Hb 2650 Case Study

Better Essays

This is identifiable because the policy has specific parameters which as supposed to be followed without deviation. When one analyzes possible implementation problems in regards to HB2650 when it comes to the programmed implementation one can determine that (1) there was no ambiguity when it came to policy goals. The goal was to lower the obesity rate for people ages 5-19. This goal has not been compromised or questioned by any organization or politician, and; (2) There are several people and organizations that were involved with the implementation of the policy. Those involved included, Governor Kulongoski, the USDA, parents and a number of groups such as the Oregon Public Health Institute, Oregon Nurses Association, American Diabetes Association, …show more content…

However, there are many aspects of the policy that had to be agreed upon and supported by the Governor. Lawmakers also had to be certain that none of the Bill’s proposed mandates violated any laws that were already put forth by the government; (3) The policy also involves a situation in which the people involved recognize the policy as being valid, but they were unsure as to if the policy would make any real improvement to the situation. In the case of HB 2650 this uncertainty caused the policy to take several attempts to be passed into law. Due to the purpose of the Bill which was to restrict the competitive foods sold to students on school campuses to help combat obesity in students the implementation of the policy seems to be fully rational. To pass legislation that only specified general goals would have set the plan up for failure. This is because unless things are explicitly spelled out, people, organizations, and companies will try to undermine …show more content…

It can be assumed that HB2650 works through the environment slightly more than the individual, which is why students are nor banned from bringing competitive foods to school. It is constituent in that it worked to improve the competitive food policies that existed in schools prior to 2007, it operates in the background and does not force anyone to follow it. Therefore, students have the right to bring competitive foods on to campus. However, it is feasible that they would not be permitted to sell or distribute the items on school grounds as it would violate the policy. This would then take the policy into regulatory territory because the government could be seen as interfering in the rights of the individual both as a distributor and a

Get Access