Sip & Savor has long made the argument that talk about a soft drink tax has far more to do with a money grab by big government to pay for even bigger government. We’ve also laid out the data and science that shows a soft drink tax won’t work in reducing obesity. You just can’t tax someone to better health.
Well, even our critics are finally conceding these points. Wednesday, the same old gang of scientists and activists released yet another piece advocating for taxing the beverages of hard-working Americans.
This portion of The New York Times article today captured similar sentiments expressed in various media outlets.
The New York Times wrote:
The soft drink industry has adamantly resisted the notion that its products are responsible for a national increase in obesity or that a tax would help curb the problem.
And even a supporter of a beverage tax said it was not clear if it would have a direct effect on the waistlines of Americans. (Highlighting added by Sip & Savor)
“I think we should be satisfied that soda taxes would be having a modest effect on consumption but would generate billions of dollars that could be used to mount public health campaigns,” said Michael Jacobson, executive director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, an advocacy group that favors such a tax.
In other words:
- That tax won’t directly impact obesity.
- The tax is a money grab. For more government programs.
(And I hate to pop the gentleman’s balloon, but if government raises billions of dollars off a tax—it’s not going to go for public health campaigns. That money is going to the general fund to pay for all kinds of bigger government spending. The track record underscoring this reality is clear, whether it’s the federal government or state governments.)
There are better ways to reduce obesity and improve health care. Let’s stop wasting our time on money grabs—as these grabs only end up wasting taxpayers’ money.
October 1, 2009
As a public health graduate student in the area of human nutrition, I have to strongly disagree with you. Other than a rep at the ABA, I’m not sure who wrote this article, but your claims are unsubstantiated. Can you please direct us to the proof that this will not work? Most importantly, the people in this nation who suffer the highest rate of obesity are those with the lowest annual income. The reason is that farm subsidies and agricultural overproduction (both of which play a roll in the low price of high fructose corn syrup) have made unhealthy foods very very inexpensive. Unlike the tax on cigarettes, the sugary drink tax would work because sugar is not chemically addictive, and if these at risk populations can no longer afford these drinks, they can simply stop buying them.
I believe the burden is upon YOU, American Beverage Association, to create healthy drinks (less fructose, more nutrients) that are also affordable. The fact that the government is taxing you should be a warning, that like the cigarette companies, your corporate greed has overwhelmed your sense of moral responsibility to the health of Americans.