Clarity and command of standard English (Trait 3)

A student wrote this first draft in response to the two texts about a teen curfew in Easton. The draft has errors in style, grammar and sentence structure.

(1) Easton's police chief wants a curfew for teens under 17, but the director of the town's youth center thinks a curfew would target the wrong hours. Both writers want young people to be safe, yet they disagree about how to protect them. Reyes's argument is way more convincing than Donnelly's.

(2) Donnelly's main statistic is a 30 percent rise in juvenile arrests. Which sounds serious. However, the actual numbers were only 20 and 26. Reyes points out that six extra arrests in a town of 18,000 people could just be a normal change, this weakens Donnelly's whole case.

(3) The data on timing are even more important. According to police records, 57 percent of juvenile incidents happens between 3 p.m. and 7 p.m. on school days. Only 9 percent happened during curfew hours. When Reyes compared these numbers with Donnelly's plan, she showed that it would miss most of the problem. In other words, the curfew would cover the hours when the fewest problems occur.

(4) Donnelly also leans on stuff like a mayor's comment that the streets "felt calmer". Feelings are not evidence. Reyes, in contrast, relies on research. Looking at a dozen studies, no consistent drop in juvenile crime was found.

(5) Each of the parents at Donnelly's meeting have a real concern, and I get it. But a curfew isn't the answer. Reyes reports that a spring pilot program at her center drew an average of 65 teens each afternoon. Keeping the youth center open later are a more practical solution.

A student wrote this first draft in response to the two texts about a teen curfew in Easton. The draft has errors in style, grammar and sentence structure.

(1) Easton's police chief wants a curfew for teens under 17, but the director of the town's youth center thinks a curfew would target the wrong hours. Both writers want young people to be safe, yet they disagree about how to protect them. Reyes's argument is way more convincing than Donnelly's.

(2) Donnelly's main statistic is a 30 percent rise in juvenile arrests. Which sounds serious. However, the actual numbers were only 20 and 26. Reyes points out that six extra arrests in a town of 18,000 people could just be a normal change, this weakens Donnelly's whole case.

(3) The data on timing are even more important. According to police records, 57 percent of juvenile incidents happens between 3 p.m. and 7 p.m. on school days. Only 9 percent happened during curfew hours. When Reyes compared these numbers with Donnelly's plan, she showed that it would miss most of the problem. In other words, the curfew would cover the hours when the fewest problems occur.

(4) Donnelly also leans on stuff like a mayor's comment that the streets "felt calmer". Feelings are not evidence. Reyes, in contrast, relies on research. Looking at a dozen studies, no consistent drop in juvenile crime was found.

(5) Each of the parents at Donnelly's meeting have a real concern, and I get it. But a curfew isn't the answer. Reyes reports that a spring pilot program at her center drew an average of 65 teens each afternoon. Keeping the youth center open later are a more practical solution.

A student wrote this first draft in response to two texts about banning cell phones at Westbrook High School. The draft has several errors in grammar, usage and style.

(1) Phones in school is a big deal these days. Principal Janelle Price argues that schools should lock up phones during the day, while parent Marcus Lee believes students should be allowed to keep them. Price's argument is more better supported because she uses results from her own school and a international report.

(2) Price gives alot of evidence. Discipline referrals fell by 28 percent and online bullying dropped by half. Which shows that the pouches made a real difference. In addition, 34 of 38 teachers said students was more focused. These numbers come from the very school that is being debated.

(3) Lee's letter has some good stuff in it, but it mostly relies on feelings. He says phones are learning tools, his daughter uses a calculator and a dictionary app. However, he never explains why these tools must be on a phone, so it don't prove that phones are necessary.

(4) Lee's strongest point is about safety. I totally get why parents want to reach their kids. Price responds to this worry directly, she explains that families can reach students through the office and that phones can make it harder for staff to give instructions in an emergency. Rushing to answer calls, instructions from teachers might be missed by students.

