There is perennial complaint in the media about obesity and taxes, but now is the time to join the two and tackle two major national problems.

We need a new sin tax comparable to the tax we already have on alcohol and tobacco. The sin of course is gluttony, and the remedy is the FAT TAX. This tax needs to be structured in such a way that it will be attractive to positive thinkers, civil libertarians, neo-cons, all who love the American Way, and overweight taxpayers such as myself. We need a positive incentive for slimming, i.e. for every pound shed over the course of a year there should be a rebate from the government. And since every carrot needs a stick, a substantial tax increase for every pound one is overweight. (Apparently, the CDC has a foolproof formula for determining who is overweight.)

It should be obvious that the FAT TAX is superior to the intrusive income tax, property tax, flat tax or non-specific sales tax. Only the FT promotes both the health and fiscal soundness of our great nation. We can become a people that is lean and mean from crib to nursing home that will ahve an impact on the economy through efficiency and we will once again be a credible threat to our enemies.

Let me enumerate some of its advantages:

1. The FT is natural--it harmonizes with the life cycle. It is well known that a person's income tends to increase over time with increased skills and experience. The older generation tends to be more affluent, and also more prone to obesity. The FT is tied to the natural process of income growth around the belly and thighs.

2. The tax rate can be easily be determined. Once each person's ideal weight is scientifically established fluxuations can be monitored. How? We have all observed that trucks on our superhighways have to make stops at weigh stations. Stations could be set up at fast food and gourmet restaurants, the post office and check-out counters at food markets. If an electronic chip were put on the seats of automobiles with a connect to a computer, the FT would encourage public transportation which would in turn reduce pollution, conserve fuel and reduce dependence on foreign oil. The ripple effect would be incalculable. But would not the FT be an invasion of privacy? Nonsense. The privacy issue is bogus because fat is hard to hide from public view. To preserve privacy medical records in a doctor's office would be exempt.

3. An exemption or extension could also be given to those who have genuine, certified medical problems. The FT rewards those who improve their health and does not persecute the truly sick.

4. There is a supply side feature to the FT that neo-cons might find attractive. Supermarket offerings would join in the fun by having a hefty tax added to fatty, artery clogging items. Nutritious foods such as Ted Turner's lean bison meat would have great appeal in the Atlanta area.

5. The FAT TAX would make "taxation with representation" a reality in America for the first time in American history because counties would negotiate with their states, and states would negotiate with the federal government for the appropriate tax percentage on each salable item with a revision every two years.

6. What about enforcement? No problem. Fat is hard to hide. The very whisper of a threat of "citizens' arrest" would bring rapid compliance. A fine could be monetary or in the case of obese children, push-ups or additional household chores coupled with rewards for compliance. Whistle blower laws may have to be strengthened to encourage employees and lower level bureaucrats to report on their obese superiors.

7. There is one nagging problem that still needs to be anticipated. After the successful implementation of the FAT TAX (five years at most), how will government obtain revenue when all our citizens are at their optimal weight and so healthy that many hospitals will shut down? Even though there would be surplus money resulting from health care savings, and increased efficiency in the work place, there would have to be some mechanism for government to get its hands on our money. Cutting the fat out of the populace, not just the budget, could have unintended consequences.

Perhaps a tax on hypocrisy could be explored. It is a modest proposal.