Among Gov. Paterson's many proposals recently, the "soda tax" stood out not for its implications for our wallets, but for New York state's public health [Dec. 17 Gazette]. While the tax will discourage the consumption of high-fructose corn syrup, high-calorie beverages — known detriments to populations at high risk for obesity and diabetes — it wisely exempts diet beverages, pure fruit juices and water, providing a strong financial incentive for consumers to choose these lower calorie options. The "soda tax" is an important step toward improving our food environment and incentivizing a shift toward lower-calorie, lower-sugar foods.
JAMES R. KNICKMAN New York City The writer is president and CEO of the New York State Health Foundation.
It’s New York’s bloated budget that needs to go on a diet
It is obvious that Gov. Paterson is “fishing” for reaction to his proposed “obesity tax” on soft drinks. The real purpose is to see if he (and the Legislature) can get the camel’s nose under the tent [for] when they need additional revenue next year. Democrats and Republicans need to reject his proposal, as this would be the first of many steps resulting in higher taxes. If the intent is to reduce obesity in children, why are they taxing carbonated soft drinks? There are more calories in a similar amount of grape juice or orange juice than in Coke! Sugared “juice drinks” would be another target. Why stop there; what about the cookie aisle? There is a huge opportunity to increase revenue in the name of obesity reduction by taxing all cookies with sugar. Next, check out the cereal aisle. Then, slide over to the frozen food aisle and look at ice cream. And why stop at sugar, when there is so much butter fat in ice cream? I could give more examples — such as baked pies, cakes, donuts and muffi ns — but you get the point. Gov. Paterson can move out of the supermarket into Dunkin’ Donuts and restaurants, and tax everything that contains sugar. Why stop with sugared treats? Tax the meals — those nasty French fries and double hamburgers. As you can see, the opportunities for the obesity tax are limitless. However, what the governor needs to do is cut spending. That way, you don’t have to keep finding new and mindless ways to tax people who are up to their necks in taxes. What our governor and Legislature are pushing for is a tax revolt. [Maybe] we need a new political party that represents the people’s interests and is willing to make tough decisions to reduce spending and the unlimited growth of state government without worrying about being elected to another term.
The sad part is, Paterson put up a list of proposals. Dems and Reps said "no, we don't like those" - he retorted with "ok, YOU take it off the table, but replace it with something else". They can't - for fear of the next election cycle. If they suddenly lay off 10,000 workers across the state, they'll never get re-elected. But they can't find any "replacement" or "counter" to Paterson's proposal.
Paterson, while I don't support him 100% has done his constitutional duty to PROPOSE a budget. It's the legislators that will vote on and pass the budget .. so far, I haven't seen any compromises from their side of the bargaining table. Everyone's afraid to say "layoff" or "cut back" because it would be "unpopular" at election time.
Posturing by Paterson? Definately - but he's doing his job.
There in lies the problem MT, our legislatures are worried more about their re-election than doing their jobs and that is exactly why we need term limits at all levels of government.
Taxing non-diet soda? Is the governor making bad jokes or does he really think government has the right to punish us based on our taste in soft drinks? Perhaps the clause, “The government shall make no law providing for the tax-free consumption of non-dietary, sugar-based beverages” is familiar to Gov. Paterson, but I don’t ever recall seeing it in the constitution. So now, in the name of balancing budgets, the government will be discriminating in favor of thin people? Or in favor of those who like NutraSweet? What’s next? Taxing people who like cheeseburgers because the dairy can’t be good for people with lactose intolerance? Taxing people who eat peanuts to protect those with peanut allergies? Or maybe just taxing the people who buy salted peanuts, because all that salt can’t be good for their blood pressure. Or maybe government should mind its own business for once. Choice is the cornerstone of this country and our freedoms, and if people choose to drink fattening sodas, or even be fat, it is their right to do so. Common good arguments that health officials put forward are irrelevant when compared to the predominant individual good of free choice, even over something as trivial as soda. If the governor is serious about balancing the budget, he will slash spending and return government to its appropriate, non nanny-state role. If not, then we can all await the day when we pay extra for the privilege of not following the latest diet trend.
The sad part is, Paterson put up a list of proposals. Dems and Reps said "no, we don't like those" - he retorted with "ok, YOU take it off the table, but replace it with something else". They can't - for fear of the next election cycle. If they suddenly lay off 10,000 workers across the state, they'll never get re-elected. But they can't find any "replacement" or "counter" to Paterson's proposal.
Paterson, while I don't support him 100% has done his constitutional duty to PROPOSE a budget. It's the legislators that will vote on and pass the budget .. so far, I haven't seen any compromises from their side of the bargaining table. Everyone's afraid to say "layoff" or "cut back" because it would be "unpopular" at election time.
Posturing by Paterson? Definately - but he's doing his job.
Posturing by the Leg? Absofreakintively.
