Discount Cigarettes News
Feb 2nd, 2007 - 16:31:59
If passed, Proposition 86 will raise the excise tax on tobacco by $2.60 per pack of cigarettes, nearly a 300 percent increase. This will, in turn, raise the average price of a pack of cigarettes in California to $6.55 — the highest average in the country — and turn the pack-a-day habit into a $2,400 yearly expense. Too extreme? Perhaps. But a glance at the country’s current statistics on smoking suggests that such extreme measures are necessary. The Editorial Board urges readers to vote yes on Prop. 86. Smoking, which will kill an estimated one billion people in the next century if current trends hold, is still the leading cause of preventable disease and death in the United States. In California, where health advocates have pushed through all manners of legislation restricting tobacco use, cigarettes still seem to have "badass," "sophisticated" and "rockstar," written all over them. In fact, several studies, including one done by the Stanford School of Medicine, have shown that anti-smoking ads often backfire or fail to target important segments of the youth population. In contrast, tobacco companies are increasing their influence over new and current smokers. On the one hand, money spent on advertising is enormous. The California Department of Health estimates that the amount spent on big tobacco marketing in California is upwards of $920 million a year. On the other hand, smoking is getting more addictive. The Massachusetts Department of Health found that cigarettes deliver on average about 10 percent more nicotine to a smoker’s lungs than they did just eight years ago. While the number of smokers is still declining, it’s no longer declining rapidly — especially among the young. This is significant because research has shown that almost 80 percent of adult smokers start their addiction before or during adolescence. In California, 273,000 high school students smoke one or more cigarettes daily, and 50,000 more become regulars every year. Proposition 86, sponsored by the Coalition for a Healthy California, will help alleviate many of these problems. Studies have shown that raising the price of cigarettes is both the best way to keep them out of the hands of minors and an effective incentive for adults to quit. According to projections, the tax would reduce cigarette consumption by more than a quarter. The end result? An estimated 700,000 kids wouldn’t become adult smokers, hundreds of thousands of premature deaths would be prevented and the state would save some $16.5 billion in health care costs over the long run. Health care costs would decline partly because taxpayers would pay considerably less for medical costs due to smoking and partly because the estimated $2.27 billion dollars of revenue generated by the proposed tax would go toward improving California’s health care system: health insurance for needy children, emergency services for the uninsured, nursing education, tobacco prevention programs and disease research. The overarching goals of this proposition are clearly commendable. But the measure is by no means perfect. Opponents of the proposition, including big tobacco companies, have argued that Prop 86 would exempt hospitals from antitrust laws and allow them to recklessly overcharge taxpayers for uninsured patients. But the measure does not exempt hospitals from antitrust laws directly. Rather, it allows local governments to exempt hospitals from antitrust laws. Furthermore, the antitrust measure would only affect emergency and specialty services, not all hospital services. Others argue that if declining revenues from tobacco sales fail to match the proposition’s spending mandate, Prop 86 would ultimately contribute to a state deficit. While spending mandates may indeed exceed revenues and the pilot costs of new programs could prove steep, the state can potentially save billions from reduced health care costs over the long run because smoking-related health problems will presumably decrease. It is difficult to see whether the state will come out ahead, but the overwhelming positive health consequences make Prop 86 a risk worth taking. A final objection against the proposition is that such a significant tax hike on cigarettes constitutes an arbitrary restriction on consumer freedom and will only contribute to the growth of underground tobacco trafficking. Because the tax punishes not only tobacco companies, but also tobacco addicts, some argue that Prop 86 is burdening smokers with more than their share of responsibility. The question becomes whether such a burden can be considered just. But if there is any justifiable economic restraint on a common consumer product, it is a cigarette tax. Tax revenues from the proposition would be a boon to the health care system and the uninsured, while the increase in cigarette prices would significantly reduce the number of smokers. Some people would quit and many more would never start, reducing the social cost of smoking in addition to mortality rates. Although this high tax incidentally targets those who already smoke, it is not a good enough reason to reject all of its potential benefits. This tax will help clamp down on an industry that targets an addictive, deadly product at minors who are not yet mature enough to make a truly rational choice about smoking. Ultimately, Prop 86 will save lives and reduce the burden placed on California taxpayers by medical issues resulting from smoking. © Copyright 2006 by DiscountCigarettesBox.Com Top of Page |
