Sweet Drinks Bring Sour Controversy

Details: Created on Tuesday, 05 May 2015 17:20; Written by Katrina Floranza

VERMONT- The bill to implement a tax on sugar-sweetened beverages is back in the state house for the fourth time. However, this time, the bill seems to be going further than it has before.

The Beverage Tax Bill was first introduced in 2011, claiming that with a tax on beverages, it would decrease the obesity rate in Vermont. Once rejected in 2011, it came back again and again in 2013 and 2014, being denied once more each time. Appearing in front of lawmakers for a fourth time, it has just recently passed in the House Means and Ways Committee.

The original proposal of the bill was a two cent tax per ounce on sugar-sweetened beverages. These beverages include soft drinks, iced teas, juices, and sports drinks. The House Ways and Means Committee approved the bill with some compromise. The bill was changed from a two cent per ounce tax to a half a cent per ounce tax, as well as adding diet drinks to the list.

The bill will now go back to the House Appropriations Committee to be voted on before moving to the House to be voted on, and then the Senate-- where if approved, it will become a bill.

Supporters of the bill believe that this could decrease the obesity rate in Vermont. "Obesity is definitely a problem in Vermont. Sugar-sweetened beverages are a known cause of obesity," says Northeastern Vermont Regional Hospital Food Service Dietician Sharon Anderson.

In fact, the Alliance for a Healthier Vermont says that Vermont spends an average of about $202,000,000 a year on obesity related medical costs. That number is just for adults alone.

"I think something as clear as a sugar-sweetened beverage-- that has no nutritional value—no purpose, really, for nutrition... I think it's pretty clear that that could be taxed," adds Anderson.

According to the Vermont Department of Taxes, the bill is expected to bring in $18,000,000 in revenue to the state, which would go towards increasing medicare payments to doctors and healthcare providers. However, in order to implement the bill, it would cost the state at least $800,000 alone.

"Zeroing in on sugar-sweetened beverages, I don't think is a strong enough motive to help in the health concepts that many people are talking about," says Representative Marty Feltus, Republican-Lyndon.

If the bill does go into effect, it could increase the cost of sugar-sweetened beverages by 25%. Not only would that increase the consumer's cost of groceries, but also pose as a threat for local businesses.

"I don't think it's a fair tax on many of the businesses, especially on our side of the state," says Rep. Marty Feltus. In fact, businesses would suffer by having to increase the cost of not just sugar-sweetened beverages, but also the rest of their products in their store—making it hard to compete with larger, widely-known corporate stores in the area.

"I'll say it, they are completely selfish ideas... and the rest of the counties should push back, really, we should push back, strongly," says Representative Scott Beck, Republican-St. Johnsbury, "I'm more than eager to lead a fight to stop these ridiculous proposals."

Many businesses and organizations in Vermont have already begun to push back. Over 200 businesses and organizations have started, with a petition of over 18,000 signatures from Vermont residents. There also is a Facebook page where residents of Vermont can express their concerns and voice their own opinions.