Politics with Marc Ambinder

« Obama On China, Human Rights | Main | Tweet Your Senator, With The Democratic Party's Help »

Jul 27 2009, 12:33 pm by Marc Ambinder

The Obama Administration And A Soda Tax

As he discussed the efficacy of a tax on soda today, CDC chairman Tom Freiden was quick to point out that he was not endorsing the policy as a member of the administration. "I'm just presenting the science," he says.  In his opinion, any intervention that reduces the price of healthy foods and increases the price of unhealthy foods "would be effective."  The challenge, as he noted, is political and administrative. It's easy to mock a soda tax as being an example of nanny state government, and politicians don't seem interested in exploring what it would really entail. An ad valorem-type tax would produce people to cheaper items in bulk, which won't change consumption habits. A tax per ounce on sugar will probably decrease sugar consumption. 

:: Comments (4) :: Share This

Comments (4)

???

A sugar tax would simply be window dressing to the problem. A tax on all sweeteners per ounce, including sugar and corn syrup, would be much more sufficient in reducing sugar consumption.

Hugo Pottisch (Replying to: ???)

What about an end to sugar subsidies first?

EileenK

I hate the idea of a soda tax. I also doubt it will do much to curb my consumption. Soda from a vending machine is not really a cheap product so an additional twenty-five cents (That's a 20% hike) in the price of a bottle isn't going to drive me away.

Soda is an impulse product. I'm not sure if a twenty-five cent price hike deters purchasing, even by teenagers. Most of the adolescents I know will spend $3.00 for a latte at Starbucks. If a Coke were $2.00 (an even bigger hike than the .25 I figured above) they might still buy it.

Sugar, honey, or karo syrup (Yes you can buy corn syrup!) on the other hand are "baking needs." Go down to your local supermarket and check this out if you don't believe me. They probably have a different demand curve and a very different consumption pattern. Do we want to penalize home bakers or the person who puts real sweetener in their coffee? The idea of an across the board sugar tax just enrages the baker in me. If one is going to indulge in sweets, home made ones are really much better because they help build cooking skills that help people resist the social engineering to mindlessly consume.

Now a soda tax (that is also not a sugar tax) might convince me to try making my own soft drinks. Here in the South some people might replace Coke with home made sweet tea or lemonade. I can see taxing the prepared products, vending machines, and convenience stores, but it would let's keep the government away from home cooks and bakers.

diablesse

I love the idea of a tax per ounce of sugar consumption and or a soda tax. The idea is not new. Washington State already have a tax on soft drink and prepared foods. While it will not cut people's consumption, the money raise will be used to defray escalating healthcare costs due to increase in obesity and help pay for health care education. The tax will have limited or no effect on people who consume sweets in moderation or not at all.

It is a fact that a small number of patients account for most healthcare costs. Government statistics show that about 20 percent of people — often those with chronic conditions such as diabetes and heart disease — account for 80 percent of medical costs. Obesity and poor eating habits are two of the main culprit in type 2 diabetes and heart disease.

While I see the need for mandatory health insurance, it is also incumbent on Congress to wage out a war on all front to bring down the cost of health insurance at the individual levels so as to lessen the burden on our shrinking paycheck.