(5) In conclusion, Price's argument is better supported because it is based on real results. Lee raises fair concerns, but his evidence is mostly personal. His idea of teaching responsible use is worth discussing, yet he offers no proof that it works. The school day should be for learning, and Price shows how to protect it.

A student wrote this first draft in response to two texts about banning cell phones at Westbrook High School. The draft has several errors in grammar, usage and style.

(1) Phones in school is a big deal these days. Principal Janelle Price argues that schools should lock up phones during the day, while parent Marcus Lee believes students should be allowed to keep them. Price's argument is more better supported because she uses results from her own school and a international report.

(2) Price gives alot of evidence. Discipline referrals fell by 28 percent and online bullying dropped by half. Which shows that the pouches made a real difference. In addition, 34 of 38 teachers said students was more focused. These numbers come from the very school that is being debated.

(3) Lee's letter has some good stuff in it, but it mostly relies on feelings. He says phones are learning tools, his daughter uses a calculator and a dictionary app. However, he never explains why these tools must be on a phone, so it don't prove that phones are necessary.

(4) Lee's strongest point is about safety. I totally get why parents want to reach their kids. Price responds to this worry directly, she explains that families can reach students through the office and that phones can make it harder for staff to give instructions in an emergency. Rushing to answer calls, instructions from teachers might be missed by students.

(5) In conclusion, Price's argument is better supported because it is based on real results. Lee raises fair concerns, but his evidence is mostly personal. His idea of teaching responsible use is worth discussing, yet he offers no proof that it works. The school day should be for learning, and Price shows how to protect it.

A student wrote this first draft in response to two texts about banning cell phones at Westbrook High School. The draft has several errors in grammar, usage and style.

(1) Phones in school is a big deal these days. Principal Janelle Price argues that schools should lock up phones during the day, while parent Marcus Lee believes students should be allowed to keep them. Price's argument is more better supported because she uses results from her own school and a international report.

(2) Price gives alot of evidence. Discipline referrals fell by 28 percent and online bullying dropped by half. Which shows that the pouches made a real difference. In addition, 34 of 38 teachers said students was more focused. These numbers come from the very school that is being debated.

(3) Lee's letter has some good stuff in it, but it mostly relies on feelings. He says phones are learning tools, his daughter uses a calculator and a dictionary app. However, he never explains why these tools must be on a phone, so it don't prove that phones are necessary.

(4) Lee's strongest point is about safety. I totally get why parents want to reach their kids. Price responds to this worry directly, she explains that families can reach students through the office and that phones can make it harder for staff to give instructions in an emergency. Rushing to answer calls, instructions from teachers might be missed by students.

(5) In conclusion, Price's argument is better supported because it is based on real results. Lee raises fair concerns, but his evidence is mostly personal. His idea of teaching responsible use is worth discussing, yet he offers no proof that it works. The school day should be for learning, and Price shows how to protect it.

A student wrote this first draft in response to two texts about banning cell phones at Westbrook High School. The draft has several errors in grammar, usage and style.

(1) Phones in school is a big deal these days. Principal Janelle Price argues that schools should lock up phones during the day, while parent Marcus Lee believes students should be allowed to keep them. Price's argument is more better supported because she uses results from her own school and a international report.

(2) Price gives alot of evidence. Discipline referrals fell by 28 percent and online bullying dropped by half. Which shows that the pouches made a real difference. In addition, 34 of 38 teachers said students was more focused. These numbers come from the very school that is being debated.

(3) Lee's letter has some good stuff in it, but it mostly relies on feelings. He says phones are learning tools, his daughter uses a calculator and a dictionary app. However, he never explains why these tools must be on a phone, so it don't prove that phones are necessary.

(4) Lee's strongest point is about safety. I totally get why parents want to reach their kids. Price responds to this worry directly, she explains that families can reach students through the office and that phones can make it harder for staff to give instructions in an emergency. Rushing to answer calls, instructions from teachers might be missed by students.

