King George III Ain't Got Nuthin' On The Texas Legislature

[shksprtx]

Warning: I'm going off on a bit of a rant here...

From Merriam-Webster Online (http://www.m-w.com)

Main Entry: dra·co·ni·an
Pronunciation: drA-'kO-nE-&n, dr&-
Function: adjective
Usage: often capitalized
Etymology: Latin Dracon-, Draco, from Greek DrakOn Draco (Athenian lawgiver)
1 : of, relating to, or characteristic of Draco or the severe code of laws held to have been framed by him
2 : CRUEL; also : SEVERE <draconian littering fines>

Draconian.

It's a good word to describe the cigarette tax recently imposed upon consumers in the great State of Texas. On January 1 of this year, the Texas Legislature levied a $1.00/pack tax on cigarettes, and earmarked the revenue from this tax for education finance reform. Although it's only two months into the year so far, and there's no way of predicting the long-term effects of this tax, I nevertheless have a few thoughts on the subject that I thought I'd share.

The new cigarette tax was conceived as a way of relieving homeowners of their property tax burden. As many of you may know, public education in Texas has long been paid for largely through property taxes at the local and State levels. This new tax changes that.

This is how it works, in theory. The cigarette tax generates revenue at the State level; the State then disburses these funds to local school districts, who are then able to lower local property taxes, which in turn enables low-income people to more easily purchase a home. But let me digress for just a moment.

In 1991, the State legislature had a brilliant idea. It was decided that year to form a Lottery, the proceeds of which would go towards subsidizing public education (or at least that's how the folks in Austin sold it to us). In the 16 or so years since the Lottery's inception, however, very little of that money actually went to education finance. Instead, it went back into the daily operations of the Lottery.

Which brings us back to the present. With the Lottery having proved a monumental failure to the public education system in Texas, a new funding source was needed. I picture the following meeting:

SENATOR A: We need money for the education system...
SENATOR B: What about the Lottery?
SENATOR A: What about it? It failed...
SENATOR B: Well, what about a State sales tax?
SENATOR A: Nobody would go for that...
SENATOR B: Maybe a State income tax?
SENATOR A: What are you, some kinda pinko Commie?
SENATOR B: Well, maybe we should just raise property taxes...
SEANTOR A: Naw...we can't do that to the good, hard-working middle class people of this State...
SENATOR B: Then what do we do?
SENATOR A: We need to find a villain, someone we can really stick it to...

(At that moment, a smoker walks by, and their toxic death-cloud wafts towards the Senators)

SENATOR A: That's it! A cigarette tax! It'll be the biggest cigarette tax in history!!!!!

And that, my friends, is probably not too far from the mark.

Now, as a smoker myself, I understand that smoking is unhealthy. I understand that public healthcare costs as a result of smoking and secondhand smoke are on the increase. I understand that the government (both State and federal) would love nothing more than to see smoking eradicated.

But why, then, should smokers be punished rather than helped? Furthermore, why should smokers now be forced to pay for most of the cost of public education in Texas?

1) That this new tax will help lower property taxes is a myth. At the State level, perhaps, but at the local level, schools will welcome the additional revenue and will be highly unlikely to let go of their current property tax income.

2) The new tax is discriminatory. Contrary to the line of tripe you may have been fed by the Legislature, property taxes aren't just paid by people who own homes...if you rent a house or apartment, I can promise you that you're paying property taxes. See, your landlady gets charged taxes once a year, and guess where she makes that money up from? That's right! She pays her taxes on that property out of your rent money! Everybody pays!

On the other hand, by shifting the burden only to smokers, the Legislature is creating a discriminatory situation by which everybody benefits from the pockets of a subset of the population...and if you don't think that's discriminatory, you need to hit the dictionary, my friends...

3) The new tax will not encourage people to quit smoking. Let me repeat that. The new tax will not encourage people to quit smoking. We smokers are a crafty lot -- we'll drop our preference down to the generic brands, clip coupons, travel to Mexico, order online from overseas, make friends at the nearest military base -- anything to keep our habit going as cheaply as possible.

And anyway, if the State was so concerned about getting people to quit smoking, why then does this tax benefit public education? Shouldn't that revenue be used to help defray public health costs, or maybe to offer free or reduced-cost smoking cessation programs?

4) If smoking is so bad, why are we using it to subsidize our schools? Don't we want kids to NOT start smoking? So what kind of idea is little Johnny gonna get in 11th grade economics when the teacher happens to mention that they have to share textbooks because people have cut back drastically on smoking? An extreme example, I know, but I think an appropriate one.

