One could as easily ask 'why don't use high impedance grounded services with every device from the main breaker to the least receptacle being an auto-coordinating gfci device'?
All protective measures have to be considered in the context of both cost and benefit. The NEC is about 'practical' safeguarding, not 'perfect' safeguarding.
With a hot tub, you have people immersed in the 'appliance' itself, in close proximity to the heating elements, pump(s), controls, and wiring. The water usually has lots of added chemicals which will change its conductivity. In the event of a failure there is some chance that a person will intercept a current flowing through the water.
With a water heater, people are not immersed in the appliance itself, and are usually separated from the heating elements by grounded and bonded piping. The water heater itself is metallic and is grounded and bonded. In the event of a failure, it is very unlikely that a person will intercept the path of current flowing through the water.
However: if the water heater tank is not properly bonded, and the plumbing is plastic, then the water could be energized. Another situation that can leave the water 'energized' is if the water from the hot water heater is grounded/bonded but the shower _drain_ becomes energized because of incidental contact to a wire. But this requires 2 failures: the heating element and the lack of proper bonding, and the use of plastic pipe for the hot water with a grounded (eg metallic) drain.
If you feel that the risk presented by electric water heaters justifies the cost of a GFCI breaker, then by all means submit a proposal to the NEC. But please justify this in terms of both the cost and the benefit. For example, is the amount of current carried through water in plastic pipe likely to cause injury, how often does this sort of failure occur, have there been emergency room visits, etc.
As a side not, and totally a monetary rather than a safety issue, a heating element failure can easily cause current leakage through the water to the tank. This leakage can continue even when the thermostat is not calling for heat, and this can waste lots of money. A GFCI breaker would prevent this economic loss.
Finally, regarding luckylerado's comment. He used an inappropriate, argumentative and impolitic expression to explain that you are being argumentative and impolitic. I disagree with the way he said things, but you do come across and argumentative and impolitic.
-Jon