(5) In conclusion, Price's argument is better supported because it is based on real results. Lee raises fair concerns, but his evidence is mostly personal. His idea of teaching responsible use is worth discussing, yet he offers no proof that it works. The school day should be for learning, and Price shows how to protect it.

A student wrote this first draft in response to the two texts about a teen curfew in Easton. The draft has errors in style, grammar and sentence structure.

(1) Easton's police chief wants a curfew for teens under 17, but the director of the town's youth center thinks a curfew would target the wrong hours. Both writers want young people to be safe, yet they disagree about how to protect them. Reyes's argument is way more convincing than Donnelly's.

(2) Donnelly's main statistic is a 30 percent rise in juvenile arrests. Which sounds serious. However, the actual numbers were only 20 and 26. Reyes points out that six extra arrests in a town of 18,000 people could just be a normal change, this weakens Donnelly's whole case.

(3) The data on timing are even more important. According to police records, 57 percent of juvenile incidents happens between 3 p.m. and 7 p.m. on school days. Only 9 percent happened during curfew hours. When Reyes compared these numbers with Donnelly's plan, she showed that it would miss most of the problem. In other words, the curfew would cover the hours when the fewest problems occur.

(4) Donnelly also leans on stuff like a mayor's comment that the streets "felt calmer". Feelings are not evidence. Reyes, in contrast, relies on research. Looking at a dozen studies, no consistent drop in juvenile crime was found.

(5) Each of the parents at Donnelly's meeting have a real concern, and I get it. But a curfew isn't the answer. Reyes reports that a spring pilot program at her center drew an average of 65 teens each afternoon. Keeping the youth center open later are a more practical solution.

Text 1 — A Small Tax With a Big Health Payoff (op-ed by Dr. Alan Pierce, fictional director of the Bayport Health Department)

(1) Bayport should place a tax of 1.5 cents per ounce on sugary drinks such as soda, sweetened tea and energy drinks, and use the money for school nutrition and community health programs.

(2) Sugary drinks are the largest single source of added sugar in the American diet, according to federal dietary guidelines. In Bayport, 34 percent of adults have obesity, and our clinics see more patients with type 2 diabetes every year.

(3) Taxes change buying habits. After the city of Harlow adopted a similar tax, a university study comparing Harlow with a nearby city without a tax found that sugary drink sales in Harlow fell by 33 percent, while bottled water sales rose.

(4) The tax would also raise about 4 million dollars a year, based on current sales. That money would pay for free healthy breakfasts in every elementary school and for diabetes prevention classes.

(5) Critics say the tax hurts low-income families most. But low-income neighborhoods also suffer the highest rates of diet-related disease, so they would gain the most from healthier choices and new programs.

Text 2 — Don't Tax My Customers' Choices (letter to the editor from Sam Okoye, fictional owner of a Bayport corner store)

(6) The city council wants to tell people what they can drink. That is not the government's job.

(7) This tax will hit working families hardest. A family that buys a 12-pack of soda each week would pay about 9 dollars more a month.

(8) People will just drive to stores outside the city to buy their soda. My cousin owns a store in a city that passed a soda tax, and he says his customers started shopping across the city line the very next week. Small stores like mine will lose business, and some will close.

(9) Besides, soda is not the only cause of obesity. People gain weight from fast food, lack of exercise and many other things. Taxing one drink will not fix the problem.

(10) If the city really cares about health, it should build more parks, not punish shopkeepers.

A student wrote this first draft in response to the two texts about a teen curfew in Easton. The draft has errors in style, grammar and sentence structure.

(1) Easton's police chief wants a curfew for teens under 17, but the director of the town's youth center thinks a curfew would target the wrong hours. Both writers want young people to be safe, yet they disagree about how to protect them. Reyes's argument is way more convincing than Donnelly's.

