Friday, April 21, 2006

High Fructose Corn Syrup Madness!

A look at the front page of the Harford Courant, April 21, 2026.

Senate Passes Sweetened Beverage Control Act
The soda industry lost their latest battle against state control and regulation of the sweetened beverage market today. The Senate bill, passed 22-10, would put drinks such as soda and sports drinks in the same category as alcohol and tobacco. Key components of the bill include the ban of soda sales through vending machines and the criminalizing of possession of such beverages if a minor. It is already illegal to sell soft drinks to a minor, or to misrepresent your age in order to purchase soft drinks.

A similar House bill, which included the creating of a Soft Drink License law that would create restrictions similar to those of the sale of alcohol, failed last year amidst intense debate.
Senate President Pro Tem Anthony Soprano, D-Waterbury, has been the chief proponent of the bill in this legislative session.

"Connecticut children are buying over five million soft drinks a year from vending machines," said Sen. Soprano. "How can we ensure our children lead healthy lives if we don't ensure it is slightly more inconveinent for teenagers to get their hands on these dangerous products."

Governer N. Jordan Fisher has said he will probably sign the bill as it is now. Governer's Fisher's was re-elected in a landslide last year, with many people approving of his signing of the ban on violent videogames, but his ratings have plummeted after a teenage student shot three of his classmates with an AK-47 before killing himself. The Governer hopes to appear tough on teenage miscreants with the signing of this bill.

"The fact of the matter is, the lobby of people with way too much time on their hands is one of the strongest out there," said political analyst Professor George O'Malley. "Parents aren't the driving force behind this bill, its busybodies. Let's face it, old maids vote in higher numbers than any other demographic."

Trinity Flat Broke
Trinity College will eliminate janitorial staff, cut the Economics Department, and even close the student lunchroom in order to fix a financial squeeze caused by years of overspending, President Carl C. Carlson said today.

The college's endowment has almost been completely wiped out for costly projects such as a new community social center and the financing of a Major League football stadium. "The state wasn't going to shell out to get the Pats in town, so we kinda took things into our own hands," said President Carlson.

Special Advertisement
Paid for by the Coca-Cola Company:

The Coca-Cola Company supports a single, consistent public health message on the role of the consumption of soft drinks in the development of disease. (As required by the ruling in State of Connecticut vs. Coca-Cola)

Soft Drinkers are far more likely to develop serious diseases such as obesity, diabetes, heart disease, premature aging, and Stunted Growth Disorder.

There is no such thing as a "safe" soft drink. Soft drinks labeled "diet" or other low calorie beverages should not be assumed to be better for health.

The Coca-Cola Company agrees with the overwhelming political consensus that self-righteous crusading gets you the votes.


This bill is just plain silly. High Schoolers, Eighteen year olds, can't buy a soda at school?

The general trend, however, of imposing state restriction and rules on the raising of teenagers concerns me. Driving curfews, going after parents who let kids drink in a private home... its not telling parents how to raise their kids, its persecuting parents and children who don't toe the line.

11 comments:

David said...

Students can still bring soda and any other unhealthy snacks that they want to school.

What the state is doing is setting an example for children. The state should not be selling unhealthy food to kids. Parents have every right to have their kids eat and drink whatever they want, and under this bill they are still allowed to send their kids to school with twinkies and Coke in their backpacks.

But if we as a state are going to teach the children in health classes about what foods are unhealthy for you, then shouldn't we as a state also not sell those very same products?

Nobody's being persecuted here. Bring all the Ding Dongs to school that you want. But we as a state should not be selling these products to kids.

ctkeith said...

It's 11 yr old kids too.My son is in 5th grade and there are Coke Machines at almost every entrance to the school.
Water fountains were fine when I as in 5th grade and should be fine today too.

If a parent wants their kid to have a soda in school they can put it in their bacpack.

ctkeith said...

I talk to my Board of Ed members often.

It seems that Republican parents would sell their kids health down the tubes as long as the property Tax on their McMansions is lowered by a couple of bucks a year but we are having the discussion on how to get the Soda machines out.

Aldon Hynes said...

Yeah, I guess you're right. I've always thought that the schools should set a positive example, instead of profiting off of children by encouraging behavior that may not be beneficial for them.

But recognizing the wisdom of profits over children's health, maybe the nurses office should start selling condoms or even providing abortions. School districts could make a lot of money that way.

Also, recognizing that what schools do should be the domain of local boards of education and not some wider authority, I do hope everyone here is working hard to get No Child Left Behind repealed.

ctkeith said...

turfgrrl,

Our public schools are the most profitable investment in US history in terms of return on investment.

Local comtrol ended with Brown v Board of Education.

Some of us still think that was a good decision.

ctkeith said...

The Fairfield Education budget is over 120 Million.

If 2 kids are kept from becoming diebetic by leading by example and teaching kids each can of pepsi has 5 teaspons of sugar in it instead of promoting brand loyalty on unsuspecting kids 275 grand is chump change.

ctkeith said...

Turfgrrl,

Educating our kids is not a buisness.The only 'revenue sources" for education between K-12 is and should be Taxes.

I believe this country is FINALLY beginning to realize that the entire concept of using Buisness practices as a model for Government has been an utter failure.
Are you happy with the 2 top CEOs as President and VP?
America has finally figured out They're not.

ctkeith said...

Wolcottboy,

I spoke today to a board member and was informed that the soda machine are "locked" during shool hours now and will be removed as the contracts expire.

As far as I'm concerned thats GREAT NEWS even if my property Taxes must be raised a couple of bucks.

As a Democrat I believe in The Greater Good over The Corperate Good in almost all of government Functions.I believe thats THE major difference beween Rs and Ds.

ctkeith said...

Truthy,

Whats even more interesting is Liebermans Campaign notifying the press (Norwich Bulliten) of the public Meeting in Waterford tommorrow but NOT the one scheduled earlier in the day in Norwich for Delegates.

You guys scared of what the Delegates are going to say or you going to allow the press in the Norwich event too because they know about it now.

Frank Krasicki said...

This law affects a lot more than just soda sales. All kinds of snacks including brownie sales at various school events are being targeted.

It is also affecting what teachers can eat at school and, yes, it includes what foods are allowed on school grounds.

These State and Federal Education mandates are wholly out of control and both parties bear responsibility. And the issue transcends the nutrition nazis.

NCLB is an experiment in social engineering that is as malicious a social experiment as any conducted on American soil.

Many years ago. Allan Watts said that the difference people had about eating meat vs. vegetables was that "Vegetables don't scream". Likewise, this government gets away with its mean-spirited social experimentation because kids can't vote.

And local BOE are as likely to exascerbate the problem as remedy it. The hubris and inane reactionary arguments that elevate these issues likewise propel them.

Frank Krasicki, Region 19 BOE
http://region19.blogspot.com/

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.