Newsom wants to charge stores that sell sodas

San Francisco Chronicle ^ | September 18, 2009 | Healther Knight

[MamaDearest]

Snippets: Calling soda the new tobacco, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom will introduce legislation this fall that would charge a fee to retailers that sell sugary beverages.

Newsom would need voter approval to tax individual cans of soda and sugary juice, but only needs approval from the Board of Supervisors to levy a fee on retailers. His legislation would charge grocery stores like Safeway and big-box stores, but would not affect restaurants that serve sodas.

Jim Lazarus, vice president of the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce, said the group opposes the soda tax. "Does this mean there's a fee on candy bars, on ice cream, on potato chips?" he asked. "Where do you draw the line?" He added that a small fee - likely to be passed on from the retailer to the consumer - wouldn't be enough to dramatically change people's habits, leading him to believe it's meant to be just another revenue source for the city.

[MamaDearest]

People are losing their jobs, stores are cutting back, the economy is in the toilet, and Newsom wants to create even more chaos for those who take comfort in an occasional soft drink....

[GeronL]

would not affect retaurants that serve soda.....

... so whats the point... hurt the poor??

[GOP_Lady]

I detest NANNY-STATERS.

Newsome is just as bad as Bloomberg.

[animal172]

Is there anyone including those who advocate for this approach who honestly believes that a small tax increase on soda pops is going to cause people to either quit drinking or reduce the amount they drink? Do they really think we are that stupid. Never mind, I already know the answer.

[BenLurkin]

Any excuse to tax and regulate.

[GOP_Lady]

Link to article:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/09/18/MNF619OSF4.DTL

[pissant]

Sounds like Huckabee

[gubamyster]

What about stores like 7-Eleven that sell cans/bottles & fountain drinks? What about vending machines....?

This is nothing more than a means to confiscate more of the citezens’ money.

[steelyourfaith]

[cranked]

I am utterly surprised people still inhabit San Fran..../s

[Babalu]

Maybe he’s anticipating the legal fees from the lawsuit his city will be slapped with for aiding and abetting ACORN in San Fran. Besides, I’m sure his buddy SanFranNan Pelousy can ram through some kind of aid for his decadent city.

[SJSAMPLE]

Excellent.
San Fagcisco elected him.
Let them reap the whirlwind.

Same for Venezuela.

Same for AMERICA.

Some lessons just need to be learned.

[GeronL]

Maybe we can pass a liberal tax. Should raise a lot in SF

[animal172]

Well it is the Sodom and Gomorrah of the West.

[nufsed]

Because of his sanctuary policy, Newsome is culpable in the murders of three men from one family. He is loathsome, has no shame, and is unfit for public office. The idea that someone like this thinks he should be governor is the 31st sign of the apocalypse.

[MichaelP]

If soda pop is a dire threat to health, and must be taxed, what of unprotected homosexual sex in Frisco?

Mike

[Oldexpat]

A special tax on the poor and South Asians.

[SandWMan]

Put a tax on the sale of K-Y...they’ll make millions.

[GOP_Lady]

This is absurd. They are adding up the amount of sugar from only ONE can of soda a day.

I drink about 6 cups of tea a day with sugar. I’m not overweight or diabetic. Should they tax my tea since sugar can be added?

GOVERNMENT IS NOT OUR MOMMY AND DADDY, FOLKS.

[Marie2]

“I am utterly surprised people still inhabit San Fran..../s”

Hey, some of us have to hold the line.