(2) Donnelly's main statistic is a 30 percent rise in juvenile arrests. Which sounds serious. However, the actual numbers were only 20 and 26. Reyes points out that six extra arrests in a town of 18,000 people could just be a normal change, this weakens Donnelly's whole case.

(3) The data on timing are even more important. According to police records, 57 percent of juvenile incidents happens between 3 p.m. and 7 p.m. on school days. Only 9 percent happened during curfew hours. When Reyes compared these numbers with Donnelly's plan, she showed that it would miss most of the problem. In other words, the curfew would cover the hours when the fewest problems occur.

(4) Donnelly also leans on stuff like a mayor's comment that the streets "felt calmer". Feelings are not evidence. Reyes, in contrast, relies on research. Looking at a dozen studies, no consistent drop in juvenile crime was found.

(5) Each of the parents at Donnelly's meeting have a real concern, and I get it. But a curfew isn't the answer. Reyes reports that a spring pilot program at her center drew an average of 65 teens each afternoon. Keeping the youth center open later are a more practical solution.

A student wrote this first draft in response to the two texts about a teen curfew in Easton. The draft has errors in style, grammar and sentence structure.

(1) Easton's police chief wants a curfew for teens under 17, but the director of the town's youth center thinks a curfew would target the wrong hours. Both writers want young people to be safe, yet they disagree about how to protect them. Reyes's argument is way more convincing than Donnelly's.

(2) Donnelly's main statistic is a 30 percent rise in juvenile arrests. Which sounds serious. However, the actual numbers were only 20 and 26. Reyes points out that six extra arrests in a town of 18,000 people could just be a normal change, this weakens Donnelly's whole case.

(3) The data on timing are even more important. According to police records, 57 percent of juvenile incidents happens between 3 p.m. and 7 p.m. on school days. Only 9 percent happened during curfew hours. When Reyes compared these numbers with Donnelly's plan, she showed that it would miss most of the problem. In other words, the curfew would cover the hours when the fewest problems occur.

(4) Donnelly also leans on stuff like a mayor's comment that the streets "felt calmer". Feelings are not evidence. Reyes, in contrast, relies on research. Looking at a dozen studies, no consistent drop in juvenile crime was found.

(5) Each of the parents at Donnelly's meeting have a real concern, and I get it. But a curfew isn't the answer. Reyes reports that a spring pilot program at her center drew an average of 65 teens each afternoon. Keeping the youth center open later are a more practical solution.

Text 1 — A Small Tax With a Big Health Payoff (op-ed by Dr. Alan Pierce, fictional director of the Bayport Health Department)

(1) Bayport should place a tax of 1.5 cents per ounce on sugary drinks such as soda, sweetened tea and energy drinks, and use the money for school nutrition and community health programs.

(2) Sugary drinks are the largest single source of added sugar in the American diet, according to federal dietary guidelines. In Bayport, 34 percent of adults have obesity, and our clinics see more patients with type 2 diabetes every year.

(3) Taxes change buying habits. After the city of Harlow adopted a similar tax, a university study comparing Harlow with a nearby city without a tax found that sugary drink sales in Harlow fell by 33 percent, while bottled water sales rose.

(4) The tax would also raise about 4 million dollars a year, based on current sales. That money would pay for free healthy breakfasts in every elementary school and for diabetes prevention classes.

(5) Critics say the tax hurts low-income families most. But low-income neighborhoods also suffer the highest rates of diet-related disease, so they would gain the most from healthier choices and new programs.

Text 2 — Don't Tax My Customers' Choices (letter to the editor from Sam Okoye, fictional owner of a Bayport corner store)

(6) The city council wants to tell people what they can drink. That is not the government's job.

(7) This tax will hit working families hardest. A family that buys a 12-pack of soda each week would pay about 9 dollars more a month.

(8) People will just drive to stores outside the city to buy their soda. My cousin owns a store in a city that passed a soda tax, and he says his customers started shopping across the city line the very next week. Small stores like mine will lose business, and some will close.

