McDonald's Skirts Happy Meal Toy Ban -- Maybe

Today's the day that, by decree of the San Francisco City and County Board of Supervisors, restaurants can no longer give away toys with meals that don't meet nutrition guidelines spelled out in the law.

So does that mean no more Happy Meals?  Not the way McDonald's sees it. Beginning today, the toy that used to be free with a Happy Meal now costs ten cents, with the proceeds going to the city's Ronald McDonald House.  Burger King is doing something similar.

Can this be legal?  USA Today seems to think so.  "McD, Burger King outwit San Francisco's Happy Meal rules," the paper says. McDonald's "outwits City Hall," squeaked the San Francisco Chronicle. 

Maybe, but there are quite a few attorneys out there who think the McDonald's strategy is just a little too cute and that newspapers ought to do that thing they talk about all the time -- you know, that objectivity, get-both-sides thing.

One is Michele Simon, who writes for Grist, a "green news" Website.  Simon says fast food outlets routinely manipulate the "default options" on the menu to ensure maximum sales.  Order a combo meal, for example, and it's likely to automatically come with a soda, not juice or milk.

So if McDonald's is just automatically adding ten cents to the price of a Happy Meal and assuming the parent wants the toy included, it may not pass muster in court, Simon suggests.  What's called "legislative intent" carries a lot of weight in court, after all.

Fully comply

For its part, McDonald's is arguing that it is simply protecting the God-given right of parents to fatten up their children however they choose.

"While we will fully comply with this law, we also have a responsibility to give our customers what they want," Danya Proud, a spokeswoman for McDonald's, said in a statement, "Parents have told us they'd still like the option of purchasing a toy separately for their child when they buy them a Happy Meal."

Other critics said this was just the latest in a long line of cynical ploys by McDonald's to skirt any attempt to improve the healthfulness of its food aimed at children.

"As McDonald's long has, it is again using a charity that helps children get well to defend a practice that contributes to a range of diet-related conditions like diabetes," said Corporate Accountability International. "Currently McDonald's uses its contributions to the charity to defend the hundreds of millions it spends marketing its junk food brand to kids each year."

Relatively reasonable

Supervisor Mar

The San Francisco ordinance isn't as draconian as it's being made out to be.  It sets a few relatively reasonable nutrition guidelines -- a maximum of 600 calories and limits on fat and salt, for example -- that meals must meet if they include a free toy.

San Francisco Supervisor Eric Mar, who initiated the ordinance,  dismissed the 10-cent strategy as a marketing ploy. Mar, who represents the Richmond District, is a public interest attorney who has also served on the San Francisco Board of Education.

The measure passed last year with a supermajority of the board despite heavy lobbying by McDonald's. 

“This is a tremendous victory for our children’s health. Our children are sick. Rates of obesity in San Francisco are disturbingly high, especially among children of color,” Mar said last November. “This is 
a challenge to the restaurant industry to think about children’s health first and join the wide range of local restaurants that have already made this commitment.”

Mar said at the legislation is aimed at promoting healthy eating habits and to address issues related to childhood obesity. The legislation encourages restaurants to provide healthier meal options. To provide an incentive item -- like the toys in Happy Medals -- meals must contain fruits and vegetables, not exceed 600 calories, and must not have beverages that have excessive fat or sugar.