[Nursie]

> And that’s exactly what happened in Washington shortly after Seattle passed its soda tax: In November of that same year, soda companies campaigned successfully for the passage of a ballot initiative banning all future fees on sugary drinks across the state.

Wow, this is nakedly self interested and a law purely for the industry at the expense of democracy, how on earth can that be allowed to happen?

[inglor_cz]

Because 55.88% of voters (1,721,487 people) voted for it.

Note that the initiative banned "local government entities from imposing any new tax, fee, or other assessment on grocery items" in general, not just from sugary drinks.

I guess people did not want more expensive groceries. This may in the future be compensated by more expensive healthcare, but such is the human species. Short term gain > long term loss.

[derbOac]

Just for some perspective, in some states there is zero tax on any food because it is seen as essential.

The problem is there are a lot of assumptions being made about the choice to buy a soda in any given situation. Someone in my family, for example, has type 1 diabetes, and occasionally (not usually; they control it well) needs something sugary for weird situations to regulate their blood sugar.

On average the state might gain from some policy, but is it always in the best position to understand what is in the best interests of the individual?

I guess I've never understood the focus on sugary beverages in particular. Why not candy? Pastries? Sugary cereal? Seems arbitrary and capricious to me.

[chrismcb]

Washington state has a candy tax. And like most places has a tax on prepared food but not unprepared for.

[timbit42]

Because it's America.