(9) Besides, soda is not the only cause of obesity. People gain weight from fast food, lack of exercise and many other things. Taxing one drink will not fix the problem.

(10) If the city really cares about health, it should build more parks, not punish shopkeepers.

A student wrote this first draft in response to two texts about banning cell phones at Westbrook High School. The draft has several errors in grammar, usage and style.

(1) Phones in school is a big deal these days. Principal Janelle Price argues that schools should lock up phones during the day, while parent Marcus Lee believes students should be allowed to keep them. Price's argument is more better supported because she uses results from her own school and a international report.

(2) Price gives alot of evidence. Discipline referrals fell by 28 percent and online bullying dropped by half. Which shows that the pouches made a real difference. In addition, 34 of 38 teachers said students was more focused. These numbers come from the very school that is being debated.

(3) Lee's letter has some good stuff in it, but it mostly relies on feelings. He says phones are learning tools, his daughter uses a calculator and a dictionary app. However, he never explains why these tools must be on a phone, so it don't prove that phones are necessary.

(4) Lee's strongest point is about safety. I totally get why parents want to reach their kids. Price responds to this worry directly, she explains that families can reach students through the office and that phones can make it harder for staff to give instructions in an emergency. Rushing to answer calls, instructions from teachers might be missed by students.

(5) In conclusion, Price's argument is better supported because it is based on real results. Lee raises fair concerns, but his evidence is mostly personal. His idea of teaching responsible use is worth discussing, yet he offers no proof that it works. The school day should be for learning, and Price shows how to protect it.

Text 1 — A Curfew Will Keep Teens Safe (statement by Ray Donnelly, fictional police chief of Easton)

(1) I am asking the Easton town council to adopt a curfew that would require anyone under 17 to be off public streets between 11 p.m. and 5 a.m., unless they are with a parent, working, or traveling to or from a school or religious event.

(2) Juvenile arrests in Easton rose 30 percent last summer, from 20 to 26. Many of these incidents involved groups of teens gathered late at night in Riverside Park.

(3) A curfew gives officers a simple tool. Instead of waiting for trouble, officers could stop and send home young people who should not be out late. When the nearby town of Milford adopted a curfew, its mayor said the streets "felt calmer."

(4) Parents also want help. At a recent community meeting, several parents told me they worry when their teens stay out late.

(5) Nothing good happens on the streets after midnight. A curfew protects young people from becoming victims or getting into trouble.

Text 2 — Curfews Miss the Real Problem (op-ed by Monica Reyes, fictional director of the Easton Youth Center)

(6) Everyone wants Easton's young people to be safe. But a curfew would target the wrong hours and the wrong people.

(7) Our police department's own incident data for the past three years show that 57 percent of juvenile incidents happened between 3 p.m. and 7 p.m. on school days. Only 9 percent happened between 11 p.m. and 5 a.m., the hours the curfew would cover.

(8) Research points the same way. A review that combined the results of a dozen studies of youth curfews in U.S. cities found no consistent drop in juvenile crime or in young people becoming victims of crime after curfews took effect.

(9) A rise from 20 to 26 arrests sounds alarming as a percentage, but six additional arrests in a town of 18,000 people could easily reflect normal ups and downs from year to year.

(10) Easton would do more good by keeping its youth center open until 8 p.m. on school days. Last spring, when we extended our hours for a pilot program, the center served an average of 65 teens each afternoon.

Text 1 — A Small Tax With a Big Health Payoff (op-ed by Dr. Alan Pierce, fictional director of the Bayport Health Department)

(1) Bayport should place a tax of 1.5 cents per ounce on sugary drinks such as soda, sweetened tea and energy drinks, and use the money for school nutrition and community health programs.

(2) Sugary drinks are the largest single source of added sugar in the American diet, according to federal dietary guidelines. In Bayport, 34 percent of adults have obesity, and our clinics see more patients with type 2 diabetes every year.