Therein lies the beast of our problems.....we made it....we live it......and the politicians think 'tweaking' the machine here and there will 'fix it'........think BIGGER boys and girls........you were elected to be a lineman/woman.....now act like it.......do the job you were hired to do......bust apart the crap..... oh, my mistake ya'll are too busy rubbing elbows with the likes of Madoff and high priced hookers.......dont want to 'get caught'...... you cant tell me that Mr.Paterson, Mr. Cuomo and the rest of the boys/girls didn't know.........
PUUUUULLLLLLLEASE.......................
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
Paterson’s ‘Obesity tax’ would save not just money, but lives
One in four adult New Yorkers is obese, and obesity in children and adolescents has tripled in the past three decades. Sugarsweetened beverages are the largest, single source of added sweeteners in the U.S. diet. Gov. Paterson’s proposed sugar-sweetened beverage tax is expected to reduce consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages while raising revenue for health-related programs. Studies show that sugar-sweetened beverages are associated with increased weight gain and an increase in preventable medical problems including diabetes, asthma and heart disease. Additionally, life expectancy for a moderately obese person is two to five years shorter; for a severely obese person, five to 20 years shorter. Obese people who smoke are also at an especially high risk of mortality, with a six to eight times greater risk of dying. It has already been shown that similar taxes on tobacco products have contributed to decreased cigarette consumption and smoking rates, particularly in children. The sugar-sweetened beverage tax is expected to do the same and is a win-win for all of us — both physically and economically. New York ranks second in the United States for adult obesity-related medical expenditures, totaling nearly $6.1 billion The sugar-sweetened beverage tax is an effective way for New Yorkers to become healthier, and ultimately to save money.
BRIDGET ROCCO Johnstown The writer is coordinator of Tobacco-Free Healthy Schools for Catholic Charities of Fulton and Mont gomery counties.
Bridget, you're just making excuses for people not taking control of their own lives and bodies. People who refuse to stop overeating, refuse to exercise, refuse to stop smoking, and who refuse to stop drinking in excess have nobody to blame but themselves and shouldn't be forced by more regulations to force them to behave as society wants. This is America and people came and settled here for freedom of choice and to get away from England's never ending laws and now you want the government to legislate the same kind of laws we fled from.
Bridget....how does a tax on 'anything' save money? And save money for exactly who? Your issue should be with the state's love affair with tax and spend.
And I'm sure that there would be a new department made just to handle the obesity tax. Employing and costing the taxpayers even more!
These people still walk amoung us!
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
Nanny nanny, help me nanny....please...help us be safe against all dangers including ourselves so that we may be protected...
"While Foreign Terrorists were plotting to murder and maim using homemade bombs in Boston, Democrap officials in Washington DC, Albany and here were busy watching ME and other law abiding American Citizens who are gun owners and taxpayers, in an effort to blame the nation's lack of security on US so that they could have a political scapegoat."
Re Feb. 11 editorial, “Attack big cause of obesity epidemic”: As the technology of health care advances, the health of Americans continues to decline. How is this possible? We have more access to information on nutrition and health than ever before in history and yet we individually make poor choices. I am not a fan of government regulation, but taxes that increase the price of unhealthy items, such as cigarettes or alcohol, are one of the most effective ways to reduce their purchase and use. The state Legislature is currently discussing a proposed tax on sugar-sweetened beverages and a $1 increase in the cigarette tax. An increase in the cigarette tax will reduce youth smoking rates, and a penny-per-ounce tax on sugar-sweetened beverages is expected to reduce their consumption by a minimum of 10 percent. The revenue raised through these taxes will go to the New York State Health Care Reform Act Resources Fund to support health care and health-related initiatives — such as health promotion, tobacco control, obesity, and other chronic disease prevention programs. What’s the end result to this proposed tax hike? Healthier New Yorkers and less state funds spent on preventable diseases. It sounds like a win-win to me.
REBECCA MANWARING Amsterdam The writer is director of Project ACTION Tobacco-Free Coalition of Hamilton, Fulton and Montgom-
Rebecca, go back to your little government controled world and stay out of my world. We have too many taxes, regulations, fees, and restrictions to our lives already and we don't need any more. I'm afraid if the government keeps going tyhe way they are it won't be long b4 the government will be telling us how many squares of toilet paper we can use in order to save trees.
Healthier New Yorkers and less state funds spent on preventable diseases. It sounds like a win-win to me
sounds like a pitch for the NYS lotto.....honestly.....what a freakin' joke.....preventable diseases????? and you know that a person who doesn't smoke/eat lead/fat or whatever WONT get cancer-how???
THAT'S WHY IT'S CHOICE......and choice to fight to the 'top' pay for your own and pull up your own damn bootstraps.....the problem with NYS is there are WAY TOO MANY entitled folks at the top who's skirts are flying up.....and they seem to be looking for some more morons to plow their fields FOR them, by keeping them happy with the sh*t they rob from "Paul" then give to the "peters" of this state......
GET OFF MY BACK.....
All it takes is a $1.00 and a diet.......what a farce.....
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
Logged
