The Associated Press contributed. Email John Burnett at jburnett@hawaiitribune-herald.com. By JOHN BURNETT ADVERTISING Tribune-Herald staff writer A controversial bill to place a one cent per fluid ounce surcharge on all sugary-sweetened beverages sold in the state has been shelved for
By JOHN BURNETT
Tribune-Herald staff writer
A controversial bill to place a one cent per fluid ounce surcharge on all sugary-sweetened beverages sold in the state has been shelved for this year.
“I didn’t feel that the entire Legislature had the political will to pass the bill this year, but I do know my colleagues are concerned about the problem, so I intend to revisit it next year unless we see real movement on obesity,” Senate Health Chairman Josh Green, who co-sponsored the measure said Wednesday night after withdrawing the bill, which was opposed by Coca-Cola and Pepsi.
At a hearing earlier in the week, Green, a Kona Democrat and physician, decried soda companies advertising their wares to children and used Coke’s long-running winter TV ads featuring animated polar bears as an example, saying, “No adult gives a crap about a polar bear,” the Honolulu Star-Advertiser reported.
Green said sugary beverage consumption by teenagers accounts for 170 calories daily, which could translate to 20 pounds of weight gain per year.
Michelle Tang, an executive for Coca-Cola Bottling Co. of Hawaii, submitted written testimony referencing a National Cancer Institute study that showed “soda, sports drinks, sweetened waters and energy drinks contribute only seven percent of total calories, which is to say all other foods and beverages contributed 93 percent.”
“It is clear that we cannot blame overweight or obesity on soft drinks or any other single food or beverage, alone,” she wrote. “Our products already are subject to the sales tax, deposit and beverage container deposit fees. And the unfortunate result of this bill, by trying to place blame on sugar-sweetened beverages and increase the cost to consumers, is that our sales will decline.”
Others in opposition include beverage and retail industry groups, including the Hawaii Food Industry Association,
which testified that there is “no empirical evidence supporting the argument that a soda tax will reduce consumers’ collective calorie intake.”
“The beverage industry is already doing more than its fair share to raise money for the state of Hawaii,” the HFIA letter stated. “The bottle bill has cost the industry a significant amount of profit percentage in surcharges and reduced sales.”
The bill would have taxed not only soda, but any canned or bottled beverages with sugar, including high-fructose corn sweeteners added, including so-called “juice drinks.” It would not tax beverages containing only non-caloric sweeteners, nor would it tax unsweetened fruit juices.
Last year, Gov. Neil Abercrombie proposed a soda tax as a method to fight obesity and balance the state budget, and Green’s bill had the support of the Department of Health and health professionals.
Green, who acknowledged the difficulty of passing a tax measure in an election year.
“Soda contributes no additional health benefit and contributes massive public health costs,” he said. “That’s why we, as a society, are concerned. Not because I want a tax, at all, but because we pay hundreds of millions of dollars for health care.”
He said a task force is being created with DOH, the soda companies and community members “to look at the obesity solution in a global way.
“Pediatric obesity and adult obesity is an epidemic with catastrophic consequences for society, and soda is contributing more than its share to the problem. So if we don’t get the support of the soda industry to help solve this problem, … a tax is going to be necessary. And the money will be spent on pediatric obesity.”
The Associated Press contributed. Email John Burnett at jburnett@hawaiitribune-herald.com.