(3) Taxes change buying habits. After the city of Harlow adopted a similar tax, a university study comparing Harlow with a nearby city without a tax found that sugary drink sales in Harlow fell by 33 percent, while bottled water sales rose.

(4) The tax would also raise about 4 million dollars a year, based on current sales. That money would pay for free healthy breakfasts in every elementary school and for diabetes prevention classes.

(5) Critics say the tax hurts low-income families most. But low-income neighborhoods also suffer the highest rates of diet-related disease, so they would gain the most from healthier choices and new programs.

Text 2 — Don't Tax My Customers' Choices (letter to the editor from Sam Okoye, fictional owner of a Bayport corner store)

(6) The city council wants to tell people what they can drink. That is not the government's job.

(7) This tax will hit working families hardest. A family that buys a 12-pack of soda each week would pay about 9 dollars more a month.

(8) People will just drive to stores outside the city to buy their soda. My cousin owns a store in a city that passed a soda tax, and he says his customers started shopping across the city line the very next week. Small stores like mine will lose business, and some will close.

(9) Besides, soda is not the only cause of obesity. People gain weight from fast food, lack of exercise and many other things. Taxing one drink will not fix the problem.

(10) If the city really cares about health, it should build more parks, not punish shopkeepers.

Text 1 — A Curfew Will Keep Teens Safe (statement by Ray Donnelly, fictional police chief of Easton)

(1) I am asking the Easton town council to adopt a curfew that would require anyone under 17 to be off public streets between 11 p.m. and 5 a.m., unless they are with a parent, working, or traveling to or from a school or religious event.

(2) Juvenile arrests in Easton rose 30 percent last summer, from 20 to 26. Many of these incidents involved groups of teens gathered late at night in Riverside Park.

(3) A curfew gives officers a simple tool. Instead of waiting for trouble, officers could stop and send home young people who should not be out late. When the nearby town of Milford adopted a curfew, its mayor said the streets "felt calmer."

(4) Parents also want help. At a recent community meeting, several parents told me they worry when their teens stay out late.

(5) Nothing good happens on the streets after midnight. A curfew protects young people from becoming victims or getting into trouble.

Text 2 — Curfews Miss the Real Problem (op-ed by Monica Reyes, fictional director of the Easton Youth Center)

(6) Everyone wants Easton's young people to be safe. But a curfew would target the wrong hours and the wrong people.

(7) Our police department's own incident data for the past three years show that 57 percent of juvenile incidents happened between 3 p.m. and 7 p.m. on school days. Only 9 percent happened between 11 p.m. and 5 a.m., the hours the curfew would cover.

(8) Research points the same way. A review that combined the results of a dozen studies of youth curfews in U.S. cities found no consistent drop in juvenile crime or in young people becoming victims of crime after curfews took effect.

(9) A rise from 20 to 26 arrests sounds alarming as a percentage, but six additional arrests in a town of 18,000 people could easily reflect normal ups and downs from year to year.

(10) Easton would do more good by keeping its youth center open until 8 p.m. on school days. Last spring, when we extended our hours for a pilot program, the center served an average of 65 teens each afternoon.

A student wrote this first draft in response to the two texts about a teen curfew in Easton. The draft has errors in style, grammar and sentence structure.

(1) Easton's police chief wants a curfew for teens under 17, but the director of the town's youth center thinks a curfew would target the wrong hours. Both writers want young people to be safe, yet they disagree about how to protect them. Reyes's argument is way more convincing than Donnelly's.

(2) Donnelly's main statistic is a 30 percent rise in juvenile arrests. Which sounds serious. However, the actual numbers were only 20 and 26. Reyes points out that six extra arrests in a town of 18,000 people could just be a normal change, this weakens Donnelly's whole case.

