D.C. Councilmember Mary Cheh (D-Ward 3), who has vowed to pay for her “Healthy Schools” legislation one way or another, has asked colleagues to approve a tax on soda sales in the District of Columbia as a means of raising the estimated $6.5 million annual cost of the omnibus bill aimed at improving school nutrition and combating the city’s high childhood obesity rate.
In her letter to other members of the Council, Cheh does not specify a tax rate for sodas, but quotes the director of the U.S. Center for Disease Control as saying that a tax of 1 cent per ounce on soft drinks–or approximately 10 percent–would be the “single most effective measure to reverse the obesity epidemic.”
Cheh notes that since the repeal of a city tax on snack foods in 2001, there is no tax in the District on sodas except those purchased from vending machines. Meanwhile, Maryland levies a 6 percent sales tax on soda, while Virginia charges 1.5 percent. plus a state excise tax. Revenue from Cheh’s proposed soda tax would be directed into a special “Healthy Schools” fund, to be used only for purposes outlined in the bill.
In addition to providing additional funds for school breakfasts and lunches, the “Healthy Schools” bill would also help fund the purchase of local produce for school meals and establish grants for school gardens. While the legislation has won widespread support on the Council and among healthy food advocates, it has been dogged by questions of how Cheh would finance the plan when the city is in financial pain.
Special soda taxes have been proposed in other cities–notably New York–as a means of attacking the obesity problem. But this is the first time the issue has been raised seriously here. The “Healthy Schools” legislation, which sailed through committee and an initial Council vote recently, is scheduled to come up for a second and final vote on May 5.
An aide to Cheh last night said Cheh proposes to attach the soda tax to the city’s proposed general budget legislation, scheduled for a vote May 25, and expects that it will spark a fierce reaction from the food and beverage industries.
The proposed soda tax could also ingnite protests from the city’s black and low-income residents. Cheh says in her letter that such a tax most likely will fall heaviest on the District’s poor, who are also at greatest risk for being overweight or obese. “This means that children in the District who are at the greatest risk for childhood obesity are the most likely to decrease their consumption of sugary beverages as a result of a soda tax.”
We are engaging the concerns of a hungry planet--slowly--right here in our kitchen garden in the District of Columbia, about a mile from the White House.
While low-income Americans will be most effected by a soda tax, the jury is out on what that effect will be.
Food Bank For New York City, where I work, has taken the position that a regressive soda tax would punish low-income people — adding grocery costs for individuals and families to whom every cent counts and who struggle to stretch their grocery budget to the end of the month, making it even harder to afford healthier options. Meanwhile, a soda tax would do nothing to address lack of access to and affordability of healthier options.
While I applaud the focus on improving the nutritional value of school food in Maryland, I have to question if a soda tax is the right source of change.
For more on the Food Bank For New York City’s position on a soda tax in New York, check out our blog post:
http://dld.bz/sq5
I love the Soda Tax idea, but I don’t think its going to happen here in New York. The beverage lobby has really mobilized their resources, constantly showing anti-tax commercials on TV. They use scare tactics to convince people that their grocery bills are going to increase tremendously. I despise these ads, but I could see how they could be effective.
It’s sad to me that we taxing certain foods seems like such a positive way to curb a national health epidemic. I’m on board with Cheh’s plan though.
A soda tax could have benefits greater than obesity, though. Maria Rodale’s blog post on the topic shares some additional benefits from the tax including how it may curb the global climate change. http://www.mariasfarmcountrykitchen.com/top-5-reasons-not-to-drink-soda/
I’d love to hear your thoughts on it!
dbuckley-You have GOT to be kidding us with this statement:
Food Bank For New York City, where I work, has taken the position that a regressive soda tax would punish low-income people — adding grocery costs for individuals and families to whom every cent counts and who struggle to stretch their grocery budget to the end of the month, making it even harder to afford healthier options. Meanwhile, a soda tax would do nothing to address lack of access to and affordability of healthier options.
If people were so worried about affording healthier options they would SKIP the soda and drink water that comes out of their tap (which BTW costs the consumer about 10 cents a gallon, that is a about 95% cheaper than soda)
So you are telling me the low income people are still going to purchase the soda at a higher price and skip the broccoli as a result? This does not sound like a tax problem, but a priorities problem-and therefore a personal problem. I do not think the kids should suffer in unhealthy school cafeteria because a group of people thinks because they are low income they should not have to see a price hike in their soda.
I do not think you are doing any of these people a favor advocating for lower soda prices. I think many people of all income levels need to familiarize themselves with the healthiest and cheapest drink of choice, like H20.
dbuckley-you act like soda is the only choice low income people have.
Melissa,
I think the point that Carly at the Food Bank is trying to make is that a soda tax is just the wrong end to start at in combating obesity and poor purchasing patterns. I think it is really interesting that Maryland is proposing using the funds from a soda tax to improve the quality of school food — keeping a connection to healthy eating at least in the intention of the tax.
But the fact is that unless it is coupled with targeted educational outreach, a tax like this is going to do very little to change people’s purchasing habits. Improving school food is great, but if at least part of what you’re concerned about is improving health in low-income communities over the long term, just putting healthy food in front of kids at school is not likely to change their eating habits outside of school very much, even if there are other choices out there.
The point is also that other choices are extremely limited in many places (just google “food deserts”) and affordable choices are even harder to come by. I do believe that it would be better policy if government focused their energy on making healthier options more available and more affordable. And it would do less harm to low income communities.
But either way, you need education to complement measures like this (ie, see the Food Bank’s CookShop Program: http://dld.bz/bYpF).
Personally, I don’t think a soda tax is so horrible, but I don’t think it’s good.
D.C. Council Member Mary Cheh’s proposed beverage tax would include much more then just soda. Cheh’s proposal would target all sugary beverages. Sport drinks, juices, iced tea, lemonade, if it has sugar, Cheh wants to tax it. This would lead to confusion as baristas attempt to calculate the tax of a large black coffee with two sugars. It would be the 1993 snack food tax fiasco all over again.
It has been put forward that Healthy Schools Act of 2010 be fund by revenue from a D.C. beverage tax. The pitfall with this is the politician and their machinations. Repeatedly across the country at differing levels of government, the behavior of elected officials falls into familiar pattern. A new tax, a new lottery or a new toll is enacted to pay for a new program, a new initiative or a new public amenity. Only to see the politicians then cut the funding to the institution in the next budget cycle to pay for another pork belly project.
The dividing line between low-income and outright poverty is a string of coins. Low-income families shop for food by looking at price tags, not the USDA food pyramid. Regressive taxation not only stretches the food budget, but could wreak devastation on the whole family economy. It isn’t the president of Pepsi that will join the unemployment line, but the delivery driver, the convenience store clerk and the hot dog vendor.
My blog on the taxation of Washington, D.C. at
http://nomoredctaxes.blogspot.com/2010/05/soda-tax-rebuttal.html
Check out the No D.C. Beverage Tax to sign the petition
http://nodcbevtax.com/Sign_the_Petition.html