No on 2H
About the "sugar tax." I feel this is unnecessary and sets a dangerous precedent. If Healthy Boulder Kids wants funding for healthy eating programs, they should do like all the other human service nonprofits have done — fund themselves through donations instead of a tax.
If the "sugar tax" passes, the precedent will be set for other nonprofits to ask for taxes to support their needs. Will the homeless shelter ask for a tax on blankets? Will food banks ask for a tax on canned goods? Will learning programs ask for a tax on school supplies? Where will it stop?
Limiting the amount of sugar in children's diet is the responsibility of the parents. My wife and I managed to raise our children and manage their sugar intake without a tax. I am in favor of educating people about overconsumption of sugar but not in favor of funding the programs through a special tax. How many of their goals could have been met with the money they have already spent for this campaign?
The claim is that this is a tax on the distributors, not on retailers. Do we really believe that distributors are not going to pass this tax along to retailers? And if they do, who is to say that the retailers won't increase prices on other goods to cover the tax so their soda sales don't suffer?
Way too many questions to justify a Yes vote.
Peter Arts, Boulder