A California Republican

The Center for Science in the Public Interest (the Center) is lobbying for states to put a “soda tax” on sugary drinks. The Center believes this could help the states raise $10 billion a year by placing a 7 cent tax on each 12 oz can of soda or sugary drink.

This is a bad idea. Sure, it can help raise money. So can taxing pornography, driving, watching television, sweets, white bread, and red meat. All of these things are linked to obesity - just like sugary drinks. The problem isn’t the sugary drinks, the problem is that people are not drinking them in small quantities. The same people who are drinking sugary drinks - and are obese - are the same people who are not exercising, who drive instead of walk, who eat fattier meats, who eat refined carbs and other food that is not good for you in large quantities.

This tax is paternalistic. It is a social policy rather than a tax policy. Some are linking taxing soda with taxing cigarettes. Cigarettes are a public health issue because the consequences of smoking them are not limited to the people doing the smoking. Drinking soda, or another sugary drinks, affects the person doing the drinking. There is no “second-hand sugary drink” problem. There is no environmental quality problem from people drinking sugary drinks. The soda cannot be passed through the air like second-hand smoke. Soda and cigarettes are not the same - not at all.

Drinking soda is an individual choice. If drinking soda is really a problem, and needs to be taxed, then people who don’t exercise should be taxed. The link between not exercising and increased health care costs is a lot stronger than the link between soda and rising health care costs. The problem with the soda and obesity studies is that you cannot control for everything else. People who are obese have other problems, and soda simply exacerbates those problems. Soda isn’t the main cause - their lifestyle habits are. Now, if the goal is to tax obese people so they have to pay more for health care, because they use more health care - that is going to be a problem. A problem of Constitutional proportions. However, taxing soda is simply a bad idea.

Where is the freedom of choice? President Obama - who really wants every to have freedom of choice and expression (he has said so) - is for a soda tax. He thinks it is a reasonable way to cover some of the health care costs. Where is the freedom of choice President, the man who said he wants people to be allowed to choose their own lifestyles? This is certainly not him.

If a soda tax goes through, then it is only a matter of time before there is a chocolate tax - excessive chocolate is linked to obesity too. As is alcohol - why not simply raise the alcohol tax? Alcohol causes more public health problems than soda. Raise the alcohol tax another 7 cents. With alcohol you can at least make a public health argument that people who abuse alcohol inflict damage on their families, their relatives, and anyone on the road when they are driving. You cannot make that argument with soda.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS