California soda warning label bill stalls in committee

California lawmakers on Tuesday turned back legislation that would require warning labels on sugary beverages, voicing skepticism about the public health benefits. 

"It's an honorable effort but I feel it's ineffective," said Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez, D-San Diego, who acknowledged that soda manufacturers are prominent job generators in her district. "I think this bill creates as much confusion as it does information. A label which will appear on soda and sports drinks with no labels appearing on chocolate milk, juices or alcoholic beverages sends the wrong message."

Senate Bill 1000 slipped out of the Senate last month with the bare minimum 21 votes needed to advance. Legislators on the Assembly Health Committee halted its progress, with two Democrats voting against the measure and four others abstaining. The measure fell three votes short of the 10 needed to pass.

After trying unsuccessfully in the past to impose a tax on sugar-suffused drinks, Sen. Bill Monning, D-Carmel, this year sought to drain soda consumption by having the drinks bear warning labels. Monning and public health officials backing the legislation called sugary drinks a key culprit in the nation's swollen obesity rate.

"The label is based on the science that says liquid sugar is a unique driver in today's obesity and diabetes epidemics," Monning testified.

Opponents representing the beverage industry argued that Monning's bill unfairly singled out soft drinks. They argued that other factors, including a lack of exercise, genetics and unhealthy diets, contribute in concert to ballooning obesity and diabetes rates.

"This bill would not give consumers meaningful, helpful information," testified John Latimer, a lobbyist representing the California Retailers Association and PepsiCo. "Instead it will disparage many hundreds of beverages that can be safely consumed and responsibly added as part of a healthy diet."

Holding aloft a picture of a thick slice of chocolate cake, Latimer dismissed a soda-labeling policy as inconsistent.

"This beautiful piece of chocolate cake, which can be secured at a restaurant nearby, has 2,700 calories, 150 grams of fat, 55 grams of saturated fat," Latimer said. "And yet it doesn't need a warning label, but a 75 calories beverage does?"

Members who declined to support the bill said they were not convinced that labeling would do enough to influence consumer behavior.

"I've looked for any kind of information that shows that labeling changes peoples' habits," said Assemblyman Jimmy Gomez, D-Los Angeles. "I haven't found one."

Comparisons to the tobacco industry, both overt and implicit, surfaced throughout the debate. Dr. Harold Goldstein of the California Center for Public Health Advocacy wondered, "how bad will it have to get before we begin to tell the truth about these sugary drinks?" Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, D-San Francisco, was more direct.

"I do remember some of these same arguments and some of the same struggles around labeling of cigarettes," Ammiano said, "and it took a long time to permeate peoples' consciousness."

Critics of the bill rejected those comparisons, saying it is disingenuous to equate soda and smoking.

"Smoking is inherently dangerous," said Bob Achermann, a lobbyist representing a trade group called the California Nevada Soft Drink Association. "Consumption of a sugar-sweetened beverage, or anything else for that matter, is not inherently dangerous."

PHOTO: In this Monday, Feb. 9, 2009 file photo, Pepsi drinks sit on display at JJ&F Market in Palo Alto, Calif. Paul Sakuma/AP Photo.

via: http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2014/06/california-soda-warning-label-bill-stalls-in-committee.html

Read more here: http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2014/06/california-soda-warning-label-bill-stalls-in-committee.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2014/06/california-soda-warning-label-bill-stalls-in-committee.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2014/06/california-soda-warning-label-bill-stalls-in-committee.html#storylink=cpy

It's back to San Diego politics as usual in unusual mayoral election

SAN DIEGO — Councilman and mayoral candidate David Alvarez stood and applauded when acting Mayor Todd Gloria, in his state of the city address, proposed raising the minimum wage in San Diego beyond the scheduled statewide increases.

Councilman Kevin Faulconer, Alvarez's opponent in the Feb. 11 election, remained seated, hands folded in his lap. He later told reporters that raising the minimum wage could be bad for business and lead to elimination of jobs.

Differences over economic issues illustrate the divide between Alvarez, a Democrat, and Faulconer, a Republican, as the hurry-up campaign to find a successor to the disgraced Bob Filner enters its final stretch with prickly debates and dueling TV commercials.

Alvarez supported a 2010 measure to boost the sales tax by half a cent, an increase that then-Mayor Jerry Sanders said was vital to prevent further cuts in city services because of the city's spiraling pension payments.

Faulconer led the opposition, arguing that no taxes should be raised until the city finished reforming the pension system.

Voters agreed with Faulconer — Proposition B was defeated 62% to 38%. The appeal of smaller government is strong; nonpartisan polls suggest that Faulconer is leading Alvarez, particularly in more prosperous neighborhoods north of Interstate 8.

