The debate is juiced

I wonder whether it’s a factor of the late-night audience for prime-time football games – a pliable, slightly boozy demographic, given to rushed judgments and home-team jingoism – but I’ve noticed two borderline insulting TV spots in the past week after the pigskin is put to bed.

The first, in which a soccer mom with two strapping children unloads groceries and gives “Washington” what-for about a proposed tax on soft drinks. She looks like a mother lion about to claw the eyes out of an approaching hyena. “Families around here are counting pennies to get through this economy,” she says. “So when we hear about another tax it gets our attention. They say it’s only pennies. Well, those pennies add up when you’re trying to feed a family. Washington, if you’re listening, what doesn’t seem like much to you can be a lot to us.”

Here’s the video. Note that its comments and ratings have been disabled:

Take a guess who’s sticking up for “families around here.” Why, it’s a friendly group called Americans Against Food Taxes! Who is this coalition of concerned Americans? Well, they describe themselves as “responsible individuals, financially strapped families, small and large businesses in communities across the country [who are] opposed to the Government’s proposed tax hike on food and beverages, including soda, juice drinks, and flavored milks.” The American Beverage Association is leading the charge; regional chairs include representatives from the likes of the National Supermarkets Association and the Florida Petroleum Marketers & Convenience Store Association. I guess “Americans With Deeply Entrenched Financial Interests In Maintaining the Pipeline of Cheap Sugary Drinks Against Food Taxes” didn’t focus-group as well.

I grant that any trade organization worth its salt (and caramel color, and high-fructose corn syrup) isn’t doing its job if it doesn’t lobby against proposed taxes on its constituents. But the AAFT’s particularly specious arguments come down to two main points: the ludicrous “feed a family” line from the ad, and the claim that the tax would be, effectively, regressive – that it would disproportionately fall on the lower and middle class. If you’ve ever looked at the grocery aisles in low-income neighborhoods, this rings true: poor children in America are fueled by generic sodas and juice drinks that contain less than 10 percent juice. But therein lies the scandal. If parents do decide (please, God) that an extra nickel on a bottle of Coke is too much, they’re free to downgrade to R.C., and if that particular extravagance breaks the bank, there’s always Sam’s Choice. If that, also, is too high, then let me suggest tap water and other sources of calories. Meanwhile we’ll use the nickels to help treat type 2 diabetes.

The other ad doesn’t raise my hackles as much. Just check out this power executive’s speed-blinking when she mentions the environment 22 seconds into the video, and tell me if you believe what she’s saying: