Comments about ‘Utah doesn't need cigarette-tax hike’

they still received plenty of money from cig tax.... tax coke and candy bars as well...

The people who will benefit the most from any cigarette tax hike will be

1. Those who never start.

2. Those who quit as a result.

3. Those who end up smoking less.

4. All of us from the badly needed new revenues the state will get.

5. All of us from the decrease we will pay in medical insurance as a result of people smoking less

The People who will be hurt from a cigarette tax hike.

1. Those stuborn people who insist in smoking the same amount.

2. Retailers who won't sell as much.

This may be the most ridiculous editorial the DNews has ever printed! Grover claims that we shouldn't raise cigaret taxes because it will cut consumption and we won't get as much revenue as planned. Grover, wake up, we are talking about cutting consumption of the worst legal health habit there is. We WANT people to to cut consumption!
And he says that smokers are generally poorer than average and can't afford the increased taxes. But that means they can also least to pay for the medical costs of smoking, and since they are poor, guess who pays that tab. You got it, the tax payer!
Come on Dnews the logic in this editorial could be torn apart by a class of fourth graders.

I seriously question Norquist's judgment on a Utah matter. His argument about raising the cigarette tax is simplistic and wrong. New Jersey is a small state and it is no big deal to cross over into Pennsylvania top buy smokes. In fact, PA has shops set up right across the border to cater to folks from NJ. Utah is a big state and it is not cost effective to leave the Wasatch Front to buy from a neighboring state. In any case, there is more than revenue involved. Taxes can provide incentives and disincentives. So as a disincentive for smoking, a public health nuisance and hazard, I would favor raising the tax to $20 a pack. This "purity" about taxes is annoying. Norquist, please go back to Washington.

Wow, me agreeing with Grover Nordquist. Strange bedfellows indeed!

This so-called editorial is nothing short of outrageous. The cigarette tax should be imposed because our political leaders have a clear and historic resposibility to protect the health of the citizens. This is not a discriminatory tax. A discriminatry tax would be based on things such as race that cannot be changed. A smokers status is determined by choice--anyone who choses to smoke is effected by this tax exactly the same. That is the very definition of a nondiscriminatory tax. There was a time in this Country when elected officials cared more about public health than they did about appeasing campaign contributors. Hopefully, that time has not yet passed.

Could it be that the Deseret News is more concerned with the profits of those who sell cigarets than the health and welbeing of those that use them?

This cigarette tax is just wrong! It's immoral! It shows Utahns to be a pack of uncaring bullies who will lie about their reasons for taxing those least able to defend themselves, or to bear the burden of a truly evil tax that is "grievous to be borne."

If the tax has the effect politicians say they're after, there will be no revenue from it anyway.

The inescapable conclusion is that the politicians pushing it are lying, either about the revenue enhancement we should expect, or about their motives in seeking to lay the tax in the first place.

Either way, they're liars. And cheats. And thieves. And should be ashamed.

re --- John Charity Spring | 9:13 a.m

spoken like a true non-smoker. we would expect no less from you judgemental religious zealots. you will do whatever you can to force others to comply to your moral codes.

["There was a time in this Country when elected officials cared more about public health than they did about appeasing campaign contributors"]

and there was a time when people could do what they wanted without governmental and religious interference.

but i guess you like the idea of forcing your will onto others. typical.

Grover an Abramoff pal?

Flatter taxes don't discriminate? THe flatter tax just simply skewed the tax code in favor of the wealthy.

IF Utah raises the tax $1.00, which is what they're proposing, Utahns MOST PROBABLY will import them from other states. (I KNOW I would)

That tax hike would make Utah the HIGHEST of ALL surrounding states except Arizona.

But as most of us already realize: logic and reason fly out the window when observing the actions of the Utah legislature.

The "health nannies" have been VERY VOCAL this session, and probably won't be content until NO ONE smokes in the state!

Good editorial

It is illegal to mail cigarettes to avoid taxes.

re: "2:22"

Yes it is! And if the feds are as good at finding carton of smokes in boxes, as they are at finding illegal aliens, WE DON'T HAVE MUCH TO WORRY ABOUT!!

Cigarettes are bad.
Cigarettes are evil.
Cigarettes are against the Word of Wisdom.

But none of the above is important if you can make a profit from them in tough economic times.

if you are going to tax cigarettes then alcohol should also be taxed. taxing cigarettes and not alcohol is discrimination.