This week the NAACP’s New York chapter opened a new front in the war on soda.
The group just filed an amicus brief in support of the beverage industry’s lawsuit against the city for its ban on super-sized sugary drinks.
Mayor Bloomberg says the city’s plan to prohibit the sale of sweetened drinks in cups or bottles larger than 16 ounces is needed to combat rising obesity.
This much the NAACP has right. Whatever the ban’s health merits, it creates an unfair playing field for business. Because bodegas, delis and restaurants are regulated by the city, they will be subject to the ban. But because supermarkets and 7-Elevens (home of the humungous Big Gulp) are regulated by the state, they won’t be.
That’s more than a fair point. We’d add that we would also feel better about actions like this one if they came through legislation passed by an elected City Council rather than a decree imposed by the unelected Department of Health.
It’s sad, however, to see the NAACP — and the Hispanic Federation — resort to race to make what is otherwise a good argument. They claim that the ban is not just unfair but racist, because of its impact on small, minority-owned businesses.
Cynics will observe that the NAACP has some conflicts of its own here. On the one hand, it has loudly applauded Michelle Obama’s anti-obesity crusade, and concedes that childhood obesity is a greater problem in the black and Hispanic communities.
On the other hand, it also has a long relationship with Coca-Cola, a regular sponsor of its annual convention and generous contributor to some of the NAACP’s education initiatives.
In short, the NAACP makes a good point worth debating: The city’s soda ban gives some drink sellers a competitive advantage over others. Pity the group had to play the race card to make it.