TY - JOUR
T1 - State Preemption of Consumer Merchandise and Beverage Containers
T2 - New Strategy to Preempt Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Policies?
AU - Pomeranz, Jennifer L.
AU - Mozaffarian, Dariush
N1 - Funding Information:
Dr Mozaffarian reports research funding from the National Institutes of Health, the Gates Foundation, and The Rockefeller Foundation; personal fees from Acasti Pharma, America's Test Kitchen, Barilla, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Danone, GOED, and Motif FoodWorks; scientific advisory board, Beren Therapeutics, Brightseed, Calibrate, DayTwo (ended 6/20), Elysium Health, Filtricine, Foodome, HumanCo, January Inc, Perfect Day, Season, and Tiny Organics; and chapter royalties from UpToDate, all outside the submitted work.
Funding Information:
This research was supported by NIH project number: 2R01HL115189-06A1 Cost-Effectiveness of Health System and State-Level Strategies to Improve Diet and Reduce Cardiometabolic Diseases.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. All rights reserved.
PY - 2022/5/1
Y1 - 2022/5/1
N2 - State legislators passed laws preempting, or prohibiting, local governments from regulating beverage containers. Although the primary purpose of these laws may be to ban local environmental regulations addressing single-use plastics, it is unknown the extent they also preempt public health policies aimed at reducing sugar-sweetened beverage consumption. In 2021, using LexisNexis, we assessed state legislation preempting local control over consumer merchandise and containers. We identified 8 laws (and 16 failed bills) with broad language preempting local regulation of the sale, use, or marketing of multiple container types, including beverage containers. Most legislative activity occurred during 2016-2021, with legislative intent to avoid a "patchwork" of local laws, avoid burdening retailers, and have a "refreshing drink." Local policy control was characterized as "personal choice." Broad preemption language may stifle local policy making aimed at reducing sugar-sweetened beverage consumption and preempt public health policies such as restricting portion size, in-store promotion and display, and labeling measures.
AB - State legislators passed laws preempting, or prohibiting, local governments from regulating beverage containers. Although the primary purpose of these laws may be to ban local environmental regulations addressing single-use plastics, it is unknown the extent they also preempt public health policies aimed at reducing sugar-sweetened beverage consumption. In 2021, using LexisNexis, we assessed state legislation preempting local control over consumer merchandise and containers. We identified 8 laws (and 16 failed bills) with broad language preempting local regulation of the sale, use, or marketing of multiple container types, including beverage containers. Most legislative activity occurred during 2016-2021, with legislative intent to avoid a "patchwork" of local laws, avoid burdening retailers, and have a "refreshing drink." Local policy control was characterized as "personal choice." Broad preemption language may stifle local policy making aimed at reducing sugar-sweetened beverage consumption and preempt public health policies such as restricting portion size, in-store promotion and display, and labeling measures.
KW - containers
KW - local policy making
KW - preemption
KW - state government
KW - sugar-sweetened beverage policies
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85128001104&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85128001104&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/PHH.0000000000001462
DO - 10.1097/PHH.0000000000001462
M3 - Article
C2 - 35045010
AN - SCOPUS:85128001104
VL - 28
SP - 222
EP - 232
JO - Journal of Public Health Management and Practice
JF - Journal of Public Health Management and Practice
SN - 1078-4659
IS - 3
ER -