Obamacare Architect Gruber Advocated for “Fat Tax”

First they came for the fat people, and I did not speak out—Because I was not fat…

In a April 2010 article for the National Institute for Health Care Management, Jonathan Gruber (most famous for saying that Obamacare was able to be successfully passed due to the “stupidity” of the American people), advocates for government regulations to curb alcohol use , tobacco use and most interestingly, obesity.

Perhaps unscathed by the very real and serious effects that so-called “sin taxes” have had on those who are the least fortunate (see: Garner, Eric), Gruber presumes that it is the duty of government to ensure the health and well-being of all Americans. He begins with cigarettes: “The magnitude of this behavioral response means that, on net, higher taxes do not increase the amount low-income groups spend on smoking but do improve their health through reduced smoking. When these factors are considered, cigarette taxes are more progressive than commonly perceived.”

Indeed, it seems rather “progressive” in the modern era to, perhaps not explicitly tell people what to do with their lives, but rather, to make the cost of their first choice so expensive that they have no option to choose what the government deems fit. We can all agree that smoking is a detrimental activity and should not be done by anyone. But is it the role of the state to make that decision for you?

Gruber continues on to the major problem of alcohol use. Gruber states that “the enormous damage done by drinking suggests that higher alcohol taxes would raise social welfare overall.” In other words, a tax levied by the government would be for the best, and therefore we ought to trust the government to use such power responsibly.

This remark by Gruber reflects the nastiest aspect of modern liberal paternal instincts. They believe that the government’s responsibility is not just to enforce contracts and protect natural rights. People like Gruber feel that it is up to the government to reconstruct reality into what they deem to be an image of justice. Such a scheme takes away from citizens their own rights to free will and defies any notion of liberty.
[divider]Sponsored[/divider]

Ever considered running for office? Get our informational packet with all the data that you need to run, and win, an election. Click our sponsor’s link below for more information.
Click Here!

[divider]Sponsored[/divider]
Finally, in his article, Gruber targets the growing problem of obesity. He says that “what may be needed to address the obesity problem are direct taxes on body weight.” While he states that this is a more nuanced issue, he surmises that increases in health insurance costs on those who are overweight (provided for in Obamacare) can help fix this problem.

This brings about an interesting proposition. It seems completely reasonable and just that private health insurers would raise costs on those who bring about higher costs for others by engaging in unhealthy habits. These private companies could do what they need to in order to compete with other companies. However, when the government is put in the driver’s seat of the insurance market, as is done by Obamacare, it is much a scarier reality.

In short, the government has no business telling Americans how to live their lives. Each of us has our vices and sins for better or worse. Just as government has no right to intrude into our bedrooms, it has no right to intrude into our kitchens either. Rationale like Gruber’s completely disregards the fact that obesity falls disproportionately among the poorest Americans. This is in part because they have less free time to exercise and less income to buy the best ingredients in comparison with the wealthy.

If Jonathan Gruber truly wishes to make people healthier, he has the right and obligation to make speeches and influence Americans with the undeniable facts. However, he does not have the right to use the force of government to attempt to tell us what is in our own best interest.