Consumer Information: Legal and Political Battles at the Frontier of Food Policy

Abstract

This paper explores the tactics corporate opposition uses to undermine local and state food policy efforts that address transparency of consumer information. It also examines the industry rhetoric around these issues, and contextualizes these conflicts within the larger sociopolitical environment. Three case studies were explored in order to understand the opposition tactics and language: a New York City menu labeling ordinance, a San Francisco soda warning label ordinance, and a GMO labeling law passed in the state of Vermont. The various industry tactics and public rhetoric were examined. Finally, the broader sociopolitical environment was examined to understand what made certain opposition tactics more or less effective. The tactics available to industry include: litigation, or working through the courts to prevent laws from being enacted, influencing policy through lobbying, and influencing public opinion through public relations, the media, and funding research. In the three cases, the industry used all of these different tactics to impact local or state policy. In the New York City menu labeling ordinance case, the industry tactics were ultimately not successful. The San Francisco warning bill case remains unresolved, as the presiding judge has yet to respond to the industry’s legal appeal. The lower court found that the law could stand, and hearings at the Court of Appeals are currently underway. Notably, the warning bill campaign is difficult to extract from the larger soda tax policy battles in which the industry is enmeshed. In the Vermont case, the weaker federal bill ultimately was successful and preempted Vermont’s GMO labeling bill. The analysis of the industry’s public rhetoric revealed several major themes, including lack of public health evidence, confusion for customers, and negative impact on customers. Additionally, qualitative analyses indicated that the industry also promotes its own programs and self-regulation as superior, more effective alternatives to government regulation. Finally, there was significant emphasis on the industry’s efforts to help the consumer. Local and state political context has a significant effect on the efficacy of the opposition tactics, particularly in terms of the effectiveness of the attempts to promote preemptive laws that would undermine the local or state food policy. Litigation was used in all three cases, to varying levels of success, an indicator that industry perceives the legal process as an important factor in influencing policy. Preemption, through both political and legal efforts, were also prevalent throughout these cases. This research project was intended to serve as an introductory foray into the relationship between industry tactics and language used, and helps provide context for other research that seeks to understand the ways that industry opposes local food policy.