Taxation for Carbonation?

The emergence of the “therapeutic ethos” in European American societies at the beginning of the twentieth century was crucial to the rise of consumer culture (Sturken and Cartwright 268).  Ads began to portray products as treatments for psychological problems such as anxiety and fatigue.  In Figure 7-2, in the textbook, the Coca Cola ad (1890) calls Coke “a brain tonic,” and “the ideal treatment for headache and exhaustion,” (Sturken and Cartwright 264).  In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, soda drinks were often advertised as promoting good health. The beverage industry’s continued tendency to offer soft drinks as beneficial to one’s health is now under fire. 

            In the Sunday, February 14^th issue of The New York Times, Mark Bittman’s article “A Sin We Sip Instead of Smoke,” outlines the new campaign to stop children from drinking soft drinks, because they cause obesity.  Michelle Obama heads the campaign against childhood obesity; President Obama plans to ban sweetened beverages from schools. Soft drink producers are being accused of marketing heavily to children and lobbying against change. Soft drink producers say that comparing soft drinks to cigarettes is ridiculous, that moderate amounts of soda are neither harmful, nor addictive. However, health officials point out that fifty gallons of soda per person, per year, is not moderate consumption and has been linked to the rise in childhood obesity, as well as diabetes.             

            Health advocates would like to treat soda like tobacco: with taxes, warning labels, and a public health marketing campaign discouraging consumption.  A tax on soda is one option being considered to finance health care reform. President Obama supports the tax because he believes that children drink too much soda. However, this raises the question, “Why tax soda, when there are so many other junk foods available?” The Beverage Association points out that raising taxes on soda is not the answer, since  a variety of behavior changes are needed to help stop obesity. Furthermore, taxing soda might stop consumption of sugared drinks, but could lead to people eating higher levels of fat instead. Nevertheless, the idea of a tax on soda is attracting interest. Supporters of this tax point out that sugared beverages are the number one source of calories in American food, account for 7% of the average person’s caloric intake and 10% of children’s and teens’. These calories are empty and contribute to a daily intake that is too high. Health leaders want to reverse the fact that healthy food is too expensive and that unhealthy food is cheap; a soda tax would be a start in accomplishing this goal.  In The New England Journal of Medicine, Dr.Thomas Friedan, a former NYC Health Commissioner, estimated that in New York alone, a penny per ounce soda tax would raise 1.2 billion dollars annually. This revenue could be used to subsidize fruits, vegetables, and fund obesity prevention programs for children in school.