-
Adieu, Adieu, Remember Me
March 25, 2011 | 39 comments
-
DeMint's Defense of RomneyCare is Ignorant...And Dangerous
March 17, 2011 | 85 comments
-
McConnell Pushing Vote to Block the EPA from Regulating Carbon Emissions
March 17, 2011 | 9 comments
-
More Barbour on Afghanistan
March 16, 2011 | 8 comments
-
House Passes Three Week Spending Bill
March 15, 2011 | 8 comments
The Spectacle Blog
I've often defended social conservatives from libertarians who overlook the fact that many of the members of Congress who fought runaway government spending most ferociously during the Bush administration were also among the most socially conservative. That's why it was particularly alarming to witness Mike Huckabee gain national prominence with a brand of conservatism that merged tax-and-spend governance and nanny statism with traditional values issues. This struck me when I read that the head of the Florida Christian Coalition has come out in favor of a cigarette tax as a way to stave off the expansion of legalized gambling in the state.
“Something like the cigarette tax is something that could be considered acceptable, not only in shaping acceptable [health] behavior in the future but keeping us out of an arena where we’re depending on people losing a tremendous amount of money,” the head of the group, Dennis Baxley, told the Sun Sentinel.
Cigarette taxes are bad policy on multiple levels. They disproportionately hurt lower income groups and they don't raise the revenue they are projected to raise -- in part because they are successful in discouraging people from smoking, but also because they increase black market sales of cigarettes. In that sense, they actually promote organized crime. Yet cash-strapped legislatures such as Florida, as well as the federal government (see S-CHIP), continue to pursue this policy out of a belief that it's somehow more "acceptable" to raise taxes on a group of people just because they smoke.
View all comments (9) | Leave a comment
Leave a Comment
More Blog Posts by Philip Klein
http://spectator.org/blog/2009/03/23/cigarette-taxes-and-social-con
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- In Midst of Poverty, an Educational Oasis
- The One Percenters’ Fortress City
- Capital Bound
SPONSORED LINKS
Special Feature
Better that we become a nation of choosers rather than beggars. Our symposium on choice from the May, 2012 issue:
FLASHBACK TO: 1984
-
The Fairness Delusion
The speech our President should make.
-
Media Smears: One Man’s Experiences
A noted economist fires back.
-
Chuck Colson vs. The Fundamentalists
How political can you get?
-
The Reagan Doctrine
You might have missed it, but it was boomed in January.
-
The Woman Problem
Farcical feminism is a decades-old phenomenon, as George Will's essay from 1970 reminds us.
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Crusader| 3.23.09 @ 5:09PM
Here's an idea that may sound crazy enough to work.
Instead of finding new ways to tax folks, how about gubmint, you know, cut wasteful spending?
That's something all Americans could get behind.
Jim Callihan| 3.23.09 @ 6:58PM
While I agree with your comments, it does raise some points that are worth considering and therefore, worthy of implementation.
If taxing cigarettes decreases the number of smokers, it stands to reason that this "cause and effect" can be used to America's advantage.
Point in case - Congress is hazardous to health - ALL HEALTH, globally. They approve budgets that pay for all sorts of offensive weaponry used for a plethora of propaganda. The end effect is "people die". America spends over 2 TRILLION dollars per year to support the military corporate regime (including over 1000 bases around the world).
Let us therefore TAX every bomb, every bullet, every tank, hummer, gun, grenade etc that they (WE - HELLO?) pay for via their budgets. Think of the revenue that would be raised by these murderous entities? Of course, we do need a National "Defense", so any such items that are stationed on American soil and within our terratorial waters would be tax exempt. If they violate that boundary without a Congressional War Resolution (and I'm not talking that Nazi -SH*T Bush pulled - no "Executive Priviliges" anymore - in fact, that ought to be BANNED!), then the manufacturers of those weapons, ships, etc would be penalized - not our military commanders.
This would bring about two dramatic changes:
1) Lobbyist for war (see Israel, Rayhtheon, General Dynamics, Carlyle, Douglass, Lockheed Martin, Rand Corporation, Haliburton, Blackwater and the list goes on and on) won't be so fast to infuse their pwerful sway upon corrupt politicians, nor those not wanting to be labled "doves".
2) The health of all Earthly inhabitants will rise...right along with rising revenues and diminishing federal budgets (which in turn will have to steal less from sTates and hold them ransom or hang them out to dry with "Federal Mandates").
And by the way...I grew up in a military family and lived in the shadow of ships in Mayport and bombers at MacDill, so I'm no "peace-nik". But I am a taxpayer who loathes the hi-jacking of our government - BY ANY INDUSTRY; it just so happens to be the "war boys& their toys for sale" that have f^%&*ed it up for so many years.
ENOUGH!!!
2)
Pkane| 3.23.09 @ 7:06PM
Jim,
What would be the point of the government taxing goods that are purchased exclusively the government?
Gene| 3.23.09 @ 11:57PM
Hey Jim , you had best be glad Bush had the balls to put binladen and his coharts in a really deep cave, ,,zip code unknown,,,lest you might not still enjoy the right to be expressing your opinion on this blog, be glad boy clinton was out to pasture.
Kitty| 3.24.09 @ 7:28AM
The Huckster is not conservative; he's an opportunist.
...
scott| 3.24.09 @ 9:17AM
I'm patiently waiting for the cigarette "black market" to appear.
Loretta| 3.25.09 @ 5:18PM
I think they should stop raising taxes on cigarettes and everything else, my God everyone is loosing their jobs., How do we suppose to pay for the cost of living with all these New Taxes???
Cheryl H.| 4.1.09 @ 10:49AM
Higher taxes on everything is what we are looking at. Are we not already over burdened with taxes? This latest tax hike on cigarettes is a hike of over 150%. Is there no limit to taxation without voters aproval? In Missouri, we the voters, voted against a cigarette tax hike TWICE and yet the government still went ahead and imposed this upon us! Don't we count any more? Aren't you afraid of a government that will do anything it wants to do? I am! This tax increase was imposed by the Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-3, signed into law on Feb. 4, 2009. Shouldn't they have gone after Big Business' that polute our air and water instead of the tax payers? How about making parents have to be responsible for their own children's health ins? Make it affordable! Stop discriminating against smokers! We already pay higher health ins. premiums. It is discrimination! Let us unseat those who would impose laws on us that we said no to! Let's find out who voted for this and not elect them into office again! HELP!
Chris| 4.29.09 @ 9:26AM
You don't have to smoke to live. People who give up smoking feel tremendously better and end up being less of a burden on health insurance and society. Children who are forced to sit in cars and restaurants with smokers end up being sicker and being sicker more often. Give the cigarettes up already!! Fight for other things that are more worthwhile to fight for!