Letter-writers have begun reacting to the proposal by Gov. David Paterson to place a tax on sweetened sodas while exempting diet sodas and bottled water. The idea of a “sin tax” is to try to change behavior (while raising revenue at the same time) by making it cheaper to choose the “healthy” alternative. But
these letter-writers question the idea that diet sodas are healthier than sweetened drinks: “I would rather my kids drink a Classic Coke than something with a synthesized sugar substitute or artificial sweetener that not only tastes bad, but is bad for you,” states one. Another claims that diet drinks “contain artificial sweeteners that make people thirsty, causing people to drink more than necessary . . .” and wonders, “Could ‘diet’ drinks become addictive like cigarettes?” (Both letters as yet unpublished.)

Ironically, this proposal comes in the midst of a movement to discourage consumers from choosing one of Paterson’s un-taxed alternatives: bottled water. Environmental groups argue that, while water may be better for us than soda, bottled water is very unhealthy – for the planet. The Web site “Think Outside the Bottle” claims that “Plastic bottles also require massive amounts of fossil fuels to manufacture and transport. Billions of these bottles wind up in landfills every year. And when bottled water marketing convinces one in five people that the only place to get drinking water is from a bottle, it threatens the political will to adequately fund our public water systems.” The site also points out that “. . . many bottled water brands actually come from the same source as public tap water though these brands are sold back to the public at thousands of times the cost.” Cities such as Los Angeles, San Francisco and Ann Arbor, Mich., have stopped using city funds to purchase bottled water, and Chicago Mayor Richard Daley last year came out in favor of a 10-cent tax on each bottle.

So, should bottled water and diet soda be added to the “sin tax” list? Or does the whole idea of taxing beverages fall flat? Readers are invited to comment by sending a letter to letters@lohud.com