Fat Tax in North Carolina

North Carolina is making health insurance more expensive for state employees who are obese. It is the second state, after Alabama, to implement this policy. Rising health care costs have prompted this measure in a state famous for its bar-be-que. Is this right?

Proponents say that health care costs are rising. Health care costs are rising largely because of obesity and tobacco use. The idea is that obese people should pay more for health care. This makes sense, so what's wrong with this plan? The state government says it's trying to promote healthier lifestyles. It's only fair, it says, that people who require more health care pay more.

This is similar to another measure in the Congress to tax soda and other "unhealthy" food. What exactly is an unhealthy food? In fact, no food is unhealthy as long as portions are controlled. If a person eats perfectly healthy 99% of the time, but then drinks a Pepsi, should he pay a tax? How can we conclude that these foods are causing obesity, and not lifestyle factors? Which food would be targeted?

There are several reasons to oppose the North Carolina measure, however. First, what's the definition of obese or overweight? Do we use the BMI scale, or another arbitrary scale? Some people who are "overweight" are healthy, while some who are underweight are unhealthy. Because of genetics, many black people are considered 'overweight' on the BMI scale despite showing no ailments of syndrome X (a combination of symptoms, including high blodd pressure, high triglycerides, high LDL cholesterol, and type II diabetes). Michael Jordan would be classified as overweight according to the BMI scale.

The measure also assumes that people know what's healthy and what's not. If this were true, then the series of books called Eat This! Not That! would not be so popular. People aren't sure what to eat, when to eat, and how much to eat. They're uninformed and unaware. Proponents of fat-tax measures know much more about nutrition and exercise than the general population. With no program to teach people how to modify and change their lifestyles, then people will be confused and angry with a tax that penalize the lifestyle they've always known.

There are better ways to promote healthier lifestyle. One would be to provide incentives for joining wellness programs, or hiring a personal trainer. These programs will have better long-term effects on the cost of health care than punishing taxes. It's inconceivable that during a recession states are considering more taxes.

Another solution might be just to reduce the amount of people working for the state government, which employs 600,000 people in a state with a little more than seven million people. That's almost one employee for every ten citizens.