Topeka — Lawmakers on Thursday started what promises to be a fiery debate over a proposed increase in the state cigarette tax.
After a hearing in the House Tax Committee, Chairman Kenny Wilk, R-Lansing, said the measure faces strong opposition.
"We're spending a lot of money for health care, and we're being asked to look at another revenue source. At what point can we say, 'More money is not the solution?' " Wilk asked.
But health care advocates say a 50-cent per-pack tax increase would provide needed revenue to offset the health costs of smoking and reduce smoking, especially among young people.
Dr. Barbara Atkinson, executive vice chancellor of Kansas University Medical Center, said the tax's deterrent effect "is probably the major benefit, more than producing revenue."
Tobacco causes 4,000 deaths and $930 million in health care costs each year in Kansas, according to the Kansas Health Policy Authority.
Under the bill, the state tax on cigarettes would increase from 79 cents per pack to $1.29 per pack on July 1.
The tax would increase annually at the rate of inflation, which is projected to be about 4 cents per year.
Hearings will continue today on the proposal.
The tax increase would raise an average of $67 million annually for the first six years and help pay for a five-year, $227 million initiative to expand health coverage for Kansans.
Comments
LJWorld.com doesn’t necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.
kansanjayhawk (anonymous) says…
tax and tax, spend and spend, just remember this tax is one of the most regressive!--just say No!
jafs (anonymous) says…
How about making smokers pay more for their own health care?
toefungus (anonymous) says…
A 5o cent tax on cheeseburgers, pop, heck, all sweets. The deterrent effect would be the most beneficial to prevent obesity. You know, at some point, the government is going to tax some food (or simply tax the way a person looks) in addition to alcohol. Maybe a law denying health coverage to representatives would help them to look more at the cost of medical care instead of higher taxes. As long as tax dollars keep flowing into medicine, there will be no limit to the costs medicine will increase to absorb it.
KRITIKOS (anonymous) says…
So when the number of smoker's decreases and the revenue source dries up how will they fund the additional financial burden from all the people added to the program? They will tax all non smokers. This is nothing but a back door way to start socialized medicine under the guise of a sin tax. If government programs work so well why are we adding more people rather than reducing those enrolled? The government is no different then a drug pusher who's goal is to get people hooked and keep them dependent on the debilitating drug, a government program. I have such great confidedence that the government will do a wonderful job at managing health care as they have done managing our retirement account commonly referred to, as the oxymoron, social security!!!!!