Topic: Should an added tax be placed on sugary drinks, such as sodas?

Transcription

1 Topic: Should an added tax be placed on sugary drinks, such as sodas? Directions: 1. Gather: Read and watch the videos for this assignment to gather information on the topic. As you research, take notes on important information to include in your essay. Remember to have the title of the article, the author(s), and a list of information and quotes taken directly from each source. 2. Plan: Use the 5 Paragraph Essay Organizer to plan your essay. You should have a thesis statement, the three supporting details and evidence. If time permits, write down a hook for the opening sentence and restate your thesis statement for your conclusion. Tip: Your thesis statement should answer the topic question in a brief sentence. It is a summary of your essay s main idea. Tip: The hook can be: 1. An interesting fact you learned from doing research. 2. Some background information on the topic. 3. A question for the reader (make sure your question is compelling!) 3. Write: Practice writing under a time limit! Do not forget to proofread, use transition words, and quote evidence throughout your essay.

2 5 Paragraph Essay Organizer Topic Opener/ Hook Thesis Point #1 Point #2 Point #3 Support/Examples Support/Examples Support/Examples Conclusion

3 The following video is here to show a glimpse of what the articles will be covering. Use it to gain background information on the topic beforehand. Video Source: What If You Only Drank Coke (Soda) and Nothing Else? Tip: Always keep the topic question in mind. You are not arguing about whether or not soda is bad for your health, but whether or not the government should interfere and tax sugary drinks. Things to consider: 1. Should the government play a role in what we eat or drink? 2. Should people be held accountable for their own decisions? 3. Will the Soda Tax mostly affect low-income families? And if so, is that okay? 4. Can the generated tax be used to better cities and people?

4 What Is the Soda Tax and Which Cities Have One? By Beverly Bird The Soda Tax First, the tax doesn't apply just to soda, at least not in all cities that collect it. Reaching for that juice drink instead may not spare you from paying the tax. This is technically a sweetened drink tax in many areas, and they have varying rules as to what exactly constitutes a sweetened drink. Does it have to contain sugar? Not necessarily. Some cities although not all include drinks made with artificial sweeteners. And while that juice drink might seem nothing like a soft drink, it s still taxable in some cities if it contains less than 50 percent real fruit or vegetables. Sports drinks can get nailed with the tax, too. Baby formula is generally exempt, and don t worry if you ask for sugar in your coffee-to-go. But a Starbucks Frappuccino will most likely get you because it s actually created with sugar. And what about alcohol? Some cities spare this, too, because it s already taxed. The tax ranges from 1 to 2 cents per ounce. This may not sound like much, but it can increase the price of a sugary drink by more than 75 percent. The price of a 12- pack of Coca Cola can cost as much as $2 more. Although you re not actually responsible for paying the tax in most cities, it will probably hit you in the wallet all the same. It's typically collected from distributors, who then pass the cost on to retailers who in turn hike the prices paid by consumers.

5 Which Cities Collect This Tax? So where do you have to worry about the sugar content of what you re drinking? As of 2017, six cities collected this tax as of 2017: Berkeley, California: Since March 1, 2015 Albany, California: Since April 1, 2017 Oakland, California: Since July 1, 2017 Chicago, Illinois: The tax actually extends to all of Cook County Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Since January 1, 2017 Boulder, Colorado: Since July 1, 2017

6 The Hidden and Not So Hidden Benefits of a Soda Tax By Allen D. Kanner, Ph.D. Robert Goizueta, Coca Cola s CEO from , had a grand vision for the world: by the early 21st century, people would drink more Coke than water. A few years later, in 2001, CEO Douglass Daft unveiled an installable tap that automatically mixes Coke syrup with water to make the soda directly available from the kitchen faucet, a technology right in line with Goizueta s global ambitions. To date, soda has not overtaken water as the world s largest source of hydration, in part because soda companies now also sell vast amounts of bottled water at astronomical profits. Even so, in 2014, an expected 52 billion gallons of carbonated beverages will be produced, a veritable ocean of soda pouring down our collective gullets; this figure rises annually. In the tradition of Goizueta and Daft, today s industry executives are undaunted by the fact that sugary sodas are a major health hazard a unique, contributory cause of the ballooning type 2 diabetes crisis, along with its associated complications and illnesses. The fight against Big Soda is about our kids health. Just as the tobacco industry did with cigarettes, soda companies go to great lengths to target vulnerable populations. A good chunk of soda advertising is aimed at children and teenagers. The result in the U.S. is that soda provides teenage girls with about 10 teaspoons of sugar daily and teenage boys with about 15 teaspoons. Lowincome communities and communities of color, which proportionately consume more soda than other communities, are also major targets of ad campaigns. The CDC estimates that one third of all children, and nearly one half of African American children, will be diagnosed with type 2 diabetes in their lifetimes.

