RI wants to educate ciotizens about the evils of sugary drinks and Beacon Hill is voting on repealing the ban on happy hours? Beam me up, Scottie....

Seems like government wants to be involved in every aspect of our lives. This is a very dangerous road we are going down, but it is also in-line with the nanny state mentallity our leaders have embraced in recent years.

The India Tea Company is gonna be mad.

Average Joe- I vote against government intervention whenever possible. Not sure if you're old enough to remember when Mass. instituted the mandatory seat belt law. I remember attending the anti-seat belt law rally at the state house with the late radio talkshow host Jerry Williams. Nothing like a good "click-it or ticket" advertisment on TV, and what about neighboring RI where they have a seatbelt law for motorists yet they let motorcyclists smash their heads into the pavement by not requiring helmet use. Care to explain that one?

Believe the hype - so does that mean that the government should stop taxing cigarettes and alcohol? Because it's essentially the same thing - cigarettes and alcohol are bad for us, and some people choose to use them anyway. But there IS a cost associated with the obesity epidemic, just as there is a cost on smoking related illnesses. So It does harm all of us, as a society, in a way. Financially anyway. So taxes on junk food or sugary drinks are the exact same thing to me. If we'd stop eating and drinking ourselves into morbid obesity then maybe this wouldn't be an issue.

They need to stay out of our business.

Less Government intrusion on all levels.

Let's not kid ourselves: this has nothing to do with government giving a hoot about the us...it's all about the money and finding new ways to get it from us.

The poll question should not assume that sugary beverages aren't good for us.

Some overpaid bureaucrat has decided that they know better about what's good for us and they may be right. But what it really boils down to is that they have decided that sugary drinks are not good for them and are trying to impose their nelief on the rest of society. Mind your own business!!

The government needs to stay out of our kitchens!

Education does more in helping people make better choices for themselves than mandates ever could. Give them the facts, the "true facts", and then the individual makes their own choice. It's called America.

Education only goes so far. How long have we been educated about the dangers of smoking, but some do it anyway? Education is important, but I think it has to be both. Obesity IS a burden on our society and we ALL pay for it in terms of higher insurance premiums. Just as high cigarette prices are a deterrent for some, so will higher junk drink prices. Statistics show that the highest levels of obesity are in poor demographics, and this is directly due to lack of education, higher availability of unhealthy choices in their neighborhoods, and the fact that it's CHEAP. Read any study on obesity and it will say that. Yes, this is America, and we are free to make our own choices - but this is not an ideal world and the reality is those choices often have an adverse effect on our society. The attitude of "don't tell me what to do" when it comes to food choices is exactly why Americans are so fat. Have you looked at a map of obesity rates by state lately? It's SCARY. This proposed tax isn't telling you what to do. Go ahead and do it. But when you make yourself diabetic and and need knee surgeries and have strokes and heart problems, we ALL pay for it one way or another. So you should pay for your bad choices. Maybe this tax should go to pay for state PSAs reminding us all of healthy habits - because you know how there will never be money for it otherwise.

Don't forget to "suicide - proof" your home.

People know the hazards of sugary drinks, alcohol, cigarettes, etc. but the Govt should not have the right to tell them what they can and can't do. That is our choice. If you're going to limit sugary drinks then why not alcohol and cigarettes. They are supposedly much more harmful. Ban alcohol and cigarettes. How about that?

No one is limiting anything. No one is taking away your choice. No one is telling you what you can't do. Drink, smoke, and eat to your heart's content - but pay extra for it.

Average Joe - I see nothing wrong with taxing junk food, if it could be implemented in a way that made sense. If anything, it would encourage companies to make their foods healthier so they could market them as being exempt from the tax! (Lunch meat is a good example - most is filled with carcinogenic nitrates - but not certain brands, like Boar's Head.) Please, tax McDonalds. Maybe then parents won't raise their children on it. Tax high-fructose corn syrup. Maybe that will encourage companies to take it out of their products. "Everything in moderation" is a great idea - except that if you read labels all these little things we're to take in moderation are in EVERYTHING we at. I think that Americans have more than proven that they are not capable of policing themselves, as someone here wrote previously. Most Americans are so uneducated about healthy eating that they have no idea what even constitutes the right portion size. And lets face it - the reason there are so many comments on this issue is because people take any suggestion on their food choices as a personal attack. Just as you can't discuss religion or politics, you can't tell someone what they should or shouldn't eat. So what we are left with is a country of overweight/obese citizens who get indignant when asked to pay a portion of their burden on society.

