Americans hate paying taxes almost as much as they love soda.

Some states have been proposing new taxes on soda as a way to fight the obesity crisis and push more money into the economy.

Cities and states that have tried to impose the tax have had different ideas on how to do so.

The Kansas Senate wanted to add a penny in tax for each teaspoon of sugar in a non-juice drink, according to an article in Time magazine. This would have generated $90 million in revenue a year, but the proposal never made it out of the committee.

In 2008, Maine passed a soda tax, but it was repealed by voters seven months later.
Philadelphia proposed a 2 cents-per-ounce tax which caused a local bottler to give the city $10 million to help out with its financial problems.

In May, Washington passed a tax of 2 cents for every 12 ounces of soda in a bottle or can, but groups are working toward forcing a vote on it. The District of Columbia removed its 6 percent sales tax exemption from soda.

The fact that these taxes can’t seem to stay in place goes to show that people don’t want their government telling them what to drink, no matter how unhealthy it is.

Although this type of tax could bring in a lot of revenue for suffering states, it also has the potential to eliminate thousands of jobs.

Soda company employees have been fighting and campaigning against such tax increases, and we can’t blame them.

We understand a need to bring more money into states or have more money to put into health care. That was the purpose of the tax increase on cigarettes, which to us was a good move.

However, this type of taxation is too unclear for us to defend.

Since when does not drinking soda replace calories from pizza or cake? What about diet sodas, or juices or teas that have just as much sugar — if not more — as regular soda?

How could we account for not increasing taxes on cookies, ice cream, chocolate bars and other sinfully delicious goodness? What about penalties for not meeting the recommended amount of exercise?

Soda has apparently been singled out because of studies showing a direct correlation to excess weight and drinking soda. If fewer people drank it, then yes, we would become a thinner society, but who is to say less people will buy soda because of a slight tax increase?

We think the financial crisis and the amount of people in massive credit card debt shows that not being able to afford something doesn’t stop people from getting it anyway.

This makes us think that lawmakers have already assumed people will drink soda no matter how much it is taxed and don’t really care about our weight, just our money.

To support this kind of tax, there would need to be more direct evidence that increasing a tax on soda would curb obesity in America.

This isn’t the first time government has attempted to dictate our diets and health.

The use of trans-fat in restaurants has been banned in New York. Smoking restrictions have been increasing over the years.

When such measures actually make sense, then there’s not really a problem when government tries to make us a little healthier. But taxing a specific beverage and wrapping it up in a sketchy “public-health” package is just too hard to swallow.