(3) The data on timing are even more important. According to police records, 57 percent of juvenile incidents happens between 3 p.m. and 7 p.m. on school days. Only 9 percent happened during curfew hours. When Reyes compared these numbers with Donnelly's plan, she showed that it would miss most of the problem. In other words, the curfew would cover the hours when the fewest problems occur.

(4) Donnelly also leans on stuff like a mayor's comment that the streets "felt calmer". Feelings are not evidence. Reyes, in contrast, relies on research. Looking at a dozen studies, no consistent drop in juvenile crime was found.

(5) Each of the parents at Donnelly's meeting have a real concern, and I get it. But a curfew isn't the answer. Reyes reports that a spring pilot program at her center drew an average of 65 teens each afternoon. Keeping the youth center open later are a more practical solution.

A student wrote this first draft in response to the two texts about a teen curfew in Easton. The draft has errors in style, grammar and sentence structure.

(1) Easton's police chief wants a curfew for teens under 17, but the director of the town's youth center thinks a curfew would target the wrong hours. Both writers want young people to be safe, yet they disagree about how to protect them. Reyes's argument is way more convincing than Donnelly's.

(2) Donnelly's main statistic is a 30 percent rise in juvenile arrests. Which sounds serious. However, the actual numbers were only 20 and 26. Reyes points out that six extra arrests in a town of 18,000 people could just be a normal change, this weakens Donnelly's whole case.

(3) The data on timing are even more important. According to police records, 57 percent of juvenile incidents happens between 3 p.m. and 7 p.m. on school days. Only 9 percent happened during curfew hours. When Reyes compared these numbers with Donnelly's plan, she showed that it would miss most of the problem. In other words, the curfew would cover the hours when the fewest problems occur.

(4) Donnelly also leans on stuff like a mayor's comment that the streets "felt calmer". Feelings are not evidence. Reyes, in contrast, relies on research. Looking at a dozen studies, no consistent drop in juvenile crime was found.

(5) Each of the parents at Donnelly's meeting have a real concern, and I get it. But a curfew isn't the answer. Reyes reports that a spring pilot program at her center drew an average of 65 teens each afternoon. Keeping the youth center open later are a more practical solution.

Text 1 — A Small Tax With a Big Health Payoff (op-ed by Dr. Alan Pierce, fictional director of the Bayport Health Department)

(1) Bayport should place a tax of 1.5 cents per ounce on sugary drinks such as soda, sweetened tea and energy drinks, and use the money for school nutrition and community health programs.

(2) Sugary drinks are the largest single source of added sugar in the American diet, according to federal dietary guidelines. In Bayport, 34 percent of adults have obesity, and our clinics see more patients with type 2 diabetes every year.

(3) Taxes change buying habits. After the city of Harlow adopted a similar tax, a university study comparing Harlow with a nearby city without a tax found that sugary drink sales in Harlow fell by 33 percent, while bottled water sales rose.

(4) The tax would also raise about 4 million dollars a year, based on current sales. That money would pay for free healthy breakfasts in every elementary school and for diabetes prevention classes.

(5) Critics say the tax hurts low-income families most. But low-income neighborhoods also suffer the highest rates of diet-related disease, so they would gain the most from healthier choices and new programs.

Text 2 — Don't Tax My Customers' Choices (letter to the editor from Sam Okoye, fictional owner of a Bayport corner store)

(6) The city council wants to tell people what they can drink. That is not the government's job.

(7) This tax will hit working families hardest. A family that buys a 12-pack of soda each week would pay about 9 dollars more a month.

(8) People will just drive to stores outside the city to buy their soda. My cousin owns a store in a city that passed a soda tax, and he says his customers started shopping across the city line the very next week. Small stores like mine will lose business, and some will close.

(9) Besides, soda is not the only cause of obesity. People gain weight from fast food, lack of exercise and many other things. Taxing one drink will not fix the problem.

(10) If the city really cares about health, it should build more parks, not punish shopkeepers.