Alvarez supports raising a tax on developers to provide low-income housing. Faulconer opposes it — this time in alliance with Sanders — and calls it a "jobs tax." The issue appears headed for the ballot.

Faulconer supports what could be called the San Diego orthodoxy: Hold down taxes, control spending, keep labor unions in check. That philosophy guided three successful mayors in recent decades: Republican Pete Wilson (who served from 1971 to 1983), Democrat Maureen O'Connor (1986-1992) and Sanders, a Republican (2005-2012).

Alvarez, a San Diego native, said he has seen that style of civic management result in certain neighborhoods being neglected by City Hall for lack of political clout, particularly in blue-collar areas. Among the disparities, he said, is a slower response time for firetrucks in some areas because of the location of stations.

"I've witnessed how people are treated differently depending on where they live in San Diego," Alvarez said.

Asked about Wilson, O'Connor and Sanders, Alvarez said, "Those mayors neglected parts of this community. I have a different perspective."

Without agreeing to Alvarez's larger point about a past bias against some neighborhoods, Faulconer said it would not happen if he were mayor. Money for infrastructure needs such as filling potholes and fixing water lines would be spent where it's needed most, Faulconer said.

Standing in a weed-filled empty lot in a neighborhood south of I-8, Faulconer promised tax incentives "to have development right here where we need it."

Still, Faulconer stresses a concern that higher spending and taxation could prompt businesses to flee. "There's a reason why Rick Perry comes to San Diego," said Faulconer, a reference to the Texas governor's forays here to persuade firms to relocate.

Despite their differences, Alvarez and Faulconer do not represent the same philosophical chasm that separated Filner and his Republican opponent in the 2012 election, Carl DeMaio. Aided by a large turnout for the presidential election, Filner swept into office, the first Democratic mayor in 20 years.

In Filner's absence, mayoral politicking has reverted to form.

"This election marks a return to the traditional centrist pattern of San Diego politics: One candidate is center/right, the other center/left," said Steve Erie, a political science professor at UC San Diego and coauthor of "Paradise Plundered: Fiscal Crisis and Governance Failures in San Diego."

As councilman, Faulconer, 46, represents Mission Beach, Pacific Beach, Ocean Beach and Point Loma. Asked where his economic views were formed, he said at the dinner table from his father, a longtime deputy city manager in Oxnard.

Alvarez, 33, represents a district that includes Barrio Logan, Logan Heights, San Ysidro and Otay Mesa. His positions on economic issues, he said, also were shaped by his father, who was a janitor, and his mother, who worked at fast-food restaurants.

At debates, Alvarez and Faulconer poke at the source of each other's financial support. Alvarez's campaign and independent groups supporting him are largely funded by labor unions; in Faulconer's case, funding tends to come from corporate and business groups.

Carl Luna, a political science professor at San Diego Mesa College, said much of the contest has descended to a "truly uninspiring level," with an exchange of tired invectives: "You're a corporate tool!" followed by the response of "You're a union stooge!"

That "really does a disservice to San Diego voters," Luna said. "I'm tempted to say the campaign has been lackluster, but that would be an understatement."

tony.perry@latimes.com

via: http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-sd-mayor-election-20140203,0,3137640.story#ixzz2sHNVDocg

Healthcare Law Threatens California Jobs, Business Group Says

California could lose more than 26,000 jobs as a result of a tax provision in the federal healthcare law, a small-business advocacy group said.

A study by the National Federation of Independent Business Research Foundation found that employment in the Golden State may see a loss of from 14,322 to 26,296 jobs by 2022 because of the Health Insurance Tax provision.

The NFIB is one of the biggest opponents of the federal healthcare law and joined in the Supreme Court lawsuit challenging its constitutionality.

“Businesses in California are struggling under unprecedented costs from taxes and regulations. We need to do all that we can to increase jobs, not reduce them,” said John Kabateck, the NFIB's California director in a statement.

“This destructive tax simply must go, if we are ever to return to the thriving culture of growth and entrepreneurship that Californians once knew.”

The NFIB estimates the small business community will be hit with over $100 billion over a decade in new taxes beginning in 2014 because of the federal healthcare law.

A 2012 study by the Bay Area Council found that President Obama's Affordable Healthcare Act will create about 96,000 jobs in California.

The NFIB study is flawed, said Micah Weinberg, senior policy advisor for the Bay Area Council, adding that the council does not advocate for the Health Insurance Tax.

“We looked at the net effect of the law, taking into account both economic stimuli and drags on job growth,” Weinberg said. “Looking just at the impact of a tax in isolation is essentially meaningless.”

