Oh, good: ObamaCare may help raise supermarket prices, too

posted at 7:51 pm on February 7, 2013 by Erika Johnsen

ObamaCare’s benevolent promise to help control and curtail healthcare-related costs is already going magnificently bust; why not just extend the consequences of heightened compliance costs and pricey taxes to an entirely other but equally indispensable economic sector while they’re at it, right?

As the Federal Drug Administration so munificently explains, part of ObamaCare’s overall purpose is to help provide Americans with all of the tools they need to lead healthier lives (with a universal healthcare system that requires society to absorb the costs of individuals’ daily health-related decisions, what choice do they have but to butt into those decisions?) — and so they’re proposing to extend the provision requiring restaurants to disclose nutrition facts to all supermarkets and convenience stores, in order to “help consumers limit excess calorie intake and understand how the foods that they purchase at these establishments fit within their daily caloric and other nutritional needs.” Fox News reports:

Supermarket owners argue a pending federal food-labeling rule that stems from the new health care law would overburden thousands of grocers and convenience store owners — to the tune of $1 billion in the first year alone.

Store owner Tom Heinen said the industry’s profit margins already are razor thin. “When you incur a significant cost, there is no way that that doesn’t get passed on to the customer in some form,” he said.

The rule stems from an ObamaCare mandate that restaurants provide nutrition information on menus. …

The proposed regulation would require store owners to label prepared, unpackaged foods found in salad bars and food bars, soups and bakery items. Erik Lieberman, regulatory counsel at the Food Marketing Institute, said testing foods for nutritional data will require either expensive software or even more costly off-site laboratory assessments.

Salad and hot food bars in grocery shops, sandwiches at convenience stores, and every type of muffin at the local bakery: The regulation would require that all of these businesses undergo the extensive process of breaking down the nutrition facts of their many items. Sounds great in theory, except that doing so ain’t free — and the costs of the regulation are going to be paid for by you and me.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

…you will not pay one thin dime!

KOOLAID2 on February 7, 2013 at 7:54 PM

…meanwhile his family will feast on your dime for the next four years…and beyond!

KOOLAID2 on February 7, 2013 at 7:55 PM

…start drinking ethanol!

KOOLAID2 on February 7, 2013 at 7:56 PM

Because the idiots like Obama voters can’t figure out what is making them bloat like a whale…

hillsoftx on February 7, 2013 at 7:56 PM

…corn liquor!

KOOLAID2 on February 7, 2013 at 7:56 PM

If you want your favorite salad bar, you can keep your favorite salad bar….

hillsoftx on February 7, 2013 at 7:57 PM

…$1 billion in the first year alone. Store owner Tom Heinen said the industry’s profit margins already are razor thin. “When you incur a significant cost, there is no way that that doesn’t get passed on to the customer in some form,” he said.

 

If anything Obama has brought more economic freedom.
 
lester on January 10, 2013 at 4:49 PM

rogerb on February 7, 2013 at 7:58 PM

The proposed regulation would require store owners to label prepared, unpackaged foods found in salad bars and food bars, soups and bakery items. Erik Lieberman, regulatory counsel at the Food Marketing Institute, said testing foods for nutritional data will require either expensive software or even more costly off-site laboratory assessments.

Salad and hot food bars in grocery shops, sandwiches at convenience stores, and every type of muffin at the local bakery: The regulation would require that all of these businesses undergo the extensive process of breaking down the nutrition facts of their many items.

Most would stop making anything locally, and simply bring it in from pre-packaged and already tested foods. Deli’s would be badly hit I imagine.

sharrukin on February 7, 2013 at 8:00 PM

Hungry Trolls. Starve.

Bmore on February 7, 2013 at 8:04 PM

Why doesn’t the government just issue books of standard recipes for baking and other prepared foods and be done? And define what can be put into a sandwich, how much and how thick must be the slices of meat and cheese and all that.

Boy, I hope Bloomburg doesn’t browse HotAir.

Liam on February 7, 2013 at 8:06 PM

Surely the pony-tailed doctor would applaud THIS one.

Chuckles3 on February 7, 2013 at 8:06 PM

You’ll know what’s inside you when you eat it.

