The Pro-Health, Anti-Soda Blog
Government
Hidden Soda Industry Subsidies – Food Stamps for Soda
Aug 9th
The federal food stamp program, or as it is now renamed the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP) program, funds obesity causing products such as soda according to a research paper published in the American Journal of Public Health. The paper, written by Jonathan D. Shenkin DDS and Michael F. Jacobson PhD, estimates that $4 billion dollars is spent on carbonated soda each year via the SNAP program.
Not only is this a waste of taxpayer money since carbonated soda provides little nutritional value, it also promotes unhealthy eating habits. The paper, titled Using the Food Stamp Program and Other Methods to Promote Healthy Diets for Low-Income Consumers, aims to point out methods to assist low income consumers chose healthy eating habits.
Why subsidize soda when water is available for (near) free? This seems wrong on so many levels.
“The federal government should be doing everything it can to reduce the consumption of soda and other sugar-sweetened beverages, which promote tooth decay, weight gain, obesity, diabetes, and other diet-related diseases,” said Jacobson. “SNAP should be oriented toward increasing the consumption of good, healthy food. None of the $65 billion invested in nutrition assistance in 2010 should end up paying for Coke, Pepsi, or Mountain Dew.”
via FoodCEO.
San Francisco Bans Some Sodas from Vending Machines
Jul 28th
Soda vending machines, a thing of the past?
This move is a good one from the standpoint of the “war on soda.” Governments are coming to realize that soda, when consumed excessively, are along the lines of cigarettes in that they are very unhealthy and lead to a shortened lifespan and decreased standard of living.
We applaud San Francisco’s ban on regular soda and restrictions on diet soda and hope to see other municipalities follow suit.
Read more: Sugary-drink ban starts to affect S.F. sites
Philadelphia Proposes 2-cent Per oz Sweetened Drink Tax
Mar 4th
We’ve covered Soda taxes before, but Philadelphia’s recently proposed sweetened drink tax puts it at the forefront of the ‘tax soda’ movement. Mayor Nutter is proposing a 2-cent per oz tax on sweetened beverages. For example a 20-oz bottle of soda would be 40 cents more and a 2-liter bottle would be $1.35 additional.
I am all for taxing unhealthy foods to help subsidize healthcare. But this appears to be a tax meant to help with the actual running of the city budget. What is to stop them from taxing any other type of food? What about a tax for every gram of fat content in a food source?
Although I am not completely against a soda/sugar tax, this does strike me as the wrong way to go about it. If this passes, expect similar ordinances to pass in other major metropolitan areas.
The Soda Tax, Obama’s Take, Round 2
Sep 9th
It looks like the idea of a soda tax is back again, but did it ever really go away? I would hate to tax something that should be regulated by the free market, but this time it looks like the economy and a want for new revenue streams may get the best of us. Hopefully, everyone will benefit by raising some money for the US Government, while reducing sugar consumption. Unfortunately this tax will also impact the largest consumers of soda, which may also be the same citizens who can afford a new tax the least.
Obama has made some comments about a soda tax in an upcoming issue of Men’s Health. In the article, he states that “There’s no doubt that our kids drink way too much soda. And every study that’s been done about obesity shows that there is as high a correlation between increased soda consumption and obesity as just about anything else“. To counter that, he also states “people’s attitude is that they don’t necessarily want Big Brother telling them what to eat or drink, and I understand that“.
They are also calling this a “sin tax” and putting it in the same category as the cigarette taxes. It should be interesting to see how this plays out in the news media.
(via)
Is Soda The New Tobacco?
Jun 23rd
Has pop gone flat?
Interesting article over at The Wichita Eagle.
“I believe soda is the next tobacco,” said Barry Popkin, director of the University of North Carolina’s Interdisciplinary Obesity Center and author of “The World Is Fat,” published this year.
Soda drinkers haven’t achieved pariah status like smokers before them, but proposed sugar taxes and social pressure to be healthy can put a damper on doing the Dew — and even some in the growing ranks of diet pop drinkers are feeling soda shame.
Although I am NOT a proponent of taxing beverages of any kind, the article does raise a good question. When consumers drink soda excessively, which leads to obesity and other health problems, and do not have health insurance coverage, can the rest of the taxpayers be expected to foot the healthcare bill? Would it be wise to target a main source of obesity and spread the tax burden over those who are consuming soda?
These are all good questions that I think, from a tax perspective, go back to whether you think the government should have a hand in healthcare and what kind of ‘distribution of wealth’ should occur.
I recently drove past the Pottstown Memorial Medical Center and saw a group of 5 or 6 staff members smoking across the street (so they could be off hospital property), looking like total outcasts. Part of me said “Good, they should quit smoking anyway and get the message” but the other part felt bad for them.
Since soda doesn’t have “second hand effects”, I do not think that soda drinkers will go the way of the tobacco smoker, but there will probably be an increasing social stigma to consumers of the sugary beverage (and the diet aspartame replacement).
The US Congress Thinking About Federal Tax on Soft Drinks
May 22nd
Tax on Softdrinks – good idea or bad? Considering the health effects on soda, this is along the lines of the taxes that are levied on tobacco. The soft drink industry (PepsiCo and Coca Cola) must be sweating bullets on this!
One idea to help pay for health care reform may be hard to swallow for Coke drinkers and the soft drink industry.
Congress plans to discuss a tax on sweetened soft drinks that are often blamed for helping cause health problems like obesity and tooth decay in the first place.
Not surprisingly, companies like Atlanta-headquartered Coca-Cola Co. are sour on the potential of a so-called “sin” tax on their products.
“It’s an over-reach when government uses the tax code to tell (people) what to eat and drink,” said Kevin Keane, senior vice president of the American Beverage Association. Officials from Coca-Cola declined to comment, instead referring questions to Keane’s group.
Source: Atlanta Journal-Constitution
