Latino Groups Have Surprising Stance on ‘Soda Tax’
Check out the L.A. Times‘ interesting article on how the soft drink industry squashed a plan to tax sugary beverages — a plan advocates said would have reduced obesity and helped finance healthcare reform.
Recently the tax looked like it had a chance, given the need to fund more health insurance coverage and the soaring cost of treating ailments related to excess weight. But White House staff didn’t fully embrace the idea, and beverage lobbyists attacked some of the nation’s most distinguished nutriton scientists.
Some minority groups, including some committed to fighting obesity, even lined up against the tax:
Using the argument that higher food and drink taxes would unfairly burden the poor, the coalition recruited a bevy of Latino groups, among them the Hispanic Alliance for Prosperity Institute, the National Hispana Leadership Institute and the League of United Latin American Citizens.
Public health analysts were surprised to find that the list included the National Hispanic Medical Assn., which represents 36,000 Latino doctors and focuses on health issues, such as obesity-related diabetes, that hit Latino youth especially hard.
“Why in the world would a Hispanic health advocacy group do this?” asked Kelly Brownell, the director of Yale University’s Rudd Center on Food Policy and Obesity.
Read the rest of the article here.
February 8, 2010 - 12:16 pm
When I look for a good weight-loss plan, I wonder which tax will help me more. Doesn’t everybody? Please.
February 8, 2010 - 3:40 pm
These groups do not represent Latinos. Did anybody vote for them? NO. They’re just tools of corporate America. It seems that anybody these days can open an office and pretend to speak for Latinos.
Obesity and diabetes are rampant in the Latino community and a tax on soda, a beverage that has no nutritional value, might have forced some people to give up the soda habit.
Maybe if they proposed a tax on high fructose corn syrup they would have a better chance of passing it. It would be much more difficult for the food industry to defend such a harmful ingredient.