Okay, don’t get me wrong. I think that providing universal health care options for children should be a priority in our country. However, shifting the burden to smokers to avoid what is essentially a political fight (the “who will pay for it” argument going on between the President and the Senate) is just a bit offensive.
I don’t smoke. I think people should not smoke. I do not like having smokers pollute the air around me, stink up my clothes and ruin my dinners. But cigarettes are legal. We have chosen, in this country, to make cigarettes available to the public without much regulation. If we’re going to do that, let’s not make the smokers scapegoats for political causes.
How much of a tax are we talking? That’s exactly my point. It is not unsubstantial. The proposed increase is a 61 cent increase over the current 39 cent tax. In other words, a 156% increase.
Fair? Of course not. It’s political maneuvering. If we had chosen to increase, say, the gas tax by 61 cents, there would have been a public outcry against it. But smokers? Who are they to complain? They’re not a sympathetic lot in today’s society, so somehow we’ve decided it’s okay to target them for relatively unrelated health care costs (remember this is for children’s health care, not to fund cures for cancer or other smoking-related causes).
Senator Harry Reid (D-Nev) has said, “In the long run, maybe it’ll stop people from smoking.” Really, Senator Reid? I’m not buying it. If there are fewer smokers to tax, who will you hit up next?
