At Johnstown's Orchard Hotel, where the atmosphere is negligible but the jumbo wings are delectable, food makes up a bit more than half of the bar's sales inventory. That means the rest of the stock is beverages -- beer, liquor, wine and soda pop, all of which might be subject to new taxes to pay for President Barack Obama's health care expansion plan.

"That all trickles down to us. Obviously we're going to have to increase the price for our consumers," said Dave Donate, owner of The Orchard and board member with the Pennsylvania Tavern Association.

The sumptuary tax plan is one of many under consideration by the Senate Finance Committee. It would place a new tax on pop and sweetened beverages, and install a "uniform" federal excise tax on all types of alcohol, currently taxed at varying levels. The new proposed rate is $16 per "proof gallon," a calculation that takes into account a beverage's alcohol content, meaning beer would see a lower tax than booze.

The crowd favoring universal health care may have cheered this news, but every link in the chain of the hospitality industry -- from restaurants to beer distributors to spirits distillers to wine makers -- was less than enthralled with the idea of yet another layer of sin taxes.

"Cigarettes, beer, those are things they always go after," because it's politically more palatable, Mr. Donate said.

But it's unpalatable to the Distilled Spirits Council of the United States, which said, in a statement, that "forcing hundreds of thousands of waiters, waitresses, bartenders and busboys into the unemployment line is not the way to reform our nation's health care system." And the Beer Institute played the same dirge, saying the tax would "threaten jobs, increase consumer costs for those least able to pay and jeopardize brewers, wholesalers, retailers, suppliers and related businesses."

Bob Mazza, head of Mazza Vineyards near Erie and past president of the Pennsylvania Wine Association, said wine makers are resentful that they might soon be lumped in with a tax on beer, soda pop and liquor.

"Wine is actually a healthy drink, in moderation," he said, referring to the various studies indicating that a glass of wine a day may be good for your heart.

"It's kind of annoying that we would be taxed [like] a sin tax, for health issues that we are not creating."

Today, wine is assessed a federal excise tax of $1.07 per gallon. But small wineries, like Mazza's, get a tax credit, reducing the burden to 17 cents a gallon. He said the new tax plan would be more acceptable if it preserved the tax breaks for "boutique" wineries, and according to early drafts of the Senate report, it would.

But that's not the case for small distillers such as Boyd & Blair, the new vodka line being distilled along Route 8 in Shaler. The current federal excise tax, at $13.50 per proof gallon (about $2.30 per bottle), is "the biggest chunk of tax out of what we produce," said Prentiss Orr, one of the distillery owners.

And the beer industry? You guessed it -- not thrilled. The state's beer wholesalers association said the proposed beer tax, amounting to almost $2 a case or 48 cents per six pack, would hit the middle class the hardest, since it's the folks who make less than $50,000 a year who drink the most beer per capita.

About the only kind words -- and they were mildly kind, at best -- regarding the proposed health care tax were uttered by Scott Smith, owner of Pittsburgh's East End Brewing Co.

"If alcohol is contributing to health issues, I see some symmetry there," as opposed to a drink tax that pays for mass transit, he said, referencing Allegheny County's pour tax.

That said, Mr. Smith -- whose brewery pumped out just 700 barrels last year -- sincerely doubts that micro-breweries like his are contributing to America's health problems.

"Craft" beers are generally more expensive, and not the first choice among imbibers who are out to inflict maximum damage upon their livers.

"If someone really wants to tie one on, they'll just go buy a $7 bottle of bottom-shelf vodka."