"... and other sugary drinks," makes me curious about what this bill might evolve into decades down the road. Are we eventually going to be OK with cranberry juice, but not pineapple or apple juice, due to sugar content?
Also, regarding the "tax more for more unhealthy people if we're doing universal healthcare" argument (which I agree with in part), why not just require a standard health assessment that everyone has to take to get care, and assign costs based on the outcome of those tests? It's more or less what we have now with private care, except there's at least one player in the field not (as) interested in profit margin.
They seem to forget that it is the consumer than "wants" the shows, and their job to deliver what the consumer wants, not what they think the consumer wants.
I would contend that it is indeed the consumer that wants the shows, but it is the suppliers job to make their customers happy, which, dollar for dollar, means they need to pay more attention to making advertisers happy than consumers.
I don't like the result, but consumer happiness has only become relevant in a world where there's somewhere else for the consumer to go, because they're merely a commodity that cable companies peddle to advertisers.
IBM Advanced Systems Group -- a bunch of mindless jerks, who'll be first against the wall when the revolution comes... -- with regrets to D. Adams