DN editorial: Soda taxes win big across the country

ANOTHER ELECTION DAY outcome that might have gotten overshadowed by bigger news: Voters in Boulder, Colo., and San Francisco, Oakland and Albany, Calif., approved a soda tax. What Big Soda feared when Philadelphia passed its own sugary-drink tax five months ago is coming to pass - and the list of cities could keep growing.

All the measures were ballot questions, and the outcome wasn't even close, ranging from a 55 percent "Yes" vote in Boulder to 71 percent "Yes" in Albany.

In a way, though, the fight was a repeat of the campaign in Philadelphia earlier this year - with Big Soda, through the American Beverage Association, pouring millions into an anti-tax effort. On the opposite side was billionaire and former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who contributed some of his millions to the pro-tax forces. Local money also was raised.

It's not over yet. Next week, commissioners in Cook County, Ill., which includes Chicago, are due to consider a soda tax.

Big Soda, in its messaging program, has portrayed the tax as anti-consumer and supported by elected officials who are motivated simply by a desire to rake in more tax dollars. As they did in Philadelphia, the anti-tax forces also mislabeled the per-ounce levy a "grocery tax," implying it would raise the cost on all food and drink items.

It didn't work in Philadelphia, and it didn't work in the cities that approved the soda tax on Tuesday.

In Philadelphia, the tax was proposed by Mayor Kenney and passed by City Council, but a recent Pew poll of city residents found that 54 percent favored the tax. The Philadelphia rate is 1.5 cents an ounce and is due to go into effect Jan. 17. Big Soda is fighting it in the courts, and the case has yet to be heard.

The beverage industry concern is that the soda tax will spread, likening its effect to cigarette taxes, which caused a decrease in cigarette sales and smoking.

We say bring it on. Everyone knows of the link between health and smoking. With fewer smokers, we have seen a decline in lung and respiratory diseases.

Now, it looks as if people are waking up to health issues connected with the consumption of high-sugar drinks - obesity and diabetes among them.

When Kenney pushed the tax in Philadelphia, he never cast it as a health measure. To him, the main goal was to raise money for pre-kindergarten programs and public works.

On the West Coast, supporters of the referendums played up the health angle, with some targeting proceeds to anti-obesity and recreational programs for children.

Whatever the motives, we are confident that the spread of the tax to other localities eventually will have an impact on soda sales - and an impact on public health.

Soda consumption has been declining since the mid-1990s even without the taxes. And soda manufacturers are busy seeking alternative products, including just not low-cal drinks but bottled water.

We welcome any measures that will nudge those trend lines even more. In a free-market society, food producers must adapt to meet changing consumer demands. Relying on high-priced anti-tax campaigns is not the way to do it.

Putting millions into research and marketing lower-sugar drinks is a better investment than waging a city-by-city, state-by-state political and legal war against soda taxes.