Mr. Curly on February 7, 2013 at 8:07 PM

BTW, lester, you’ll notice I post things you actually said.
 
I have no need to lie like you and make stupid stuff up about someone’s positions. Not when you provide plenty of stupid to go around.

rogerb on February 7, 2013 at 8:07 PM

You’ll know what’s inside you when you eat it.

Mr. Curly on February 7, 2013 at 8:07 PM

:)

Axe on February 7, 2013 at 8:13 PM

The gift that keeps on giving taking.

CW on February 7, 2013 at 8:14 PM

to help consumers limit excess calorie intake

Mao perfected that.

Axe on February 7, 2013 at 8:14 PM

Sounds great in theory, except that doing so ain’t free — and the costs of the regulation are going to be paid for by you and me.

Wait… how does it sound great in theory? It sounds like a patently stupid idea to me, regardless of whether or not it adds to the cost of the items. Even if it could be done for free, I’d still be opposed to it. Because it rests on the ever-popular idea that people are too stupid to make their own decisions without the government there to help them.

Does anyone really think that a Krispy Kreme donut you pick up at Speedway on the way to work is a low-calorie, non-fat, health-conscious breakfast choice? Is putting a nutrition label in front of it going to change even one person’s buying behavior? The answer to both questions is no. But even if it was yes, it’s not the business of government to try to get us to conform our food choices to what they think is good and proper.

Shump on February 7, 2013 at 8:17 PM

So.Damn.Sick.Of.This.Government.

This needs to be repealed or were done.

jawkneemusic on February 7, 2013 at 8:19 PM

And how is my local deli expected to go about figuring the caloric content, fat content, fiber etc etc of the sandwich that I have custom-made for me? I tend to vary the contents and amounts each time I visit. Think of a place like Subway, for instance – if I go light on the oil, but heavy on the mayo, lots of pepperoncini, and extra cheese – is the restaurant supposed to calculate my individual preferences, or does the government think that I’m really going to take the time to evaluate my selections each time I change up the contents of my sammy?

Insane.

Hill60 on February 7, 2013 at 8:20 PM

rogerb on February 7, 2013 at 8:07 PM

rogerb, I’m starting to get the feeling lester doesn’t want or isn’t allowed to come out and play. ; )

Bmore on February 7, 2013 at 8:24 PM

to “help consumers limit excess calorie intake and understand how the foods that they purchase at these establishments fit within their daily caloric and other nutritional needs.”

If they haven’t figured out a frosted chocolate muffin has a zillion calories, putting a label on it won’t help them.

This cr4p is pure Saul Alinsky crash the system stuff.

ZenDraken on February 7, 2013 at 8:25 PM

How many people actually read all the ‘nutritional’ information crap on the restaurant menu?

Bueller? Bueller?

Not surprising, the idiots running everything right now have never run a business. Things just ‘magically’ appear – ‘free’ of charge.

GarandFan on February 7, 2013 at 8:25 PM

Can business owners sue for ‘undue burdens’ or something?

jawkneemusic on February 7, 2013 at 8:26 PM

MAY? Has anyone been watching food prices the past couple of years? This administration is destroying the economy, especially the food industry. Let’s burn all of our corn for fuel instead of feeding people. ::sheesh::

Has anyone seen the price of arugula lately?

TheLoudTalker on February 7, 2013 at 8:28 PM

This is on top of all the hikes already. It used to cost me about $100 a week to feed my family of four. Now, about $180. And that’s with cutting back on the treats with non essentials.

jawkneemusic on February 7, 2013 at 8:28 PM

And* non essentials.

jawkneemusic on February 7, 2013 at 8:29 PM

rogerb, I’m starting to get the feeling lester doesn’t want or isn’t allowed to come out and play. ; )
 
Bmore on February 7, 2013 at 8:24 PM

 
Preemptive defensive thread abandonment.

rogerb on February 7, 2013 at 8:31 PM

There is no inflation.

The economy is about to take off.

We’ll have full employment in just a few months.

With hundreds of thousands of good green jobs.

If you like your plan you can keep your plan.

The more the American people find out about Obama Care the more they’re going to like it.

Ther won’t be any death panels.

Killing U.S. citizens with drones is legal, ethical and wise.

