What's truly regressive is smoking itself. Lower-income communities suffer disproportionately from smoking and tobacco illnesses. If public policies can help poorer Americans to quit, those regressive harms and costs are reduced. The Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids says the savings for a pack-a-day smoker who quits is profoundly significant, with savings ranging from $1,000 to $2,300 annually, depending on the state.
After seeing the powerful result of the federal tobacco tax increase, elected officials should support higher tobacco taxes. It's not about economics — it's about public health. But the economics are pretty excellent, too.
Patrick Reynolds is a grandson of tobacco company founder R.J. Reynolds and executive director of Tobaccofree.org in Los Angeles.
- Doug Robinson: Utah man's new running shoe...
- Snapshot of 2013 in political cartoons
- Robert Bennett: Sticking to facts is...
- Timothy R. Clark: Graduation advice for my...
- State pensions threaten to bleed states dry
- Letters: Threats justified
- My view: Nothing sinister about Common Core
- Snapshot of 2013 in political cartoons
Subscribe
Mobile
RSS
Tobacco taxes are probably the only taxes that directly benefit the person being taxed.
There is no problem arguing for higher tobacco taxes, it's a simple fix that really works. The problem is arguing for higher tobacco taxes from a conservative stand point. The idea is primarily a liberal concept, heck it has all the things More..
Now on to solving the next big health epidemic, obesity, time to start targeting tax policy at the fast food and high calorie beverage industry.