It is amazing to see how far the United States has come in the past 40 years when it comes to smoking. During the 1960s it would not be unusual to see a good number of people smoking anywhere and everywhere. These days, smokers are a dying breed (both literally and figuratively). They clutch to their cigarettes not only for their nicotine fix but also as a symbol of defiance to all those politically correct do-gooders who look upon smoking as a mortal sin. If the overall anti-smoking environment is not enough for smokers to think twice about continuing their habit, then maybe Wisconsin's new bill proposing a hike in cigarette taxes might.
The current Wisconsin state cigarette tax is 77 cents, which would be raised by a dollar if the new legislation were passed. The bill's sponsors, Rep. J.A. Hines (R-Oxford), Rep. Sheldon Wasserman (D-Milwaukee) and Rep. Curt Gielow (R-Mequon) claim that the bill would not only encourage smokers to quit but that the extra revenue that results from the tax would go toward treating smoking-related illnesses.
Most smokers would claim that this is merely an attempt by the government to slowly kill off smoking since they could not make it illegal. Furthermore they might claim that this is merely a money grab, a way to get more money for the state without upsetting most of their constituents. Those who make such claims would not actually be that far off in either case, except in the area of motive.
The reasons the state is proposing such a bill are far less nefarious than some would claim. The government has every right to legislate the tax hike to discourage smoking because it detrimentally affects public health. The harms of second hand smoking have been so well documented that the national consciousness has become saturated by it.
Even more important is the amount that smoking-related illnesses cost the state. Wisconsin Medicaid pays $375 million each year toward treating such illnesses. If no one smoked, the cases of lung cancer and emphysema would plummet and save the state millions upon millions of dollars. Unlike other illnesses that result from things outside of one's control, such as genetics or just plain bad luck, illnesses that result from smoking are likely the product of a conscious choice.
Discouraging smoking is a noble goal in itself, which is why the bill should be supported, but even if it does not deter a single smoker, the revenue brought in would help relieve some of the financial pressure on the states' medical programs. If smokers wish to continue to smoke, knowing that they are hurting the health of the public and hurting themselves to the point where they will need quite a bit of medical treatment in the future, that is their prerogative. Just don't feel bad when the state charges you through the nose for it.
This editorial appeared in The Marquette Tribune on April 7 2005.