How about... first the Gov't, at all levels, gets is own houses in order before it tells the poeple how to run their homes.

I do not see a "fat tax" as government policing my life, I guess. I see it as necessary evils. I can still eat or drink what I choose. If anything it's the first step in education because paying extra might make people THINK about what they are putting into their bodies. Whether you agree or not, just take a look at obesity statistics - I'm not making stuff up. I'm happy you and your friends make good choices, but millions upon millions of Americans don't. And those same Americans are passing their bad habits onto their children, who don't know better, and who are becoming obese at even more alarming rates. They will fight obesity for their entire lives now, and we are left with a vicious cycle. So what is the answer to the obesity epidemic then? (or do you even agree if there is one?) We shouldn't tax that which makes us unhealthy. We certainly can't outlaw ingredients. Education hasn't worked thus far and is the always thing to be cut first anyway, when we're not bringing in enough taxes. (ironic) Should we just keep the status quo? For me that is not an option. I've taken the time to educate myself on this subject and to me our future as a society is pretty grim if things don't change.

oh, and if you don't want the government in your life regarding your food choices, how do you feel about big business instead? I suggest reading "Food Politics" by Marion Nestle. Just to get started.

Taxing legal products in order to discourage their use is absurd. I do agree with some of the education initiatives because obesity (and other chronic self induced conditions) carry a heavy burden on society in the form of increased insurance premiums. Also there is a correlation between certain demographic groups/regions which clearly indicate a need for some additional education.

Another thing I would favor is removing sugary drinks & unhealthy snacks from schools (including chocolate & strawberry flavored milk). School age children are not mature enough to understand the long-term implications of some of their actions and if given the option they will often choose the wrong thing despite their parents best efforts otherwise.

Hey YERKILLINME - Don't we have a huge tax on cigarettes and alcohol? Isnt this a "taxing of legal products" as you describe. Why is this not "absurd"? YERKILLINME2
Agreed - Chocolate milk should be the first thing to go at school!

You get what you voted for. Big Brother is watching and if you don't behave like good little boys and girls they will punish you with sin tax. How's that hope and change working for you?

if taxpayer-funded food stamps are being used to purchase unhealthy drinks, which will then increase the need to utilize taxpayer-funded health care, then the purchase of these drinks should exempt from food stamps. Before we get into slippery slop logic, sodas and soft drinks are not necessary to our diets, where other foods that may contain harmful ingredients also contain ingredients that are necessary to our diets. Government assistance should only be used for items that are necessary and essential. Alcohol and tobacco are already prohibited food stamp purchases.

Let people drink sweet soda if they want. Just let them know the risks by proper labeling. Strangely enough, there are studies out that show people who drink sodas with fake sugar like Nutra-Sweet or Sweet & Low end up with bigger midsections than people who drink regular sodas.

Sugary Drinks are not the problem we have been drinking them for the last hundred years the problem is lack of exercise. People don't exercise any more we drive everywhere we go nobody walks anymore. Insted of playing sports we watch it on tv kids sit in front of a computer 24/7 and don't go out and play. Why not a lazy tax if you don't move around enough the government will tax you. The government mandates health and in the end we still end up dieing anyway nobody lives forever enjoy yourself while you can and keep government out of it.

Sugary drinks are an issue. According to the USDA, corn syrup consumption has risen 400% since 1970 - and most of that is due to HFCS, which is predominately found in sugared drinks. So people are obviously drinking a lot more of these drinks than they used to. Overall, food consumption is up 16% and our average calorie consumption has risen over 500 calories PER DAY since 1970. For many people that's more than enough for steady weight gain, especially if you don't exercise. Even 500 extra calories a week would be more than enough - so it's no wonder the US is getting so fat.

And lets not forget that these kids have these habits because of their parents. And their parents probably have poor habits themselves. Which they learned from their parents. Or, often when choosing which battles to pick with their children, the issue of food is often first to go since it's so easy to just give them an unhealthy "convenience food." So you can't really expect personal accountability when the issue has been manifesting since childhood. With over a third of our population obese, it's also becoming the norm. We are becoming desensitized to it.

I don't think it's the goverments job to tell me what to eat or not to eat and more than I think it's a schools job to tell me if my child is overweight or not. Have we all forgotten that we are ultimately responsible for what we say and do. Take a lesson from Girl Scouts.

What's the message from the Girl Scouts? Hmm....over the years I have spent hundreds of dollars on girl scout cookies. I think I will take your words to heart next year when the children come a knockin';) They've become a bit pricey anyway.

Don't mess with my chocolate mint cookies! You tell em Deb.