities. Food prepared in home kitchens violates federal health laws, according to school rules handed down last month. "If you wish to violate this order, your club will be disbanded," reads one provision.

Comments

[Ruby]

Diet soda doesn't contribute to obesity. In fact, if they wanted folks to lose weight they'd be better off refusing them lactose laden cow's milk or high fructose juices than zero cal-soda.

[tomk]

I don't see why a program designed to help poor people meet their nutritional needs shouldn't have guidelines and restrictions against food and drink with little or no nutritional value. I'm sympathetic to your distaste for government meddling, but in this case, where the meddling has already occurred through the food stamps, the state has an appropriate role in ensuring they are used effectively, even if this cuts down on the consumer's choices.

[Rogier]

Ruby:

Good argument. I didn't make it for strategic reasons. It gives the other side the opportunity to make some faux "compromise" that allows the buying of diet sodas but outlaws every drink with a surfeit of sugar.

Tom:

If that's how you feel, you should address the questions in the last paragraph, which it appears you've conveniently skipped. Furthermore, maybe the recipients of food stamps can henceforth be legally made to exercise 45 minutes a day, and to meditate, and to forcibly undertake any other number of other activities likely to improve their health. We're heading for interesting times.

[Ruby]

"I don't see why a program designed to help poor people meet their nutritional needs shouldn't have guidelines and restrictions against food and drink with little or no nutritional value."

Low-fiber, high calorie food have tremendous value to people suffering from diseases such as Crohn's and some forms of cancer. These are often the few foods they can physically tolerate.

People need to make these decisions for themselves. Under the pretense of helping those who don't want the help we're going to just make life more expensive and miserable, if not extremely physical painful, for other people.

But of course cutting out soda (including diet soda) and sugary foods isn't about really helping anyone; it's about public moralizing.

[Dee]

How about an approved foor list. No candy or soda.. is milk and dairy approved. in my opinion dairy is junk food. are potatoes and starches alright. this way everyone on food stamps can look like a barnyard animal..I think this dentist might be related to NY mayor Bloomberg