Storing too many calories? Could be a tax for that ...

Of course, to keep things fair, we may need to follow this idea toward its logical conclusion.

By GREGG J. CAVANAGH

Last update: October 15, 2009 - 7:44 PM

In February, I weighed 280 pounds. I'm 5 feet 10, and my claim that I was "big-boned" was wearing pretty thin. Even a mastodon my height wouldn't weigh that much. So the recent proposal by Kelly Brownell and David Ludwig to tax sugar-sweetened beverages ("Sweeten the health care pot: Tax sugar," Oct. 9) got me thinking.

My first reaction was that Brownell and Ludwig didn't go far enough. If sugar-sweetened soda should be taxed, how about ice cream, cake, doughnuts, cookies and candy? They have plenty of sugar in them. And what about sugar? It has plenty of sugar in it, too. We should tax anything with lots of sugar in it.

Unfortunately, I don't think that tax would work for people like me. I've been drinking sugar-free soda for 30 years. I cut out sweets long ago. No, under even an expanded Brownell-Ludwig tax, certain categories of overweight people would fly (all right, waddle) under the radar. We need a wider net.

Maybe we need a tax on foods high in fat and carbs, too. We all know what a diet of fast food can do to the figure. But it wouldn't be fair to stop at the fast-food restaurants, would it? After all, regular restaurants, vending machines and even grocery stores are loaded with sugar, fat and carbs. Let's tax 'em all!

But wait a minute. I know plenty of people who eat sugar, fat and carbs who aren't overweight. Why should they be discouraged from eating or drinking the things they like? Why should they be taxed for a problem they don't have?

Maybe the real problem is quantity. People who eat in moderation tend to be slimmer, and people who overeat tend to be heavier, right? Maybe we need a portion tax. The person who says "supersize me" pays a percentage. The person who orders the regular combo gets off with a warning.

Still, there are those freaks of nature who eat like horses and stay skinny as rails. Something about metabolism. Sure, we may hate them, but is it really fair to impose a portion tax on them? If we discourage them from eating those big meals, they may waste away entirely. Hmmmmm.

I've got it! Why don't we just enact an obesity tax? After all, that's what we're really trying to prevent, isn't it? We can mandate that everyone go to the Department of Body Mass once a year and weigh in. A person's body mass index will determine his or her obesity tax for the year. Heavier people tend to emit more carbon dioxide, so the tax will encourage them to reduce their carbon footprints, too.

Of course, poor people can't afford an obesity tax, so rich people will have to pay more. Rich people can afford weight-loss programs and personal trainers anyway, so it's only fair. Flexibility can be provided through a cap-and-trade system, under which people can trade fat credits on the open market. Al Gore would benefit in more ways than one.

I hope I'm making my point. "Experts" like Brownell and Ludwig invoke their credentials to push their personal agendas, and the federal government legislates those agendas to herd us like sheep. The government that declared the failed wars on poverty, crime and drugs stands ready to declare a new war on obesity. The government with the $12 trillion debt can't wait to tell us to stop overindulging. And once more, freedom yields.

So what's the solution? Well, in February, I stopped blaming my ancestors, my body, my job, the food industry and the advertising industry, and took responsibility for myself. I changed the way I eat.

It hasn't been a piece of cake. Exercising freedom isn't always easy. But so far, I've lost 82 pounds. And I've done it without a federal stimulus, a cash-for-calories program, or Brownell's and Ludwig's sugar tax. Granted, it's just one little gesture in support of freedom. But I figure I'm a bigger -- and smaller -- man for it.

Gregg J. Cavanagh, Maple Grove, is an attorney who practices principally in the areas of labor and employment law.

Recent Commentary stories

Garrison Keillor: Let's leave Afghanistan before it's last call - October 15, 2009

Garrison Keillor: Let's leave Afghanistan before it's last call - We don't like quitting, but we also don't like overstaying our welcome. More

Comment on this story | Read all 15 comments | Hide reader comments

New ideas for the public sector

THERE'S NEVER BEEN A BETTER TIME to create a more efficient Minnesota. Facing large budget deficits at the state, county and local levels, Minnesotans are seeing with new clarity that the public sector must adapt to new economic realities. Only the smartest, most strategic reinvention will ensure that our tax dollars are spent on the best programs and services. Read more

About Opinion Exchange

Opinion Exchange is produced by the Editorial Department, which is dedicated to hosting the discussion on a range of issues of interest to Star Tribune readers online and in print. In its new format, it's our hope that Opinion Exhange will create a more dynamic dialogue between Star Tribune readers and the Editorial Board. Many individual posts will be written and signed by members of the Editorial Board and will reflect their own opinions. Daily editorials will continue to represent the institutional voice of the newspaper and be researched and written by the Editorial Department, which is independent of the newsroom.

Subscribe to RSS|Learn more about RSS