The Acton Institute for the Study of Religion and Liberty is not a fan of the Senate Finance Committee’s bid to impose “lifestyle taxes.”

The “sin taxes” would increases taxes on alcoholic beverages and impose new taxes on drinks with high sugar and corn syrup content. The revenues would go to fund President Obama’s proposed $1.2-trillion health-care reform package.

Argues the Acton Institute in this press release:

The consequences of the sin tax are often the very opposite of those intended by its designers. Rather than increasing revenue, the sin tax can reduce it. Rather than discouraging what are regarded as morally questionable behaviors, the sin tax can make them more appealing. Rather than reducing what are perceived to be internal costs of the sin, the sin tax can increase them and expand them to society as a whole.

Describing the sin tax as a “lifestyle tax” won’t make these new taxes any more effective as a source of revenue or morally justifiable. And what’s next? New “lifestyle taxes” on morally suspect foods and drinks like junk food, candy bars, cookies and milk shakes?