THE ISSUE: Gov. Paterson’s hints about revisiting the idea of imposing a new tax on sugared soda.
* People don’t want government using the tax code to tell them what to eat or drink (“Gov. Shaking Bottle Again in Bid for Soda Tax,” Oct. 21).
Earlier this year, the governor proposed a major tax on sugar-sweetened beverages. New Yorkers revolted so strongly that he publicly scrapped the idea a month later.
A similar scenario can be found in Maine: Last year, it imposed a tax on beverages to pay for the state health-care program.
In a ballot initiative, Maine voters rejected the tax by a 2 – 1 margin.
In an economy like this, the last thing government should be doing is raising taxes on hard-working families.
We understand the budget challenges facing the state, and we look forward to working with the governor on solutions that don’t add to the burden of New Yorkers.
Tracey Halliday
Vice President
American Beverage
Association
Washington, DC
* New York needs a soda tax to provide New York politicians with the money with which to buy votes.
Arthur Shadforth
Cocoa, Fla.
* After being rebuked by the public and the Legislature, Gov. Paterson is resurrecting his sugary drink “sin” tax proposal on the heels of Obama’s support for a similar federal tax.
The proposal will fail to deliver the desired health benefits and is also bad tax policy.
While some people might quit buying these higher-taxed, sugar-filled drinks, those who do so are likely to begin consuming alternative calorie-filled products that are not taxed as highly but are just as unhealthy.
These taxes are not about better public health at all but are aimed at getting more of our hard-earned dollars into the hands of government.
The tax would pull more money out of taxpayers’ hands in order to prop up a broken and bloated government budget.
Alcohol, tobacco and other targeted sin taxes haven’t satisfied the appetites of big-spending politicians — and neither will a soda tax.
John Nothdurft
Chicago