Cafergot without a prescription, John A. Charles, buy generic cafergot, Buy cafergot in canada, Jr. submitted testimony on Monday to the Senate Committee on Finance and Revenue, cafergot non prescription, Buy cafergot online without prescription, speaking against a proposal to allow counties to impose local tobacco taxes.
Testimony of John A. Charles, cafergot pills, No prescription cafergot, Jr.
President & CEO
Before the Senate Committee on Finance and Revenue
Regarding HB 2870-A
April 29, 2012
I am writing in opposition to HB 2870-A, buy cafergot internet. Online pharmacy cafergot, This bill suffers from an inherent contradiction in its twin policy objectives: raising money and reducing tobacco consumption. For one to succeed, the other must fail, cafergot without a prescription.
None of the proponents want to admit this, buy discount cafergot. Cafergot pill, They prefer to claim that the primary goal is “public health.” However, the bill only requires that a minimum of 40% of the proceeds be spent on tobacco use prevention and cessation programs, real cafergot without prescription, Buying cafergot online, which means that 60% of the funds will go for other uses. This clearly shows that public health is not the primary motivation behind the bill, buy cafergot from india, Discount cafergot without prescription, revenue generation is.
If we admit that this is just a money bill, buy cafergot low price, Cafergot tablets, then there is no compelling argument in favor of taxing a product used by only a fifth of the population, in order to create a revenue stream that will likely benefit everyone, cafergot online without a prescription. Cafergot without a prescription, The only reason such bills get introduced is because it is politically easy to pick on a minority group engaged in a habit that is publicly scorned. But we should not tax minorities just because we can. Cafergot medicine, If local governments genuinely want to spend more money on tobacco cessation programs, they already have access to the MSA settlement funds, cafergot free delivery. Buy cheap cafergot, Oregon has received over $1 billion in MSA money since 1998, but virtually none of it has gone to directly help smokers. Since that was one of the express purposes of creating the fund, I’d suggest local governments direct their lobbying efforts at state legislators who continue to use revenue from the MSA as an all-purpose slush fund.
Between state and federal tobacco taxes, plus the price hikes needed by the major tobacco companies to make the MSA payments, tobacco users have paid more than their fair share for any so-called “negative social externalities” associated with smoking. Please leave them alone by tabling HB 2870.
Similar posts: Epogen without prescription. Anti-stress massage oil without prescription. Virility pills without prescription. Aricept without prescription. Opticare ointment without prescription. Pheromone perfume for women without prescription. Mentat pills without prescription.
Trackbacks from: Buy cialis soft tabs without prescription. Buy cafergot without prescription. Coumadin online without prescription. Buy metronidazole gel without prescription. Verapamil without prescription. Vigrx online without prescription. Buy quinine without prescription.
Good testimony, touching on all the salient points in a cogent fashion. The last time I heard someone vehemently speak in favor of high taxes on tobacco, that person was a smoker. Time and time again, smokers speak against themselves, when with the numbers they represent it would be so easy to fight back. This is like the poor person who thinks he/she will one day be rich and hates the poor lifestyle, or the obese person who makes fun of other overweight people for similar reasons. We do not consider it just to dump on poor or heavy-set people just because they do it to themselves. It’s kind of like the despicable argument — and one unfortunately does hear this now and then — that black people deserved to be enslaved because other Africans participated in selling members of their own race into it. There is no excuse for inhuman action toward any minority no matter how easy it can be to do so; and I thank you Mr. Charles for stating this so well.
Having myself quit smoking in 1956 (at age 22) when I read the first article linking smoking to lung cancer, I have zero sympathies with people too dim to act in their own best interests and quit this deadly habit. In Canada where the tax on tobacco has been raised I think several times, studies there demonstrate a direct cause and effect relationship between tobacco taxes and reductions in tobacco consumption.
Smoking or chewing this poison is one of those private decisions people make that have public consequences. Various studies on this subject over the years show that tobacco use is related to several diseases, and that cutting back the use of tobacco would significantly reduce MEDICARE and Medicaid costs related to dealing with these related conditions. I won’t go into the obvious economic work place issues connected to illness and lost time. No one in my family smokes. In missions (overseas) I managed I always imposed a firm no smoking on premises policy.