Why Not Fund Social Programs With New Taxes On Cigarettes?
An article that appeared in yesterday’s Tuscon (AZ) Citizen titled, “Cigarette sales dive, hurting health funds” caught my eye this morning. The gist of the article is that, since voters in Arizona approved a massive cigarette tax increase a year ago, there have been millions less packs of (taxable) cigarettes purchased in Arizona than were purchased the year before, and the shortfall is negatively affecting various social programs that were to be funded by the expected revenue increase (most notably, the Early Childhood and Development Fund, which was to receive the bulk of the new tax money).
Of course, the tax was sold to the electorate as a win/win (we’ll help people quit smoking while creating and funding the Early Childhood and Development Fund), but now they’re faced with funding the new programs with non-existent tax revenues.
Did it really not occur to anybody that this would happen? As a number of the comments point out, cigarettes can be had tax-free on the reservations, and anyone who wants to can take a quick trip to Mexico, where (even with the duty), cigarettes cost half what they now cost in Arizona.
My favorite quote from the 42 comments left on this story so far:
“It takes a selfish heartless s.o.b. to quit smoking today, knowing that the tax he pays for his tobacco is saving the lives of children who would otherwise have no access to medical treatment. Those who continue to “light ‘em up” for the kids should have a special place in the hearts of all non smoking Americans who are allowing these few brave souls to sacrifice their lives and money while carrying the burden of paying for the health care of the children of non-smokers and smokers alike. Looks like it’s time to bring back Joe Camel, an inspiration to the overtaxed but determined smokers who keep our children healthy while they rot their own lungs in the process. Light one up for the little nippers. The life you save won’t be your own, but if it saves one child, it’s worth it.”
What do you think about funding social programs with “sin” taxes like this?
