Latest News

On Friday, July 2, three initiative campaigns turned in voter signatures in hopes of qualifying for the November ballot. State officials will determine whether the initiative campaigns have enough valid voter signatures to meet the requirement.

One of these initiatives is I-1107, which would slash state revenues raised from new taxes on pop, candy, gum and other non-essential items. I-1107 is mainly funded by the American Beverage Association, which has given almost $2.5 million to the campaign.

KUOW reports on new findings from the Food Research and Action Center showing there are fewer summer meal programs available for low-income children while the need is rising. In Washington state there are 700 schools, parks and community centers that serve sack lunches — that's 23 fewer than last summer.

(June 29, 2010) — About 700 schools, parks, community centers, apartment complexes, trailer parks and other sites will be providing summer meals to hungry children across Washington this summer, down from 723 last summer.

The Children’s Alliance is honoring five state lawmakers as 2010 Legislative Champions for Children because of their outstanding service on behalf of children:

Senate Majority Leader Lisa Brown
Speaker of the House Frank Chopp
Representative Roger Goodman
Representative Ruth Kagi
Senator Claudia Kauffman

Next month at our annual luncheon, the Children’s Alliance will present five awards honoring child advocates whose work has improved the lives of Washington children.

Lawmakers in Olympia are considering establishing a Washington Food Policy Forum, currently sponsored by Sen. Ken Jacobson, Senate Bill 6343. Linda Stone, senior food policy coordinator of the Children's Alliance, and Jim Baird, a farmer in the Royal City area, discuss why the Forum would address food costs, access to healthy food and finding ways to support local farms. They write:

The Olympia Newswire continues its coverage of a proposed Washington state soda tax with an analysis of how efforts in this state join initiatives in other states and cities around the country to tax sugar-sweetened beverages.

A proposal enacting a tax on sugar-sweetened beverages to restore funding for health and dental services draws support from some advocates, including the Children's Alliance, and criticism from the soda industry. Olympia Newswire reviews the history of soda industry tax exemptions and how current lobbying efforts may remove the proposal from the table.

The latest proposal to extend the sales tax to candy, now exempt as a food item, is drawing both opposition and support in Olympia. The Children's Alliance supports the proposal, which would use the revenue from taxed candy to restore medical and dental programs for children. Teresa Mosqueda, advocacy & legislative relations for the Children's Alliance, says:

“We can no longer afford to subsidize candy and sweets. These items are not food items.”

As the Washington Legislature debates enacting a tax on sugar-sweetened beverages, three guests columnists in health care professions make their case for supporting a tax that would both save taxpayers money, reduce childhood obesity, and provide basic health care, nutrition and health-related educational programs.

Benjamin Danielson, M.D., vice president of the Children's Alliance board, David Fleming, M.D., director and health officer of Public
Health-Seattle & King County, and Lenna L. Liu, M.D., pediatrician at Seattle Children's Hospital write:

The latest tax proposals from the House, Senate and Governor Gregoire place many child and family programs on the chopping block. Child advocates, including the Children's Alliance, are urging lawmakers to consider the effects on business if child care funding for over 7,000 low-income families is cut. 

Jon Gould, deputy director of the Children's Alliance, says:

Senate and House lawmakers have rightly proposed budgets that raise substantial new revenue to protect some of the vital services that are helping children and families weather this punishing recession. But more revenue is needed to prevent devastating cuts to safety-net programs that, if enacted, would hurt families and pose serious threats to our state’s economic recovery.