Profile image
By Reason Magazine (Reporter)
Contributor profile | More stories
Story Views

Last Hour:
Last 24 Hours:

Cigarette Taxes and Spending Requirements for Anti-Tobacco Programs Don’t Belong In Colorado’s State Constitution

Monday, October 31, 2016 11:43
% of readers think this story is Fact. Add your two cents.

Colorado’s Amendment 72 would create a $315 million tax windfall for the state government by targeting a small and shrinking segment of the population – smokers. The initiative would triple the state tax on cigarettes from 84 cents per pack to $2.59 per pack, with the new revenue intended to fund a potpourri of programs.

Advocates claim the amendment will raise cigarette prices so high that it will get smokers to quit. Yet, Colorado has already been reducing tobacco use without the large tax increase. Colorado already outperforms 41 other states in terms of reducing smoking rates.

Amendment 72’s proponents also fail to point out that if the tax increase successfully reduces smoking as intended, the state will see dwindling revenues. The cigarette taxes would be funding seven different programs. As fewer people smoke, fewer tobacco tax dollars would be collected. Government programs that are funded through tobacco tax money aren’t likely to just go away. Thus, taxpayers can rest assured that it won’t be long before advocates will soon be back for other tax increases.

Amendment 72 represents flawed policy that would be seriously questioned if contemplated by the legislature, but as a ballot initiative, it’s worse because it would write bad policy into the state constitution.

It’s not easy to change a bad law passed by the legislature, but it happens all the time. If a law proves to bring harsh consequences or priorities change, legislators respond by changing the law.

Changing the constitution, as Amendment 72 would do, however, is an entirely different matter. If Amendment 72 is passed, it will be near impossible to change it. The only realistic way to fix future problems or unintended consequences that arise would be the tedious, expensive work of amending the constitution. In short, it won’t happen.

Nobel prize winning economist Milton Friedman warned that “one of the great mistakes is to judge policies and programs by their intentions rather than results.”

People trying to reduce smoking rates have good intentions but amending the state constitution to raise tobacco taxes is likely going to result long-term budget problems that shouldn’t be entombed in the constitution.

Brian Fojtik is a senior fellow at Reason Foundation.


We encourage you to Share our Reports, Analyses, Breaking News and Videos. Simply Click your Favorite Social Media Button and Share.

Report abuse


Your Comments
Question   Razz  Sad   Evil  Exclaim  Smile  Redface  Biggrin  Surprised  Eek   Confused   Cool  LOL   Mad   Twisted  Rolleyes   Wink  Idea  Arrow  Neutral  Cry   Mr. Green

Top Stories
Recent Stories



Top Global


Top Alternative




Email this story
Email this story

If you really want to ban this commenter, please write down the reason:

If you really want to disable all recommended stories, click on OK button. After that, you will be redirect to your options page.