Published: October 12, 2009 08:45 am      

Points to Ponder: Bubbling tax controversy

Hollywood sure seems to be aware of America’s weight problem.

Last year, Disney/Pixar brought us WALL-E, a futuristic yarn in which mankind, after centuries of a sedentary lifestyle on a spaceship, evolves to a place on the chain slightly below the jellyfish. Vast obesity renders people who cannot walk, and those who fall off their lounge chair hovercrafts lie helplessly on the ground, waiting for robots to rescue them. The people are so lazy that they don't chew their food, and even celebratory desserts come in a ready-to-drink form: "Get your cupcake - in a cup!"

In reality things are not that bad. Not yet. But Americans' waistlines are indeed growing.

According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services more than one-third of U.S. adults (33.3 percent of men and 35.3 percent of women) are obese. And among obese adults, approximately two-thirds have been told by a health care provider that they are overweight.

We're fat and getting fatter, and it seems that high tech fitness clubs, treadmills, home gyms and "breakthrough" diet plans can’t free us from consuming more calories than we burn.

Currently there is a movement afoot to employ one of the only proven methods of motivating the appropriate, or desired, behavior — taxes.

Now people just can’t be taxed for being overweight. Nor can they be taxed for not exercising. But the products that are a serious contributor to weight gain, i.e. soda, can be grossed-up at the check-out line.

A recent finding published by the New England Journal of Medicine connects calorie-laden beverages to obesity, heart disease and diabetes. People who consume "empty" calories in beverages tend not to correspondingly reduce their consumption of food calories, which over time contributes significantly to weight gain and its related health problems.

The Journal then supersizes the epidemic by illustrating how Medicare and Medicaid flip the bill for more than $70 billion per year for treatment of obesity related problems — which means that someone else's multi-soda-per-day habit has an indirect financial impact on those who wouldn't touch a Mountain Dew with a 10-foot straw.

So, as America tries to wrangle out a way to pay for what could be a trillion-dollar overhaul of its health care system, a nationwide tax on soda has some fizz. At a penny per ounce soda tax hike would raise $15 billion in its first year, according to Kelly Brownell, director of Yale University's Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity.

Raw dollars translating into health care for needy children, nutrition programs for expectant mothers and a vast array of disease-prevention measures.

Furthermore, if the cost of a 12-pack of Coke or Pepsi went up $1.44, people may choose to quench their thirst with some water. If that oil drum sized fountain drink puts a cramp in your budget, maybe you'll get by with a 12-ounce can that actually fits snug your car's cup holder.

The soda tax proposal was lofted before Congress in the spring, received a lot of hype, but never grew legs. With the collective lobbying power of the restaurant industry, bottlers, sugar producers and corn growers (most soda is sweetened with high-fructose corn syrup), elected officials weren’t likely to stick their necks out for what opponents can accurately describe as a regressive tax.

Strong opposition, however, doesn't mean an idea doesn't have merit. Soda is, after all, a luxury and America is no stranger to asking people to pay a extra for indulging.

So, as the nation is in a quandary over the soaring budget deficits and rising health care costs, maybe a federal tax on soda should be considered a valuable revenue stream while encouraging people to make healthier beverage choices.

Would it really be so bad if a two-liter bottle of Dr. Pepper suddenly cost more than a half-gallon of skim milk?

Armand Nardi is the publisher of the Gainesville Daily Register. He can be contacted at: anardi@ntin.net.