$moke 'em if ya got 'em

Ahh, whatever happened to the romance of smoking?

On January 1, 2007, many smokers will have a greater incentive to quit smoking. The Texas legislature and Gov. Perry decided that adding an extra dollar to the tax on a pack of cigarettes would be a great way to get more money for the things they want to spend it on.

Actuaries, no doubt, worked overtime to come up with a figure ($1/pack) that would, at least in the short term, earn the State the most revenue from everyone's favorite "whipping boy" (smokers) without causing so many of them to quit smoking that the State would pass the point of diminishing returns.

Aside from smokers, who seem to be in a minority nowadays, who would argue against the new tax?

Those who feel it is their duty to control other peoples' behavior (liberals) are almost giddy over the prospect of forcing even more smokers to finally quit as an economic necessity, if not for their own health.

Other non-smokers simply say: "To hell with smokers. That's what they get for smoking in the first place."

The politicians are not interested in the health of smokers, or the welfare of non-smokers. All they care about is the money.

I have an idea that would raise even more revenue and be a greater benefit to the welfare of my fellow Texans. Instead of taking out our anguish and greed on smokers (who have had it tough enough as it is), slap an extra $1 per drink tax on alcohol.

The non-smoking alcoholics that fill the State legislature probably wouldn't like that idea too much, though. But just think of the benefits!

How about it AA? How about it MADD? It would be a win-win situation for everyone but the alcoholics we despise (almost) as much as we despise smokers.

Next, we go after coffee drinkers.

Hmmm....aren't soft drinks bad for you? What about red meat?

"My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives." -Hedley Lamarr