You don’t need a gun.

Curtiss on February 7, 2013 at 8:33 PM

Food Nazis and control freaks, get the hell outta my life.

petefrt on February 7, 2013 at 8:34 PM

Won’t affect blacks. They live in food deserts.

tom daschle concerned on February 7, 2013 at 8:40 PM

Ummmmm wasn’t all of this supposed to be FREE!!!!

/Low info buttheads

Galt2009 on February 7, 2013 at 8:41 PM

This falls into the “if you like your salad or your sandwich or your muffin you can still eat it”. And just like the health plan I like and I’m going to get to keep, it’s just going to cost me twice as much as before TheWon started meddling.

mbecker908 on February 7, 2013 at 8:47 PM

75% of Asian voters say “me likee bigger government that offer more services”.

ardenenoch on February 7, 2013 at 8:51 PM

…meanwhile his family will feast on your dime for the next four years…and beyond!

KOOLAID2 on February 7, 2013 at 7:55 PM

Oh absolutely. They dine on the best steaks and cakes.

So much hypocrisy going on and yet the Republicans sit on their hands. Obama lives like a king. 10 million dollar vacations… and still it’s not enough for Boehner to say a blasted thing.

There is nothing that will pierce the Republican establishments conscience. Obama could go on a 50 million dollar vacation,, bathe in Foie gras while smoking Cuban cigars and the GOP won’t blink an eye. In fact, they would call you extremest for pointing it out.

JellyToast on February 7, 2013 at 8:58 PM

So.Damn.Sick.Of.This.Government.

This needs to be repealed or were done.

jawkneemusic on February 7, 2013 at 8:19 PM

I say we fire ALL of them and start over. Including the supposedly ‘conservative’ republicans.

And make a new constitutional amendment – if they don’t pass a balanced budget, we go to a special election and everyone’s jobs are up for grabs – including the preezy.

Timothy S. Carlson on February 7, 2013 at 8:58 PM

As long as we can keep Michelle guzzling tons of Beluga washed down with Cristal, I’m fine with it.

The only people who disagree are flyover racists.

CorporatePiggy on February 7, 2013 at 9:31 PM

GOOD. The country needs to suffer for voting the idiot in. I just hope these high prices and taxes and everything kick in sooner rather than later. The satisfaction of telling idiot libs I told ya so will help me deal with being flat broke and hungry.

Jack_Burton on February 7, 2013 at 9:46 PM

No one reads those idiotic nutritional breakdowns anyway. The only people in the known universe too stupid to know what they’re eating are government bureaucrats and politicians. If George Washington could see what has become of his namesake city, he’d be leading the new revolution himself.

SteveThomas on February 7, 2013 at 9:55 PM

I think that is the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) not Federal Drug Administration.

When the powers that be in government sanction such all encompassing measures, it is not wonder that government bureaucracies don’t, with good intentions, extend their reach. After all, it is for the good of the public.

Russ808 on February 7, 2013 at 10:03 PM

I don’t care for big govt becoming a nanny state but if restaurants and grocery stores had been more willing to provide some information to the consumer then they wouldn’t be facing these new regulations. As for it being a big burden on the grocery stores, I don’t believe that. Our chain grocery store sells bakery items by the piece or already prepackaged. The prepackaged items are labeled with all the ingredient and calorie info they need for the items in the bakery case. I’m willing to bet all the stuff they dump into the salad bar also comes in a labeled package. Same for the soup bar. They aren’t making this stuff from scratch, they’re buying prepared food service foods. That’s what they don’t want you to know.

GrannySunni on February 8, 2013 at 12:05 AM

I know that this comment will be flame bait, but I don’t find this provision to be a bad thing. As one who continues to struggle with his weight I find that information is a useful tool. I don’t often know the nutritional facts of what I consume and would find it useful to see it when I decide what to eat.

There is plenty to hate about this despicable ObamaCare thing, but this provision is not one, IMO.

MJBrutus on February 8, 2013 at 6:12 AM

Has anyone seen the price of arugula lately?

TheLoudTalker on February 7, 2013 at 8:28 PM

obama hasn’t. Not like he has to pay for it.

runawayyyy on February 8, 2013 at 3:05 PM