UPDATE, August 6, 2012: ?The El Monte City Council voted unanimously on July 24 to put a 1-cent-an-ounce tax on ?every can of "sugar-sweetened beverages" sold in the city on the November ballot. The tax, a "business license fee," and is expected to raise $7 million a year for the city. The Council, which had to declare a fiscal emergency to comply with election law in order to place the tax proposal on the ballot, also approved a companion measure that will allow voters to affirm or deny direction of those funds, if approved, for treatment and prevention of chidhood obesity. In reporting the action, First 5 LA quotes its senior policy analyst, Kate Sachnoff,who testified in favor of the proposal:?
"The impact of these drinks on very young children is profound. For ach additional sugary drink a child consumes per day, his or her risk of obesity increases by an astonishing 60%."
The unhealthy, well-researched and well-documented impact of sugary drinks and soda on children ?-- 37.3% of El Monte's children are overweight --was a collateral influence on the council's vote. "We have some major financial hurdles down the raod that we're gonna need to deal with, and we need to consider putting something like this on the ballot," the mayor of El Monte, Andre Quintero, at left, said before the vote.?
Quintero knows the opposition will be strong (see Richmond's battle, below):
"It is irresponsible for a city with 13.7% unemployment to impose a new business tax on beverages that will threaten local grocers, restaurants and movie theaters and the jobs they provide in the community," said Bob Achermann, executive director of the California/Nevada Soft Drink Assn. "Singling out one item in the grocery cart for an additional tax is discriminatory and regressive, and it makes no sense."
Mayor Andre Quintero, who first introduced the tax plan earlier this year, said he was not surprised by the backlash. A similar plan proposed at the state level by Assemblyman Bill Monning (D-Carmel) failed last year, after opposition from the California Chamber of Commerce, California Restaurant Assn. and other food industry advocacy groups.
"Oh yeah, we anticipate the industries that sell these products to put up a fight," Quintero said. "If this is successful here and it works, then it might be successful in other cities. They're not going to want anything like this to take hold anywhere."
UPDATE, June 15, 2012: Will Harless of the Bay Citizen is reporting that the?American Beverage Association?is funding a local campaign, the Community Coalition Against Beverage Taxes?to fight a local measure proposed city councilman and cardiologist?Jeff Ritterman. The measure?would raise taxes (a penny per ounce) on all sodas and soft drinks sold in Richmond. (See below for previous reporting on this story).
51% of children in Richmond are overweight or obese, one of the highest rates in the state (38% average), according to a June analysis of data from the California Department of Education?s ?2010 Physical Fitness Tests by the California Center for Public Health Advocacy (CCPHA) and the UCLA Center for Health Policy Research. (Interactive maps of the data can be found on kidsdata.org).
A local resident, Rosa Lara,?presented the Richmond City Council with a petition that she said included 900 signatures against the soda tax, including the names of 100 local businesses.
Lara, who also presented her case to the council in Spanish, said she represented the Community Coalition Against Beverage Taxes, but did not note the beverage association was helping fund her petition drive.
In an interview, Lara said she does not mention the American Beverage Association funding when she is collecting signatures. But if asked, Lara said she will acknowledge that she's a paid community organizer.
?What I tell them is I live in the community,? she said. ?I?ve lived here my whole life. I tell them I?m with the Community Coalition Against Beverage Taxes, and I?m a community organizer. Most of the people that I talk to ... know me already, they know what I do, so I really don?t have to explain who I am.?
Chuck Finnie, a vice president of the San Francisco public relations firm Barnes Mosher Whitehurst Lauter & Partners, confirmed in an interview that his firm is working for the Community Coalition Against Beverage Taxes and rented the office across from the Richmond city hall on behalf of the coalition.
?There are stakeholders nationwide who care about what happens in Richmond,? including soft drink makers, bottlers, distributors, retailers and local union workers, Finnie said.
The office rented by Barnes Mosher previously served as campaign headquarters for Richmond City Council Member Corky Booz?, an outspoken soda-tax opponent [who voted against the measure]. Booz? has appeared on Fox News and PBS and was?quoted in The New York Times?this month speaking against the tax. The office was vacant when Lara approached Booz? to ask who its landlord was, according to Booz?.
The councilman said he was unaware that either the American Beverage Association or Barnes Mosher had any involvement in the anti-tax effort.
Previously reported:?
