Bill Napoli sounds off. This time, on the Tobacco tax
Mercer’s recent column about the wonderful new tobacco tax was a great article written only as Mercer could write. But, it fell far short of explaining the rest of the story, something Mr. Mercer is becoming famous for.Read it all here.Ms. Stalley and the rest of the “Tobacco Nazis” gave a gift of $40 million to the Legislature all right, but she and her organization also committed a huge political blunder. Mercer never mentions the mission of the $40 million tobacco tax was to force people to quit smoking and using tobacco products. In effect, it made the tax a self-abolishing tax, “No Smokers or Chewers, No Tax Money to Spend.”
However, the recently passed tobacco tax increase was written to use the new tax for ongoing government programs such as education and property tax relief. Which means, the tobacco tax must be an ongoing tax, or else the Legislature will be facing actual revenue deficits.
and...So, when people quit smoking and chewing as the tax intended, there will be less tax money in the state’s coffers. The loss of this revenue that is expected to be in our state’s $3.4 billion budget will and must be made up by the rest of us non-smokers.
State Sen. Bill Napoli
Rapid City
Comments
This tax was wrong from the get go! Most of the price of cigs is TAXATION!
I say repeal!
First, we may eventually save on Medicaid and other expenses related to smokers, but the costs we have today are for longtime smokers. We won't see significant savings for many years when the number of longtime smokers has decreased. If things go as the proponents planned, we'll see a loss of tax revenue from people quitting smoking long before we see the savings of health care costs.
Second, it sounds like LEXREX doesn't trust his Republican governor to either restrain spending or to oppose future tax increases. LEXREX probably recalls 2003 when Democrats opposed tax increases that Rounds and his Republicans passed. Don't worry LEXREX, fiscal responsibility will return when we have a Democratic governor in 2 years.
LEXREX apparently has no qualms about tax dollars being squandered on ineffective sexual abstinence policy and on forcing doctors and health workers to spew state-mandated religious propaganda to women seeking abortions.
yes, you have heard me correctly.
"LEXREX probably recalls 2003 when Democrats opposed tax increases that Rounds and his Republicans passed."
i recall that very few in either party opposed the tax increases.
and the informed consent on abortion law doesn't require the use of any tax dollars.
He does, however, believe in fining or putting people in prison to effect social engineering.
laws aren't there to engineer certain social outcomes. they are there in the paraphrased words of the father of our legal system, william blackstone, to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right.
HB1147 tobacco tax increase:
R's: 71 yes, 5 no
D's: 13 yes, 16 no
HB1157 tourism tax increase:
R's: 59 yes, 16 no
D's: 9 yes, 16 no
SB63 long-distance phone tax increase:
R's: 65 yes, 5 no
D's: 6 yes, 22 no
Let's be honest.
i don't know what you're counting, but as for the cell phone tax, there were only 9 total votes against it, not 27.
i admit i forgot about the tourism tax.
as for the tobacco tax, there were a few more dems that voted no than i remember. you're right.
but i can agree with you that without the repubs, these tax increases wouldn't have passed.
The cell phone tax you refer to is a different bill than the long distance phone tax. They both came up that year at Rounds' request.
As to the cell phone tax, you're probably looking at the final vote after counties got a cut of the revenue. Before counties got added in, alot more dems voted no.
yes, you have to look at the final vote on the final version of the bill, don't you?
but again, if you'd stop being so beligerent, you'd realize that i'm trying to agree with you about who's responsible for the tax increases. 'nuff said?
(it's me, lexrex. google keeps blocking my password, so i can't sign in under my screen name.)