Stimulus Funds Fat Tax Study

18 Nov, 2009 by McQ

Print this article Font size -16+

This one is right out of the “you’ve got to be kidding me” category.

It seems that stimulus funds, you know that 787 billion bill without an “ounce” of pork in it, are funding a study at the University of Illinois (wow, there’s a surprise) to look at “the relationship between fat taxes and food consumption, diet quality, and obesity.”

In reality it is a study to assess the feasibility of taxing soda, under the guise of fighting obesity, to fund health care reform. You remember all the trial balloons that were launched earlier in the year concerning this tax? Well, now taxpayers are funding research to figure out if it is feasible to further tax taxpayers.

And does anyone really doubt the outcome of the study? Really?

This is perfect example of how out of control government has become. Spending money it doesn’t have on a study to see if it can tax you more to make up for some of the money it’s spending that it doesn’t have. That should be a line in a comedy skit, not a reality.

This also makes the point that government would have no hesitation whatsoever – if it can manage to wrangle the power to do it – in deciding what you should or shouldn’t consume – all in the name of health care dollars – and punishing you if you don’t conform. And, of course, regulators and bureaucrats can’t assume that power unless Congress hands it to them through this health care reform monstrosity.

While you’re noodling over that, you might also consider another voice that came out today in opposition to the present health care reform bill. Dr. Jeffery Filer, dean of the Harvard Medical School said:

Speeches and news reports can lead you to believe that proposed congressional legislation would tackle the problems of cost, access and quality. But that’s not true. The various bills do deal with access by expanding Medicaid and mandating subsidized insurance at substantial cost–and thus addresses an important social goal. However, there are no provisions to substantively control the growth of costs or raise the quality of care. So the overall effort will fail to qualify as reform.

Make sure you read the whole thing.

[HT: Katherine P.]

[Crossposted at QandO]