Editorial: A tax on pop? Freedom slips

It's only a long shot so far, but serious people on the national scene are giving more than passing thought to a tax on soft drinks. It's a sign of things to come as Americans give up notions of being free.

According to a report on National Public Radio Wednesday, researchers have concluded that a tax on soft drinks would yield hundreds of billions of dollars over several years. Think of all the good that could be done with that kind of money. And think of all the health problems - from obesity to tooth decay - that could be prevented with a tax on sugary drinks.

Reformers can always find reasons to increase their control over what people should not do, and what they must be prohibited from doing.

Health care is the excuse for a tax on risky behavior. If the government has to pay the bill, the government has a natural interest in trying to reduce the cost.

So don't expect the idea of a soft drink tax to remain a long shot forever. Sooner or later it will be adopted, just as taxes have been used to drive down the use of tobacco.

After that, what? There is no limit to the kinds of risky behavior that has the potential of increasing public costs.

We already have helmet laws on the grounds that the public should not have to bear the cost of caring for brain-injured motorcyclists who don't have means of their own.

As we slip down that slope, future generations may be forced to accept regulations or limits on anything where injuries are more likely than during stints on the couch watching TV. Such activities would include mountaineering, bicycling and skiing, and hunting too.

And long before that, people in America can expect more regulations to regulate what they eat.

If anybody ever asks where in the Constitution our regulators find the authority, they may point to "general welfare" in the preamble. Or they might just say: Forget the Constitution; these regulations are for your own good. (hh)