Taxing Our Tanning Salons and Burning Up Our Freedoms

The world is full of things that are good for us and bad for us and the definition of such is constantly changing. For example, the constantly swinging pendulum of pros and cons in certain foods and beverages like eggs, which are high in cholesterol but also high in protein. Or the most comprehensive list of pros and cons: coffee, which is believed to be good for everything from preventing Parkinson's disease to Asthma, to Kidney stones, but is also believed to be a cause or contributor to heartburn, dehydration, heart rhythm disturbances, and Osteoporosis.

Some substances have little to zero health value, or have a negative effect on one's health, but the users of such take a risk on their health in trade for a pleasurable activity. Our government, which in any other situation involving religion and morality vows to remain separated from, deems such actions as "sinful" whereby justifying their outrageous taxation. The "sin tax," as government loves to tell us, "always reduces smoking rates and always increases the state revenue," (http://www.in.gov/itpc/files/research_51.pdf ) as is stated on Indiana's Tobacco Prevention and Cessation website. But the irony of that statement is missed entirely by those who utter it. The truth is, if it weren't for smokers, drinkers, and gamblers, how could government operate under the ridiculous amount of programs, welfare, and bureaucracy it has mutated into and promised to voters. If it weren't for those courageous men and women risking their own health day after day, pack after pack, how could the impoverished children on Medicaid get the services they need?

The Senate passed, by straight party line vote, "Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009": HR 3200 on Christmas Eve. Within it is a 10 percent tax on tanning salon services. The effects of UVA to the skin can be damaging. In fact, in July of 2009 the World Health Organization moved the risk of tanning to the highest, after research was done and published in Lancet Oncology. This means, tanning beds, or other indoor UVA lamps, are considered as dangerous and cancer-causing as cigarettes and arsenic.

However, those who use tanning beds are usually aware of the risks, as are those who use tobacco. The real health link, or reason that a 10 percent tax has been included in the bill, is to generate funds to pay for the monstrosity of the healthcare bill itself. Estimates done show the regulation will bring in 2.7 billion by 2019.

But many tanning salons are small "Mom and Pop" businesses that struggle to stay open to begin with. When the economy ticks down, the average $6 per session tan is a luxury that can no longer be afforded. Add a tax that will in no way profit Mom and Pop, and you have another business-killing Washington policy, which has the audacity to claim it is helping the very people it puts out of business.

Melissa Clanton, owner of "Bourbon Tropics," a video, tanning, and ice cream shop in a truly small town with a population under 2,000 is one of those people.

"Raising my prices would affect my business. The economy has killed any entertainment shops this year, tanning and video being at the top. I have to keep my prices down just to get clients in my doors. If Obama keeps it up there will be nothing available in small towns anymore...It has been found that tanning provides vitamin D. Also, I have many customers that tan with a doctor's note for back problems, depression and skin disorders. I myself love to tan because it makes me feel better about myself. I am not addicted to tanning. Tanning too much is bad for you, but eating too much chocolate, drinking too much coffee, driving when you are exhausted are, too."

Clanton raises a point that was raised by Senator Tom Coburn, a Republican from Oklahoma.

"If we're going to tax tanning salons, why aren't we taxing anybody who goes to the beach? Or how about kids' sports in the summer? Let's tax kids' baseball. Let's tax swimming pools because they increase exposure to UV light."

Senator Richard Burr, a Republican from North Carolina, continued with the possibilities of further taxing and regulating absurdities.

"I'm sure before it's over with we'll find parents that don't put suntan lotion on their children, and especially if it doesn't meet a high enough SPF...this is out of control."

The tanning tax is Exhibit A of how America's individual choice, responsibility, and liberty are being taken over and nationalized by an out-of-touch group of people who think they know what's better for us.

Sources:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/hi/health/newsid_10000000/newsid_10000600/10000608.stm

http://www.thebigmoney.com/articles/after-fad/2009/12/30/should-your-fake-tan-be-taxed