7 This tax focuses on Big Soda How can society protect itself from this extremely effective marketing onslaught? For both straightforward and subtle reasons, this is where a soda tax comes in. This is a tax on industry, on the distribution of sugary beverages into Berkeley. Distributors will decide whether to pass the cost along to businesses and consumers. Should they increase the price of their products and this is the straightforward effect the additional cost could reduce soda consumption by encouraging people to select healthier, cheaper options. Coca Cola just reported a mid-single-digit reduction in sales following a new tax on sugary beverages that was introduced in Mexico this past January. San Francisco s city economist predicts a 31% reduction in soda consumption if a two-cents-per-ounce tax passes this November. Second and this is the subtler but likely even more powerful effect an industry-focused tax acts as a kind of anti-soda public health campaign. People understand that product-specific taxes are levied only when a substance is causing a great deal of harm, with no end in sight. This understanding can contribute to a major cultural shift in our perception of soda, moving it from cool and fun to uncool and selfdestructive. Just such a shift has occurred with tobacco in the last few decades. As cities, states, and countries implement soda taxes, more and more people will realize that things go better when we don t guzzle 52 billion gallons of sweetened carbonated beverages every year. Berkeley citizens can play a leading role in promoting this trend by voting yes for the proposed one-cent per ounce soda tax on November 4th.

8 Philadelphia s Soda Tax Is a Bad Idea Other Cities Will Copy By Baylen Linnekin But who do such taxes really benefit if anyone? What negative impact will Philadelphia's soda tax have on employment at groceries and convenience stores, and on their suppliers? Won't the soda tax increase alcohol consumption, since six-pack of soda will now cost about the same as a six-pack of beer? Won't higher-income Philadelphians simply drive outside the city (or even the state) to buy soda at places like Costco (meaning the tax burden will likely be borne more by low-income consumers)? What if families pay more for soda and as a result can afford to buy fewer fruits and vegetables? Consider, too, that there is little or no evidence that soda taxes reduce obesity. Soda accounts for about five percent of the calories Americans consume. Recent research suggests soda taxes may cut that already small consumption rate by about 10 percent. Even if we don't replace soda calories with calories from candy, pizza, beer, or cookies though research suggests we will then soda taxes will eliminate 10 calories a day from our diet, or about one pound per year. In other words, soda taxes won't make anyone thinner. Even absent taxes, reducing soda consumption hasn't dented America's obesity problem. Soda consumption has fallen in the United States by 25 percent since the 1990s. But data suggests Americans are as obese as ever. That means people drank far less soda even as obesity rates continued to rise. At least one key effort to boost revenue to improve the well-being of low-income Americans hasn't worked and is as regressive as any policy in existence. It's troubling that soda tax supporters are unable to demonstrate that soda taxes may improve health

9 outcomes. Using soda taxes as a tool to fund other policy initiatives that supposedly benefit low-income consumers is also destined to fail when those policies themselves aren't proven to be effective. Policy decisions like these that are driven by a mix of campaign promises (as in Philadelphia) and passion simply invite future food-policy interventions that are set up to fail. Prof. Nestle has referred to soda as "low-hanging fruit." Who's to say other fruits higher up on the tree branch won't be the next targets for those who want to tax our food? Activists recently seized on a World Health Organization report that links consumption of bacon, beef, and other meats to cancer. Today's soda tax could turn into sin taxes on hamburgers and bacon. It could evolve into taxes on foods that are high in carbs. If organic food is somehow better than cheaper competitors, governments may choose to tax non-organic foods. Where, if anywhere, does this stop? Unfortunately, not in Philadelphia.