UPDATE, May 18, 2012:?Richmond (East Bay, Contra Costa County) may become the first city in the nation to impose a surcharge (a penny-per-ounce) on soda and other sugary drinks. In a 5-2 vote Tuesday the city council agreed to place the measure, proposed by City Councilman and cardiologist Jeff Ritterman, at left, on the November ballot, reports Carolyn Jones for the San Francisco Chronicle.
?The tax would apply to soft drinks as well as Snapple and other beverages with added sugar. Most juice would be exempt, as would diet sodas... [The revenue raised] would go into the city's general fund, raising between $2 million and $8 million annually for soccer fields, school gardens, diabetes treatment and other antiobesity projects.
The council's decision came after several hours of heated discussion. Councilmen Corky Booz? and Nathaniel Bates were the dissenting votes.
?This is a tax on poor people. That?s all it is,???Booz??said. ?People are going to drink soda anyway. But people who can?t afford cars are going to end up paying more.??
In Richmond, over 20% of the population of 103,700 live below the federal poverty line. In the 2010 census, nearly 40% of the residents were Latino, 31% were "white," and 27% were African-American. Ritterman supported his point of view with a statistic that a third of Richmond's African-American and Latino sixth- and seventh-graders are obese, and an additional 20% are overweight. He did not give figures for "white." Both of the council members who dissented are African-American. Nathaniel Bates is a former mayor of Richmond.
Previously reported on taxing soda to fight obesity:
UPDATE, April 5, 2012: The results of a poll released yesterday by the California Endowment finds 62% of California voters would support a special tax on soda and soft drinks to be used for programs that fight childhood obesity, reports Jill Tucker for the San Francisco Chronicle.
The findings indicate the public is increasingly in favor of governmental regulation of children's sugar consumption.
The Field Poll?conducts 40-50 polls annually gathering public opinion on social and political issues in California; this was was the Field-TCE Childhood Obesity Prevention Survey,and was sent to 1, 000 "likely voters."??Among the results:
48% think childhood obesity is the major health risk for children today, up from 35% in 2003.
?73% believe that a community effort, not just family, is needed in childhood obesity prevention.
68% believe a comprehensive prevention program is needed, even if it requires billions of dollars in increased government investment.
57% favor giving local governments the authority to tax products, like alcohol, cigarettes, junk foods or sweetened beverages, if approved by a majority of voters, to help pay for obesity prevention programs.
Previously reported here on this topic:
February 4, 2012: Soda pop illegal for kids?
May sound radical, say the authors of a new report, "Public health: The toxic truth about sugar," but so did other public health campaigns (e.g., for second-hand smoke exposure and teen condom usage). The authors say sugar should be regulated in the same way to reduce consumption and prevent many health problems, including obesity, reports Erin Allday for the San Francisco Chronicle.
The report by Robert H. Lustig, MD, professor of clinical pediatrics, division of endocrinology, and director of the Weight Assessment for Teen and Child Health Program at Benioff Children's Hospital, University of California at San Francisco; and two public health experts, Laura Schmidt and Claire Brindis, from the Clinical and Translational Science Institute and the Philip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies, School of Medicine, UCSF, recommends special sales taxes, controlling access, and tightening licensing requirements on vending machines and snack bars that sell high sugar products in schools and workplaces.
Excessive sugar alters people's biochemistry, argues Lustig, making them more vulnerable to the metabolic conditions leading to diabetes and heart disease, and at the same time increases their cravings for more.
It's sugar, not obesity, that is the real health threat, says Lustig...studies show 20% of obese people have normal metabolism and no ill health effects resulting from their weight, while 40% of normal-weight people have metabolic problems that can lead to diabetes and heart disease. They contend that sugar consumption is the cause.
In the paper, the authors say that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration needs to remove sugar from the list of foods "generally regarded as safe," meaning they can be used in unlimited quantities.
?We?re not talking prohibition,? Schmidt said. "We?re talking about gentle ways to make sugar consumption slightly less convenient, thereby moving people away from the concentrated dose. What we want is to actually increase people?s choices by making foods that aren?t loaded with sugar comparatively easier and cheaper to get.?
Watch the authors discuss the recommendations:
?
The report is published in the February issue of Nature.
Researched for California's Children by Elizabeth J Carlyle.
?
the big chill tony blankley steelers charles barkley beyonce troy polamalu james harrison
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.