Industry Behind Ads Opposing New Soda Taxes

Let’s get real about who the Americans Against Food Taxes really are.

To see this group’s television ads, you might think it is a grassroots organization of working parents, pictured bringing their children home from school or sports practice. The “mother” in a frequently aired ad chides lawmakers who might consider raising taxes on soda or juice drinks. “They say it’s only pennies, but those pennies add up when you are trying to feed a family,” the actress offers.

Fair enough. We’re certain many Americans buy these products for their families and in a unrelenting recession we all lament higher prices at the checkout.

The group’s Web site says Americans Against Food Taxes is a “coalition of concerned citizens – responsible individuals, financially strapped families, small and large businesses in communities across the country” who are opposed to a proposed tax on food and beverages, specifically a hike on soda, juice drinks and similar products.

The truth? According to Sourcewatch, an online fact-checking group, the organization’s membership is mainly lobbying groups for soft drink manufacturers and distributors, including Coca-Cola Co., Dr. Pepper-Royal Crown Bottling Co., PepsiCo, Canada Dry Bottling Co. of New York, the Can Manufacturers Institute, 7-Eleven Convenience Stores and Yum! Brands.

Are they Americans who are against food taxes? Sure.

But hardly are they average-Joe citizens who are worried about grocery bills and decided to launch a public information campaign.
This is the beverage lobby protecting its livelihood. The beverage producers fear a battle similar to that on cigarettes and an ensuing sin tax on their products to pay for associated health costs from overindulgence or for health care reform generally.

The Americans Against Food Taxes came out swinging, with ads focused on working moms and families who are obvious consumers, and op-ed pieces that dispute the effectiveness of sin taxes.

We’re not looking to exclusively blame the nation’s obesity epidemic on soda, sports drinks and other sweetened drinks, but it is one way that too many people consume too many calories, too easily. Mindless sugar consumption packs on the pounds and harms teeth, and overindulgence contributes to obesity and other associated health problems.

The Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity at Yale University estimates that more than 300 million gallons of sugar-sweetened beverages – including soft drinks, sports drinks, flavored water and ready to drink coffee – are sold each year in Virginia. Tennessee accounts for about 234.5 million gallons of the stuff. Adding a 1 cent tax per ounce would generate about $386 million in Virginia and about $300 million in Tennessee.

Obesity-related diseases and programs to fight expanding waistlines cost an estimated $147 billion a year in the United States. A 3 cent tax on every can of soda would raise $50 billion over 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office. And according to a recent Reuters survey, 58 percent of Americans are willing to bear a tax increase of 1 percent or more to support health care reform.
These sugar-sweetened drinks are extras, not necessities, and a 3 cent tax per ounce could help improve health, without being oppressively high.

A recent study from the University of Minnesota estimates that a 10 percent price increase would cut consumption by 8 percent to 10 percent. Obviously, the beverage industry would not want to see this kind of cut in profits.

But from a public health perspective, that would be sweet news indeed.