BCT Editorial – 4/3/09

This page was last updated on April 12, 2009.

Lighten up; Editorial; Beaver County Times; April 3, 2009.

The editorial subtitle is “Smokers are paying for an unrealistic attitude on taxes and spending.”

Below is a detailed critique of the subject editorial.

“In a sense, tobacco users are right to be upset about the astronomical increases in federal taxes on the products they buy.

“They have been and continue to be singled out as a special niche of the American public that can be taxed with impunity by federal and state governments, in large part because most Americans are in favor of so-called sin taxes.”

[RWC] The same is true for “the rich,” but have we read any editorials addressing that point? Actually, we read exactly the opposite. Despite the fact that the percentage of total income taxes paid by “the rich” has continued to rise, Times editorials told us “the rich” were getting favorable tax treatment.

“The new federal tax increase went into effect Wednesday, raising the cost of a pack of cigarettes from 39 cents to $1.01. Taxes on chewing tobacco, snuff, cigars, pipe tobacco, roll-your-own cigarette tobacco, rolling papers and cigarette tubes also went up significantly.

“The increased revenue from tobacco taxes will be used for a worthy cause — financing the expansion of a program that provides health insurance for children.”

[RWC] Have you noticed the Times likes the idea of taxing one group of people to benefit another? You’ll recall the Times also supports taxing alcoholic drinks and car rentals to subsidize government-run bus systems. Oh yeah, the Times also wants a toll on I-80 for the same purpose.

Vouchers to improve K-12 education would be “a worthy cause.” Does anyone care to guess what the Times position would be on that issue? You’ll recall the Times doesn’t even like charter schools.

“Another benefit is that higher prices often provide the incentive for people to stop smoking. The physical and medical costs of smoking, rubbing or chewing are much too high, so the more people who stop using tobacco, the better it is, even if revenue declines.”

[RWC] Yep, the Times believes taxing behavior it doesn’t like is an appropriate use of government authority. Can someone point me to the places in the U.S. or Pennsylvania constitutions that declare this to be a government function?

“But tobacco users have a valid argument when they contend they are being singled out for special taxation. For politicians at the state and federal levels, sin taxes — alcohol and tobacco, and, in the case of the states, taxing legalized gambling — don’t have a long-term downside.”

[RWC] Anyone taking bets the Times believes people driving their own cars in lieu of taking mass transit counts as a sin? Why else the toll on I-80 to pay for something completely unrelated?

“While sin-tax revenues might address short-term needs, they are little more than Band-Aids when it comes to stopping the hemorrhaging gap between revenue and spending that state and federal governments are facing.

“The dirty secret of American governance and politics is that Americans love big government — as long as someone else is paying for it. This can be seen in the massive transfer of wealth from the future to the present in the form of the national debt. Future generations of Americans will be stuck paying our bills.”

[RWC] Not exactly. Big government is a leftist principle. I wish the Times would stop claiming I believe something I clearly don’t.

“Tobacco users have joined the ranks of our children and grandchildren in footing the bills that we don’t want to pay.”

[RWC] The editorial forgot to mention “the rich.”

“However, we’re running out of easy marks. It’s only a matter of time before reality catches up with us.”

[RWC] You have to admire the chutzpah. You’ll recall this is the same outfit that routinely publishes editorials telling us our taxes are not high and we’re selfish for not wanting them raised.