The familiar hiss of a soda bottle opening is primed to get a little more expensive in the Empire State if a proposal to enact an obesity tax of 18 percent on all regular sodas and `certain high caloric, low nutritional beverages` passes as part of Gov. David Paterson’s 2009 budget.
Though the state is facing an unprecedented deficit, Paterson has labeled the measure as a public health item, comparing it to the longstanding cigarette tax, which proponents argue saves tens of thousands of lives every time it is raised.
`What smoking was to my parents’ generation, obesity is to my children’s generation,` and it can have a similar solution,` said Paterson in a commentary for CNN. `These taxes may be unpopular, but their benefits are undeniable.`
Like charges placed on cigarettes, the so-called soda tax is taking fire and gaining support from all corners. Some say it’s necessary to combat an epidemic, while others feel it’s an invasion of privacy or an ineffective way to battle the problem.
`One of the factors is how necessary an item is, whether it’s considered a luxury or a necessity,` said Drew Anderson, an associate professor in the department of psychology at SUNY Albany who studies weight and body image, including obesity research. `It’s not clear to me how food fits into that. From the research I’ve seen and looking at the studies, it really does look like there’s a real health effect.`
In what has become a widely discussed viral video, state Health Commissioner Dr. Richard Daines posted a video on You Tube that made the case for the soda tax and was filmed in his kitchen. In the five-minute video, Daines parades out pounds of sugar and fake fat, arguing that the consumption of sugary drinks has increased in line with American obesity.
`We are in the midst of an obesity epidemic,` said Daines. `It’s become clear that one important factor contributing to this problem is a remarkable change in the amounts of different beverages that we all drink.`
Daines noted that since 1970, our consumption of milk-to-soda has basically reversed, with the average American drinking 11 cans of soda per week instead of five, and six glasses of milk instead of 10.
`Back then, overweight and obesity were not nearly the problem they are now,` said Daines.
If the comments posted to Daines’ video ` more than 900 as of press time`
are any indication, many don’t see the issue his way and feel strongly about it.
A more formal poll finds the same. A Quinnipiac University poll released near the end of December showed that New Yorkers disapprove of the obesity tax, 60 to 37 percent. Nearly all agree with Paterson that the state is facing a budget crisis of a serious nature, though.
The same poll found that the state’s citizenry would greatly prefer a millionaire’s tax, at 84 to 13 percent, or tax hikes on cigarettes or alcoholic beverages.
Opponents of the tax argue that any assumed health benefits are just a distraction tactic to sneak in another revenue source in a budget that is already laden with tax and fee hikes (Paterson has said the funds will go toward health programs and nutrition education). The deficit aside, whether or not New Yorkers can withstand another tax while a recession grips the nation is a hotly debated question.
`Gov. Paterson is bemoaning the loss of jobs in New York state, and this single swipe of the pen could do just that,` said Craig Stevens, a spokesman for the American Beverage Association, a trade group for makers of non-alcoholic drinks such as soda. Stevens said that 160,000 New Yorkers rely on the beverage trade, from bottlers to distributors to retailers.
`This is simply a money grab,` continued Stevens. `It’s not supported by science, and it’s not supported by common sense. The argument that taxing one single product would have an effect on obesity rates is overly simplistic.`
Others feel that the tax, while admirable, does not effectively target the problem as it extends to beverages with less than 70 percent natural fruit juice. Liz Morrill, founder and CEO of the Manhattan-based Fizzy Lizzy brand of sparkling juices, recently came out against the tax, arguing that it would apply to her half juice, half seltzer beverages that contain far fewer calories and less sugar than straight juice.
`Because the legislation basically wraps the entire category in an umbrella, it ends up including drinks like ours, which are designed to provide a less caloric, healthy alternative to soda,` said Morrill. `If its aim is to get children to drink less caloric beverages, then it seems to me that the criteria should be something extremely objective.`
She pointed out that a 12-ounce bottle of Tropicana Pure Premium Orange ` with 165 calories and 33 grams of sugar ` would be exempt from the obesity tax, while her tangerine drink`with 100 calories and 24 grams of sugar`would be subject to it. Along with sales tax (also imposed based on juice content), consumers would be charged a 26 percent tax on her product.
Morrill will testify to the Ways and Means Committee on Feb. 2, when it examines the health and Medicare portion of the budget.
Though the obesity tax may seem unusual, New York isn’t the first state to dabble in a sin tax of this nature. In April of 2008, Maine adopted a tax on soda, beer and wine aimed at funding affordable state health care. Soda was hit with a 42-cent-per-gallon charge, and the syrup used to make soda at fountains was taxed at $4 per gallon.
Maine’s tax was overturned by voter referendum in the November election.
Other states, like Arkansas, Virginia and Washington, have either levied soda taxes or are considering them. In some states the law extends to diet soda as well as their calorie-packed counterparts. The proceeds are often used to fight litter rather than health problems.
And according to some, the hundreds of empty calories found in regular soda versus zero-calorie diet drinks don’t make much of a difference when it comes to obesity.
A 2005 study from the San Antonio Heart Study, located at the University of Texas Health Science Center, indicated that those who drink diet soda are actually more likely to become overweight or obese than those who stick with regular ` a reason was not readily apparent, however.
A 2007 University of Alberta in Canada study on rats found that young rats that used diet foods tended to overeat at regular-calorie meals. Researchers speculated that the rats failed to associate certain foods with caloric content, making them eat more to feel full. The results were not duplicated in older animals, however.
To plot the effect of the obesity tax will take time.
`We’ll have to wait several years to see the outcome,` said Anderson. `I do think if we’re going to work on obesity prevention, we’re going to have to think about public policy and big changes. Individual treatment isn’t going to cut it, with two-thirds of Americans at least overweight. We’ll have to have the political and social will to see it through.`
Of course, if the obesity tax does go into effect, one way New Yorkers can avoid it is by changing their drinking habits. As Daines argued on You Tube, switching to non-taxed milk or juice would save the average American family $100 per year.
`Our health will be better, our health care will cost less and every family will have more to spend on whatever they want,` he argued.“