L.A. says 'no fries with that': hoping to improve people's diets, Los Angeles has banned new fast-food outlets in part of the city. Should what we eat be the government's business?

• Author: Medina, Jennifer
• Position: NATIONAL

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

Driving along Crenshaw Boulevard in Los Angeles, it's not hard to find a place to grab a bite. At some intersections, there's a fast-food joint on every comer. And if the restaurant chains had their way, city officials say, that's what most streets would look like in some parts of town.

That's why Los Angeles is effectively banning new fast-food restaurants in South Los Angeles, a huge section of the city that has significantly higher rates of poverty and obesity than other areas of the city.

The ban, which the City Council passed unanimously in December, is meant to encourage healthier dining options. Supporters envision more sit-down restaurants, produce-filled grocery stores, and takeout meals that center on salad rather than fries.

"If people don't have better choices or don't have the time or knowledge or curiosity, they are going to take what's there" says Jan Perry, a city councilwoman who pushed for the regulations. "To say that these restaurants are not part of the problem would be foolish."

Even in a nation where a third of schoolchildren are overweight or obese, the L.A. fast-food ban raises questions about when eating a particular kind of food stops being a personal choice and becomes a public-health concern. In short, is this the government's business?

Nanny State

The ban is part of a broader move by some local and state governments to use the law to fight obesity and the health problems it causes. Many states have banned soda and candy from schools. California and New York City have prohibited restaurants from using trans-fats, which are chemically altered fats that are particularly unhealthy. New York City also passed a law requiring calorie counts to be posted on chain-restaurant menus, right next to the prices.

Critics of these measures say they go beyond the proper role of government and are emblematic of a trend toward what they call the "nanny state."

"I think it's pretty ridiculous," says Joe Hicks, a Los Angeles community advocate. He thinks the fast-food ban raises serious questions about the role of government. "I don't want my government wagging their finger and trying to micromanage my personal life, telling me that cheeseburgers and French fries aren't healthy--as if I didn't know that!"

There's also the question of whether the ban will work: Just because the city bans new fast-food places doesn't mean that every storefront will suddenly be filled with salad bars and other healthier options.

...