Remember that proposed tax on sugary beverages, like flavored milk (previous blog here)? A similar tax is still under consideration in the House. However, those who need to care what their constituents think about such proposals are getting nervous.
Electorally vulnerable Democrats are urging the House Ways and Means Committee to drop language from its healthcare reform proposal that
would tax food and beverage products, saying it would disproportionately impact the poor.
In a letter to committee chairman Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.) and ranking member Dave Camp (R-Mich.), 13 members of the Democratic Congressional Campaign
Committee's Frontline program, led by Reps. Debbie Halvorson (Ill.), John Adler (N.J.), Michael McMahon (N.Y.) and Ann Kirkpatrick (Ariz.), urge the committee to abandon proposed taxes on food.
...
One proposal would tax sugary sodas at a rate of 10 cents per can, which could generate $112 billion, according to estimates.
$112 billion over a decade. The Senate's proposed 3-cent-per-can tax on all sugary drinks (which is supposedly off the table) was estimated to raise $50 billion over a decade. Both would only raise a small percentage of the cost of the health care proposals being bandied about. The solution is evidently to make the most expensive health care in the world even more expensive.
The Democrats, all freshmen except Rep. Leonard Boswell (Iowa), say such a tax would hit poorer families hardest. According to an assessment by the Congressional Research Service, 70 percent of the money generated from a soda tax would hit those making under $92,000 a year.
And, the Democrats said, adding taxes to certain food items and not others would raise the cost of groceries; poorer Americans spend more of their money on food than wealthier families.
Well duh! But couldn't the Congressional Research Service have come up with a more relevant income than $92,000?
Do you suppose President Obama would veto a health care bill that would include him breaking his promise about not raising taxes on those making less than $250,000??
"While we support health care reform and finding appropriate offsets, we would prefer that health care legislation does not raise taxes on middle class families and small businesses," the members wrote.
...
Those who signed the letter include some of Republicans' top targets heading into the 2010 cycle. The GOP already has top recruits set to run against Reps. Walt Minnick (D-Idaho), Frank Kratovil (D-Md.) and Betsy Markey (D-Colo.), while Reps. Tom Perriello (D-Va.), Eric Massa (D-N.Y.) and John Boccieri (D-Ohio) could also face tough contests.
Rep. Michael Arcuri (D-N.Y.), who faced a surprisingly close race in 2008, and Rep. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) also signed the letter.
They just want to be on record as opposing the taxes before supporting them.
The "poor" - as if these cretins actually gave a fig - would be a helluva lot more healthier if the couldn't afford to buy that crap.
Posted by: Ten Bears | July 11, 2009 at 07:53
Hard to disagree with that.
Posted by: RoguePundit | July 11, 2009 at 16:09