And it's not about 'sin'

April 11, 2006

The effort to raise the cigarette tax in South Carolina has not gasped its last — nor should it.

Perhaps it would fare better if it could be couched as a child protection issue, something that seems to pull at the heartstrings of the most hardened soul. In many ways, that is just what it is, despite all rhetoric to the contrary.

According to the American Lung Association, one-third of current smokers tried their first cigarette in early adolescence. Ninety percent of current smokers began before they reached adulthood.

Ninety percent.

Based on these statistics, 64 million of today’s children will die prematurely of smoking-related diseases, including cancer, heart disease, emphysema, and others, according to the American Lung Association.

Sixty-four million.

South Carolina’s death toll will be slightly larger than its share. Whereas 21.7 percent of high school students nationwide smoke, the percentage in South Carolina is almost 24.5 percent, according to Tobacco-Free Kids.

Last week a state House subcommittee voted to increase the tax on a pack of cigarettes by 32 cents. Rep. Rex Rice of Easley and Rep. Paul Agnew of Abbeville are among those who publicly support the increase.

It’s a huge increase from the current 7 cents a pack (the lowest in the nation) but way less than the public is willing to support. According to a recent poll, 71 percent of South Carolinians would support a 93-cent tax increase, according to the American Cancer Society.

The Anderson Area Chamber of Commerce supports an increase of up to 36 cents a pack, meeting or exceeding the Southeastern average, as long as the money is used to fully fund Medicaid for the maximum available federal matching funds.

Fred Allen, a tobacco lobbyist interviewed by the Associated Press last week, made the comment that the average income of smokers in South Carolina is $28,000. "It takes more than a 30 cents per pack increase," to stop purchases, he said. He’s right. That extra 30 cents probably won’t stop the smoker who is already hooked.

But it might help a smoker who wants to quit have a little more incentive to do so, by thinking about all the money he or she is spending on the habit. And most importantly, it might keep someone, regardless of age, who hasn’t yet harmed his or her body to make a conscious decision not to start.

We’ve considered that taxing tobacco (and we advocate all tobacco products, not just cigarettes) is in some ways singling people out. Along with alcohol, any increase in price is referred to as a "sin tax." It’s a misnomer; tobacco and alcohol use do not constitute sins. Many have pointed out that alcohol contributes to poor health, as does overeating. And they’re right; misuse of either alcohol or food is dangerous to one’s health and in the case of the former, a hazard to those around you.

Yet both have redeeming values. A glass of red wine might help your heart, or help you sleep without resorting to prescription drugs. Most food, if eaten in proper portions after being prepared in a healthy way, is needed by a body to operate properly. Most of life is, after all, enjoyed best when everything — with the exception of joy — is in moderation.

But not tobacco. A little or a lot, it’s an unhealthy habit that costs the public a lot of money and users something that is even more valuable.

We don’t like more taxes; no one does. But this is a case in which an increase in taxes can do something little else within the scope of government can do: It can save lives.

Maybe yours.

Maybe that of someone you love.

Copyright 2006, Anderson Independent Mail. All Rights Reserved.