This time last year, I was complaining about Representative Paul Ray’s (R-Clearfield-District 13) attempt to raise taxes on tobacco in the state. Well, I am back to complain again.
Now, to be fair, Ray’s bill, HB 196 – Tobacco Tax Revisions, is a more toned down version of last years bill. This does not mean, however, that it still is a good bill.
You see, last years bill more than doubled the tax on each individual cigarette and cigar. This years tax would raise the tax on cigarettes and cigars by a little less than double – from 3.475 cents to 6.55 cents per cigarettes and from 4.075 cents to 7.68 cents per cigar respectively. It should be noted that the bill adds something else: the raising of the tax on snuff from 75 cents to $1.41 per ounce. But the bill still does not address my two principal concerns: health education, treatment and prevention of the effects of tobacco, and the usage of this tax as a crutch.
The bill does state that one million dollars of the revenue gained from the tax will go towards the Department of Health for use in the “Gold Medal Schools” program (whatever that is), but otherwise remains silent on health education. I presume this million dollars will go towards the tried and true “don’t smoke kids” argument we have seen before – but it could easily be directed towards other substance abuse programs…or placing hand sanitizers in schools – the bill is not specific.
The bill also does not direct funds to more logical sources, like the treatment of health problems associated with the consumption of tobacco products. Perhaps more funding towards our hospitals or cancer centers that focus both on research and treatment. As it stands now, smokers simply drain the system if they can’t afford treatment, and cancer research benefits not just those who wish to puff up.
Finally, it appears that this bill is designed to pad the state coffers. Now, I am not inherently opposed to this, especially with our budget in as bad of a shape as it is, but I am always weary when we talk about raising so called “sin taxes” to get us out of debt.
You see, Ray may argue that the bill discourages smokers while increasing revenue. But this is talking out of both sides of ones mouth. If we want fewer smokers, we will have less revenue; likewise if we have more smokers, we will have more revenue.
My point to this is that it is not a stable tax when compared to, say, homeowners tax. It fluctuates and is, therefore, not a good way to balance a budget in difficult times, if only because you simply can not predict how much revenue will come in.
In the end, this is a better bill than last year, but it still has the same fundamental flaws and should not pass.
I agree with you. Just to add on to that I have noticed they like to complain about the health problems surrounding cigarrettes, but instead of using it to counter the so called overwhelming costs they end up using the money for something unrelated. Another thing I would like to add is the American Lung Association issued a report that living near or around Salt Lake City is the equivalent of smoking two packs a day. I am not saying cigarettes do not cause lung associated problems, but I think a lot of those problems are doubled out here. I am from a small town in Arkansas and I know a lot of old people that have smoked all their lives and I cannot seem to recall them walking around out of breath and walking around with oxygen tanks. I see a lot of that out here. I would also like to say that I believe it is wrong to profit off of others addictions and to me Paul Ray and anyone who supports this bill is no better than the cigarette companies. This bill is not to get people to quit if they wanted us to quit it would be illegal, but they see a profit in addiction and know some people struggle quitting.
[...] – Disclosure of Donations to Higher Education Institutions, C. Wimmer Failed (against) – HB 196 – Tobacco Tax Revisions, P. Ray Failed (for) – HB 194 – Grants for Math Teacher Training, B. Last Failed (for) – HB [...]