Liquor tax, tobacco tax, gas tax — could sugar tax be next? Some senators are throwing around the idea of slapping a tax onto sugary soft drinks, hence the moniker “sugar tax.”

Although the Wall Street Journal, Reuters and other media outlets are raising a bit of alarm over the subject, it’ll be quite a while before any such legislation is anywhere near implementation, if it ever materializes at all.

Beyond soda

Reuters explains that some Senate leaders today will hear testimony today from the Center for Science in the Public Interest. But the center thinks more than just soda should be taxed. From Reuters:

One idea is to levy the tax on all sugary beverages, which would include the ones that the industry has successfully camouflaged as health drinks: energy drinks and ”sports” beverages—like Pepsico’s Gatorade and Coca-Cola’s Powerade Coke’s VitaminWater, Kraft’s Capri Sun “juice drink,” and the like.

I have a friend who’d need instant payday loans to support her VitaminWater habit if they start taxing it. But I digress.

Why pick on Gatorade?

Popularity of energy drinks is growing as carbonated soda drinks are becoming less popular. Because Gatorade, VitaminWater and its cousins have roughly the same amount of sugar as sodas, lobbying for the same tax on these beverages makes sense.

No doubt the lobbyist will want to include the hip, hyper-caffeinated drinks such as Rock Star, Monster and Red Bull.

A skeptical tone

Dan Mitchell, of The Big Money, doesn’t seem to think that today’s hearing is likely to lead anywhere.

Actual consideration may or may not come later. Actual enactment is even iffier: Just look at what happened when the state of New York tried to do it, Mitchell writes.

But everyone loves to speculate. And every law, tax and policy started somewhere. It’s always fun to speculate, so let’s look at the pros and cons.

Pro: Money for health care

The proposal is that money from the “sugar tax” would be used to fund an overhaul of the health care system. Officials estimate that will cost $1.2 trillion.

The proposed tax for sugary drinks is 3 cents for every 12 ounces, which would raise an estimated $24 million over four years. Clearly, this will not pay for a health care system overhaul, but it will sure help.

Pro or Con? Discouraging consumption

Obviously, those who will oppose this tax, should it ever become closer to being a reality, will be those who drink sugary drinks on a regular basis. Besides my friend who drinks two bottles of VitaminWater every day, I’ve got one who usually downs two to three Big Gulps daily.

Neither of them would be happy if the price of their daily routines suddenly jumped. But, of course, part of the aim of the tax is to discourage consumption of these products. For people who want a little push toward healthier living, this would be a benefit. Opponents will probably argue for freedom and self-accountability.