Friday, April 07, 2006

Dems exhibit economic illiteracy in blue state CT

From WTNH:
Did soda giant Coca-Cola torpedo a plan to ban all sugary soft drinks in Connecticut's public schools? The long-time backer of the plan says yes, and the attorney general is threatening legal action.
What? Coke looking out for its best interests? The nerve! For those of you on the left, that was sarcasm. Continuing:
Back in February it was announced that a compromise had been reached with the governor to ban sodas in schools in the name of good nutrition for young growing bodies. It's clear now that getting this bill passed is like pulling teeth.
The principle backer of the ban said today that the lobbyist for Coca-Cola, Patrick Sullivan, had convinced lawmakers to kill the bill in committee by making threats to pull funding for various school programs that the soda giant funds.

"Coke's threatening to rescind it's scholarship programs, it's academic and athletic enrichment programs," said Attorney General Richard Blumenthal.

The lawyer for Coke in Connecticut says if profits from soda dry-up at schools it's only logical they'd pull out of the programs.

"You can't expect to take out the benefits of a contract and still get everything that was promised in a contract," says attorney Bart Halloran.
Why not? Democrats, unions, and other leftist groups have been attempting that very thing for years!

This one is a hoot:
"They are providing extra financial incentives to promote less healthy beverages for our children," says Sen. Don Williams, D-Senate Pres., Pro Tem.
Almost every year, some Florida Democrat gets the notion to raise the price of a pack of cigarettes by 50 cents...and the proceeds are to fund universal health insurance for Florida's kids.

Doesn't that mean that if smokers stop smoking because they've been priced out of their habit, then the now-former smokers are being cold-hearted by cutting the funding of children's health insurance (since they're not buying packs of cigs anymore, and thus aren't paying the tax)? You need a group of people to keep destroying their health in order to pay for the care of someone else's health! Why, stopping smoking is just downright mean-spirited to the children, isn't it?

In other words, these Democrats are trying to give people (in this case, smokers) an extra incentive to promote a less healthy know, the same thing that this Connecticut liberal nitwit is bitching about Coke doing?