Read your piece today [Soapboxer, "Message Fail," Jeffrey C. Billman, May 27]. As you may or may not know, I am working with the coalition that is opposing the soda tax. I would disagree with some of your comments. Though you may believe it had merit as a public health issue, it was never perceived by Council or media as such. It was a revenue grab from day one. The original proposal from the mayor had only $20 million of the tax going to public health, with $50 million for the budget gap. And then the revised proposal had nothing going for public health and everything going to the gap. Also, retailers told the mayor it was logistically impossible to tax soda as a standalone product, and his response was he did not expect that rather they should spread it across all products — so where was the disincentive to the consumer? Also, the way the tax was proposed was arguably unconstitutional and when the tax had connection with public health, all legal defenses by the city basically melted away. And that is the reason [the Pennsylvania Intergovernmental Cooperation Authority] even had problem with the tax.
If you came to City Council or had much exposure to this issue, you would know this was a true coalition and grass-roots effort. Restaurant and bar owners, neighborhood grocers and union members all got together to take this one on. More than 30,000 Philadelphians have signed petitions against it as well as approximately 700 businesses. I do not think we have any chance against the mayor if we do not have such a broad coalition. I think this has been a high-level policy debate that did not get nasty or personal. But I also believe it is not done yet.
Larry Ceisler
Philadelphia
PREMIER ADVOCATE
Thank you for your cover article on the Delaware Riverkeeper [Cover Story, "The Riverkeeper," Samantha Drake, May 20]. If you read any of the recent articles on the Delaware River deepening in The Philadelphia Inquirer, you would never know there is any opposition to that pork-barrel environmental disaster. Your paper has shown some balls in standing up to Gov. Rendell and his Philadelphia Regional Port Authority political patronage hacks and pointed out to the public what I have known for a long time: Maya van Rossum is the premier advocate for our water resources in the Delaware River basin. No other person or environmental agency comes close.
There are a lot of true "pork-barrel" projects; keeping our port viable is not one of them. This is a "disaster" only in van Rossum's environ-MENTAL-ist mind. Her goal is to get us off the river, period, regardless of the human cost. In lauding his fellow Main Liner, Cannan employs all the buzzwords but doesn't tell us where he's employed. Do he and van Rossum live austere lives in tiny dwellings so as to minimize their "footprint"? Van Rossum has six kids; I wouldn't ordinarily knock that but wonder how she justifies her impact on the environment when she expects others to sacrifice.
Comments