[A] new VTDigger/Castleton Poll Institute survey shows public support for taxing fossil fuels and sugary drinks. The poll indicates greater support for the consumption taxes among women, young people and those with more education.
Overall, 48 percent of poll respondents said they would support a tax on the consumption of fossil fuels that would be used to lower carbon dioxide emissions that contribute to climate change, while 44 percent said they would oppose such a tax.
The poll of 700 Vermonters was conducted Feb. 9-24 (see sidebar for methodology).
“It’s great to see such strong support for a carbon pollution tax even as the public conversation is really just beginning to take shape,” said Ben Walsh, climate and energy program director for the Vermont Public Interest Research Group, which has launched a campaign to bring such a tax to Vermont.
“You’ll see numbers vary considerably on this topic depending on how the question is asked. National polls have found that when people hear more about a pollution tax, they’re more likely to support it,” he said, citing a national study on the topic.
But Matt Cota of the Vermont Fuel Dealers Association said trusting state government to “redistribute” the money generated by a carbon tax is a “leap of faith” that many of the people who said in the poll they supported the tax wouldn’t be willing to take if they knew the money could go to something they oppose.
The real problem with a Vermont carbon tax is that it would be ineffective and drive business across the border, Cota said. He predicted a “go it alone” approach to a carbon tax would put gas stations in border towns out of business and potentially create a black market for home heating fuel secreted into Vermont from neighboring states.
Either way, the issue is unlikely to move this session as its top legislative backer, Rep. Tony Klein, D-East Montpelier, said earlier this year on WDEV’s Mark Johnson Show that he won’t try to push a carbon tax bill out of his House Committee on Natural Resources and Energy.
Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Tax
VTD/CPI polling also shows that 57 percent of respondents would support an additional tax on sugary drinks to support health care for low-income Vermonters, while 39 percent said they don’t support the tax.
Support was again greater among Democrats, women, young people and those with greater educational attainment.
Anthony Iarrapino, campaign director of the Alliance for a Healthier Vermont, which is lobbying for the sugar-sweetened beverage tax in the Statehouse, said the results are consistent with other surveys he’s seen. If the issue is framed as a public health measure, support often polls higher, he said.
“This is being proposed as a public health measure and a response to the obesity epidemic, and the urgent need for us to control health care costs related to type 2 diabetes, heart disease and many forms of cancer, all of which have been linked to over-consumption of sugary drinks,” he said.
However, Andrew McLean, a lobbyist for the beverage industry, said he’s seen broad public opposition to the tax through a petition drive. The petitions, asking people to sign on if they oppose a new tax on sugary drinks, was handed out by beverage distributors to store owners who display them at the counter. The companies have collected 15,000 signatures, McLean said.
Members of the House Committee on Health Care have taken testimony from health professionals and beverage distributors this session. A majority of the committee members appear to support a beverage tax bill.
The hurdle will be higher in the House Ways and Means Committee, where several members voiced skepticism about the impact of the tax on businesses.
