Why We Need Cigarettes!

The Obama Administration wants to make us healthier by requiring new sterner warning on cigarettes.  The statistics tell us that 400,000 die each year from smoking related issues.  The legislation will enable the FDA to require strict marketing rules and the actual production of cigarettes.  The new law will reduce nicotine content, ban flavoring, and make the taste so bad it will force people to quit.  It also will require advertising to be done in black and white.

The Congressional Budget Office has estimated the new laws will reduce smoking by youth and adults by over 11% across the country.  Additionally a .06 cent tax will be added per pack to fund the new Government agency to oversee this.  Anyone need a job?

It is estimated that one in five people smoke in this country.  In California, the recent data I can find from tax revenues for 2007 was $1.08 billion dollars from cigarettes.  So here lies the problem.  If we reduce smoking 11% in California and that translates straight across the board in revenues, California is looking at a $100 million shortfall within a few years.  Where does the tax income go to?

10-cents a pack goes straight into the States General Fund.  2-cents goes into Breast Cancer Research. An additional .25- cents goes tobacco education, hospital care for those that can’t afford it, and fire protection, fish and waterfowl maintenance and parks.  50- cents goes to child development program, parenting classes and similar programs in California.

So I ask you… if we cut out $100 million from the budget, where is the money going to come from to support these mandated programs?  The first answer is that with the lower nicotine content the remaining smokers will have to smoke more.  But the second answer is not pleasant.  It will have to come from the rest of us that don’t smoke.  Somehow someway we will get taxed or pay higher fees as some of the programs are mandated and have to be funded based on earlier propositions we passed.

We have funded programs based on the tax revenues that smoking generates. We are now trying to wipe out smoking without considering how we are going to make up the shortfall in tax revenues.    If smoking is so bad, why don’t we just outlaw it altogether?  Oh wait, we tried something like that once before and it was called Prohibition.  Look how well that went over.

How is it that non smokers are going to have to pay more taxes as a result of smokers smoking less?  How does that make sense?  In as much as I don’t like smoking, I sure as heck do not want to pay more taxes either.

Am I missing something here?  The new law sounds great to 80% of us until we have to start paying for it.  I pay enough taxes already.  How about you?