The increases the council forecast and the reductions by the NFIB are a small fraction of the state’s job base, Weinberg said.

via LA Times

California GOP sees role to protect education funds

What's a marginalized minority party to do?

It's a key question for Republican lawmakers staring down a newly enshrined Democratic supermajority. Part of the answer so far seems to be a renewed emphasis on higher education.

Both Sen. Anthony Cannella, R-Ceres, and Assemblyman Jeff Gorell, R-Camarillo, have introduced a pair of bills that would freeze tuition at the University of California andCalifornia State University for the seven-year duration of the higher tax rates mandated by Proposition 30.

Since voters approved the tax measure last fall, the authors say they have a role to play in ensuring that an influx of new money from Proposition 30 is exclusively used for education. They say failing to do so would betray voters to whom the initiative was sold as a vehicle for averting more education cuts.

"A lot of people made a lot of implied promises to college students that everything would be OK if Prop. 30 passes," Cannella said. "If anyone thinks the state of California will just keep that money in a bank account," he added, "it's just not going to happen."

Democrats are more skeptical of Republican lawmakers' motives, given that they resisted putting such a measure on the ballot in the first place. Had it failed to pass, resulting cuts in higher education would likely have spurred a tuition hike.

"They're in a situation where they have been fundamentally irrelevant to most of the public policy discussions in Sacramento for quite a while now, and their first step to have some credibility is to say something in the public policy debate," said Democratic strategist Bill Carrick. "So what they've done, obviously, is say, well, people care about education, let's get out front on this."

The fact that Republicans went from opposing Proposition 30 to casting themselves as responsible stewards of the money it raised is a move born more of expedience than of principle, said Steve Maviglio, a Sacramento political consultant who worked for two Democratic Assembly speakers. He called the emphasis on higher education "a post-election gimmick."

"It's like they woke up the day after the election and decided they have a commitment to education," he said.

The focus on higher education was evident in GOP responses to Gov. Jerry Brown's budget proposal last month, which Brown trumpeted as a testament to the new-found fiscal stability Proposition 30 is set to provide.

While many Republican lawmakers praised Brown's budget, they also exhorted Brown and Democrats to ensure that the influx of new funding goes to schools.

In a written response to the budget, Republican Connie Conway, R-Tulare, called the tuition freeze bills an effort to "ensure that this revenue goes to boost higher education funding and prevent tuition and fee increases at our public colleges and universities, just as the voters intended."

In a follow-up interview, Conway affirmed that "we see our role as a watchdog."

"I believe that promises made should be promises kept, so if you're out there telling people 'if you vote for this to raise taxes then it's going to go to education,' then it should," Conway said.

Assemblyman Dan Logue, R-Marysville, has also introduced a pair of higher education bills. They would create pilot programs enabling students to obtain a degree for $10,000 and $20,000, respectively, an effort to hold down ballooning tuition costs.

"We're pricing kids out of a good education, especially the middle class," Logue said.

Democrats campaigned heavily for Proposition 30 on college campuses, mobilizing student voters by saying the ballot measure would prevent a tuition hike.

Logue is also promoting his measures to the young voter bloc, which had some of the highest turnout rates of any age group in California during the November elections.

In a recent press release, he said students have "some of the most powerful voices when it comes to getting involved in government" and called his bills "the beginning of a revolution to the very pressing issue of the rising costs of education."

The 2012-13 budget promised the University of California and California State University $125 million each in 2013-14 if Proposition 30 passed, and the schools agreed to hold tuition steady for 2012-13. Dianne Klein, a spokeswoman for the University of California, said the funding levels in Brown's budget should be enough to prevent a tuition bump this year.

Pushing to ensure that remains the case is one way for Republicans to exert influence when they otherwise have little room to maneuver, said Aaron McLear, political consultant and former press secretary to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

"They have limited leverage, no question about it," McLear said. "So I think they're using what power they have to try and effect change in the state instead of just curling up and moaning about being in the superminority."

Cannella did not publicly take a position on Proposition 30. But now that the voters have spoken, Cannella said, "the equation has changed." New revenues are coming, and that presents a chance for Republicans to make the most of their diminished status.

"On a political landscape in which support for education is measured predominantly by the amount of money you're willing to spend, Republicans don't get many opportunities to play the education issue to their advantage," said Dan Schnur, director of the University of Southern California's Unruh Institute of Politics. "By arguing about how the Prop. 30 money is going to be spent, they get a chance to look like the big guys."

via The Sacramento Bee

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2013/02/03/5161070/minority-california-republicans.html#storylink=cpy