Cigarette tax debate framed by moral issue

The questions seemed to make the temperature in the room climb a notch.

"How do you feel about working for a company like that?" And the natural follow-up, "Are you working just for the money?"

On the other end were two men representing Philip Morris, the thriving, black-hatted cigarette maker. They had come, along with a representative of the Utah Taxpayers Association, to lobby the Deseret News editorial board against supporting a cigarette tax hike.

The questions took us off topic. Their pitch was to remove the tax-hike debate from morals and put it onto economic development and good public policy.

Currently, there are two cigarette tax bills at the Legislature. The House version would raise it by $1.30 a pack, to a total of about $2. A Senate version would have raised it $2.30, to $3 a pack. The Senate tabled that bill late last week. Apparently, they were swayed by the guys from Philip Morris. Or maybe they don't care about the moral arguments.

But at $3 a pack, Utah would go from having among the lowest cigarette taxes in the nation to having the highest, at least for now. With the recession deepening, other states are bound to turn to this revenue source as one of the few socially acceptable tax hikes available.

Until those states act, however, we have this economic argument: Currently, Wyoming's cigarette tax is 60 cents a pack; Idaho's is 57 cents. If Utah's rises to $3, many of the 16 percent or so who smoke here will make weekend visits to Evanston or Burley to stuff their trunks with cheap smokes. Or at least that's what our visitors said. Vote no and save those poor Utah convenience store clerks who might lose their jobs!

They also wanted to argue that increasing the tax won't reduce the number of smokers, and that any tax increase is bad during a recession.

The first argument may be a tough sell. Maybe people once walked a mile for a Camel, but how many really would drive 90 miles for a smoke? And would it harm our economy?

There are plenty of studies to show that tax hikes do lead to a drop in young smokers, who can't afford to keep up. As for taxes in a recession, well, cigarette taxes are more like user fees. They won't kill the economy.

In all, our guests came up with only one argument that ought to give Utah lawmakers pause. It makes little sense to rely too much on money from a habit that is dying about as quickly as its practitioners. The money won't be reliable.

But that wasn't enough to take away the moral question. Why do you do it?