5) My last and final(ish) point. Look at the Lottery. Do you really think the money generated from the cigarette tax will ever make its way out of the State coffers and into the schools? We already have something like an $8 billion dollar annual surplus in Texas. Where did that money go? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

The fact of the matter is that the State Legislature has found a group to victimize -- one that won't usually complain too loudly and that is usually too proud (or too addicted) to kick the habit. It's easy money for the State, and all we have to do is sit back and take it.

If, like me, you feel this tax is unfair, it's time to do something about it. Write your state Senator and Representative. Tell them to stop this nonsense and find a real and equitable way to finance public education. It's bad enough we've been kicked out of public places, restaurants, even bars (a topic for another rant some day), but this is the last straw!

To quote that great American Philosopher Billy Joel, "I don't care what you say anymore, this is my life./Go ahead with your own life, leave me alone!"

[York99]

If there's even a slight chance that the money will go to education of drivers that the left lane is the passing lane and/or fast lane, then I am 100% behind this and any other tax.

[the_orf]

It's not that the funds from the lottery go to the administration of it. The lottery is actually fairly efficient at that, especially when compared to other fund-raising type organizations.

The problem is that the lottery was supposed to AUGMENT to budget from the property taxes and such so that schools could be funded adequately. Then the money rolled in from the lottery, and the lawmakers decided to use ONLY the money from the lottery to fund the schools, and they SUBTRACTED that amount from the schools' share of the overal budget. So the property tax revenue got diverted to other places, and the schools are now incredibly dependent on the lottery, which isn't providing them any extra funding compared to what they had before, it's just providing the same inadequate funds from a different source. And so to increase school funding, property taxes have to be raised again somehow (and the newly-raised portion diverted back to the schools that had them in the first place), or cigarettes and booze have to be taxed higher, or some nonsense like that.


Here's a stumper: what happens to cigarette-based school funding if people go on a health kick and the number of smokers suddenly drops by half?

[vine311]

Here's a stumper: what happens to cigarette-based school funding if people go on a health kick and the number of smokers suddenly drops by half?

You've never been a smoker have you.

[Mike]

Heh. When I left NY, they were charging upwards of $7.25 for a pack of smokes. People complained that nobody would buy them, as the price was way too high. The week after the tax ( about 1.75) took effect, there were people still buying cigarettes and such, despite paying the equivalent of a meal for 2 at a restaraunt when they bought a carton.

People are going to smoke whether or not you tax the hell out them. And the government realized this, hence they'll tax the shit out of any tobacco product.

The reason the government taxes smokers is simple: you are collecting your cash back from a group who will pay top dollar to satisfy their addiction, and you're also collecting funds from a population who will suffer more respiratory and throat illnesses than the non-smoking population. Smokers are an easy target as they willingly participate in something that can kill them. And as nicotine is addictive, the smoker will not think twice about paying for the fix here, or paying cash to go to Mexico, or paying a shpping fee online.

I still say the best way for the government to make a shitload of cash is to legalize pot and tax the hell out of it. Charge for licensed to sell pot, charge for the distribution rights, and put a surcharge on it for research, and you'd be rolling in cash. Same with alcohol. Tax the heck out of it, and you'll be surprised how much cash you can earn.

The lottery doesn't work because the cut for the state is probably 1 or 2% of gross annual sales. That's crap. You're better off letting the students buy their own lottery tickets. "It helps our students" is just an excuse to support legalized gambling. I'm not for a property tax funding schools because I don't plan to have kids and why should I be forced to pay for someone else's kid to go to school? I'd rather have my taxes go to funding a hospital, EMS or the fire/police dept's. Let those with kids pay the taxes to keep their kids in school. ( but that's another rant altogether)

Smokers are the new scapegoat since 2000. They will be taxed, banned from public places, and considered outcasts. Then we'll find somebody else to pick on, like the obese. Give it 10 years and we'll have anti-obesity legislation as well, and a Fat Tax.

[phlounderphil]

Hand-rolling tobacco (and pipe tobacco as well) is not taxed as heavily as processed cigarettes.

Roll your own.

[Wesley]

More taxes on morality!

More laws on morality!

[Asaf]

Actually there was a problem in NY that there were a lot of people going out of state to purchase cigarettes in bulk. Some were even selling them in NY tax-free. The population of NYC is such though that this didn't make a huge difference.

[Jules]

More taxes on morality!

More laws on morality!

So if I'm sinful, I won't have to pay any taxes?????

I'm ahead of the game already!

[York99]

Heh. When I left NY, they were charging upwards of $7.25 for a pack of smokes.

And so is born another black market and all the wonders that brings (organized crime, untaxed goods being traded, the return of Yahoo Serious, etc etc.)

[shksprtx]

the return of Yahoo Serious, etc etc.)

Oh, God no! Anything but that! ANYTHING BUT THAT!!!!!

/begins whimpering in a corner