Of course, all lunchroom behavior was under the watchful eye of Mrs. Longstreet, a fixture in the cafeteria who took seriously her responsibility of in loco parentis. She kept an eye on what everyone ate, or didn't eat, and wasn't afraid to intervene if you had too much or too little of what you should have been having. I think her role was appropriate given the age of her flock. But today, the government is increasingly trying to play lunchroom lady, and unlike Mrs. Longstreet, I'm not sure that's in the job description.
On the heels of the war on trans fats, calorie postings on menus and a New York legislator's efforts to take all salt out of the hands of the chefs in the state's restaurants, comes Mayor Nutter's proposed 2-cents-an-ounce tax on sugary drinks.
He's not alone. Colorado's state legislature passed such a tax. California and Kansas are considering them. In New York, Gov. David Paterson and Mayor Michael Bloomberg both endorsed the idea (though the state Senate rebuffed it this week).
I understand the reasoning behind it. Too many of us are drinking enormous sweet drinks. But we also eat too many Tastykakes and Pat's Steaks, and where is the line between them? Don't get me wrong. Obesity is a big problem, but it's also a complex one aggravated by a number of factors - from larger portions to more time spent in sedentary pursuits. So what's the argument for taxing Mountain Dew, but not Milky Ways?
Dr. Kelly Brownell, a nationally recognized obesity expert listed among the world's 100 most influential people by Time in 2006, spelled it out for me.