Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: SUNDAY, June 5, 1994 TAG: 9406070069
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-10 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE:
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
The industry spokesmen question studies which suggest that a $2 per-pack increase would roughly cover society's costs in health-care spending and lost productivity caused by tobacco-related diseases. The spokesmen prefer to cite a Congressional Research Service report that estimates a lower social cost.
What they don't point out is how this report came to its different conclusion. The congressional researchers attempted to count up the savings - including unspent Social Security, pensions and other benefits - accrued because smokers die prematurely.
Every year, tobacco snuffs out the lives of more than 400,000 Americans - a heck of a way to save money. If that's the means the industry proposes to reduce the federal deficit, why not encourage everyone to start smoking?
Most Americans would put the value of life higher than entitlement dollars consumed or not consumed.
The tobacco spokesmen also suggest that the burden of a higher tobacco tax will fall disproportionately on the poor because they spend a bigger proportion of their disposable income on cigarettes. Oh, the compassion of this industry!
What they don't point out is that poor people also smoke more than others do, thanks in part to shamefully targeted marketing. Nor do they point out that, precisely because of the relative impact on incomes, poor people will disproportionately cut back or quit smoking as a result of a higher cigarette tax. In other words, poor people's lives will be disproportionately saved. Most Americans could live with that.
The spokesmen even cite the case of Canada, which has rolled its still-much-higher cigarette taxes back a bit after experiencing problems with smuggling. What they don't point out is that smuggling was a problem because cigarettes are too cheap in the United States.
No one's talking about taxes at levels - over $3 a pack - that Norway and Denmark have imposed. Clinton's 75-cent proposal is, if anything, too low. If it were earmarked for health care, according to opinion polls, most Americans would support a hefty increase in cigarette taxes.
by CNB