Mendo Gives “Fat Bill” Another Shot
Press release for Menu Education and Labeling (MEAL) Act of 2007 (PDF format, 27 KB)
About four years back, At-Large Councilmember Phil Mendelson had a bright idea, one that would put D.C. at the vanguard of the healthy-eating movement: Force certain D.C. restaurateurs to provide nutritional information about calories, fat, carbohydrates, and sodium along with their dishes. Well, the Nutritional Information at Restaurants Act of 2003 didn’t go anywhere, but now—with a new cast of characters on the Council dais—Mendelson’s giving it another shot, this time with a catchy acronym.
Like the original bill, the Menu Education and Labeling (MEAL) Act of 2007 restricts its scope to chain eateries with 10 or more locations nationwide. According to a list distributed with Mendelson’s press release, the new requirements would affect 37 of the 78 chains of that size operating within the District (the rest already offer nutrition facts on the Internet) including 7-Eleven, Buca di Beppo, and Legal Sea Foods. One thing’s for sure: Phil’s no longer a pioneer—New York mayor Michael Bloomberg has stolen his thunder in intervening years.
Mendelson’s not alone on this one: Ward 8 Councilmember Marion Barry is cosponsoring—always a guy very keen to know what he’s ingesting.
What say you folks: reasonable requirement or nanny state run amok?
March 6th, 2007 at 3:41 pm
People are used to having nutrition information on packaged food and want it at restaurants. Otherwise how can you know that a tuna sandwich from a typical deli has 50% more calories than a roast beef with mustard; that a small milkshake has more calories than a Big Mac; or that the BBQ ribs dinner on the children’s menu at a typical dinner house restaurant has fewer calories than the chicken tenders. An industry-backed, nationally representative poll showed that 83 percent of Americans want restaurants to provide nutrition information, such as calories.
March 6th, 2007 at 4:09 pm
Hurrah for Menu Labeling! It’s about time.
Without information, how’s an unsuspecting gal supposed to make informed choices at restaurants? Most of the chains already have nutrition nitty-gritty available on their websites. It certainly makes sense to put that info where customers can actually see it while they decide what to order.
No one likes surprises at the end of the meal, or when we hop on the internet to discover that our appetizer had almost an entire day’s calories. We expect to see prices on the menu–why not basic nutrition information too?
Besides the calorie-conscious (not a small constituency), the residents most likely to be cheering in the streets when this bill passes are people with medical conditions. Rejoice, DC residents with hypertension. Help is on the way.
Just another reason to love Washington, DC! And Phil too, of course.
March 7th, 2007 at 2:47 pm
[...] his Meal Education and Labeling Act of 2007, Phil Mendelson has positioned himself as the District’s culinary Ralph Nader, protecting [...]
March 8th, 2007 at 9:41 am
The restaurant industry has been successful because they have listened to their millions of customers and responded to their needs. For those customers who want information, the restaurant chains affected already provide comprehensive nutrition information (more than just calories) in education oriented formats in brochures, tray liners, posters and websites. The proposal places unnecessary responsibility on the restaurant chains who already lead the way in providing nutrition information and education on healthy diets to their customers.
Restaurants designed around the concept of customers’ self-selection of ingredients such as sandwiches may be unable to comply with menu labeling in a non-confusing and accurate way. According to National Restaurant Association research, the make-up of a sandwich consisting of just five items or toppings (such as bread, meat, cheese, lettuce, tomato), can be ordered in 120 different ways. A sandwich comprised of 10 items or toppings could provide 3,628,800 combinations. Furthermore, an individual presented with 15 items for a sub or sandwich has literally billions of possible combinations. As you can see, the possible sandwich combinations of breads, meats, condiments and toppings would make such a labeling scheme completely confusing to consumers and inaccurate for other. More confused consumers should never be the unintended consequence of well meaning ideas to better inform consumers.