The following blog was originally posted at seattlepi.com and can be found here.

A forthcoming report by the Center for Science in the Public Interest, Taxing Sugared Beverages Would Help Trim State Budget Deficits, Consumers’ Bulging Waistlines, and Health Care Costs,  suggests that taxing sugared beverages could help to alleviate state budget shortfalls that are being felt around our entire nation.

Forty-eight states are facing or have faced budget shortfall, and Washington is no exception. As we worked to balance our state budget during the 2009 Legislative Session, we faced a $9 billion revenue shortfall. In the end, we passed an all-cuts budget that I assure you will have long-term damages on our state. As the report states, “the current budget crisis calls for bold action to balance state budgets without hurting the state’s most vulnerable residents.”

As the final days of session drew near and the support for a tax increase to stave off cuts waned, I introduced Senate Bill 6189 that would extend the general sales tax to  candy and gum sales – much like the report recommends.

Food is generally exempt from Washington’s sales tax. But certain food items are not exempt – including prepared food, soft drinks and dietary supplements.  My measure would remove candy and gum from the list of exempt food items. 

This proposal would generate at least an additional $40 million in revenue which would be appropriated to the Health Care Authority to provide competitive grants to community health centers to increase dental and medical services for low-income citizens. With up to 40,000 low-income adults and children potentially losing health care coverage as a result of a $255 million reduction in funding to the Basic Health Plan, additional grants for community clinics would help them to recoup some of the lost revenue from treating more uninsured patients.

This legislation could assist in relieving some of our budget woes by raising funds, but, as the report points out for taxing soda pop, it could also serve another important policy goal, that of “reducing excessive consumption of unnecessary products that result in serious and costly diet-related diseases.” And I’m certainly open to amending the bill to include soda pop.

I introduced the measure in the final days of the 2009 Legislative Session which means it is still “alive” for the 2010 session beginning in January, at which time I will fiercely advocate for its approval.