Where's the Spending Quitline?
Today's New York Times:
Four former surgeons general offered a plan on Tuesday to cut cigarette smoking in part with a $2-a-pack tax increase. That move alone, they said, would prompt at least five million smokers to quit.
They also called for a nationwide counseling and support line for smokers trying to quit, an idea that was immediately accepted by Tommy G. Thompson, the secretary of health and human services.
Mr. Thompson said more than $25 million would be dedicated for a toll-free national "quitline" to be established by year's end. States would also receive more financing to supplement or create their own quitline services.
A national quitline? Can it really be that after decades of government anti-smoking programs, warnings, ad campaigns, regulations, studies, taxes, and a $200 plus billion settlement with the tobacco industry, smokers who want to quit still don't have access to something as basic as a toll-free quitline?
I don't know much about this topic (Jacob, please set me straight), but if Tommy did a very quick Google search before "immediately accepting" a proposal to blow $25 million, he would have found plenty of toll-free quitline services, like:
National Cancer Institute - 1-877-44U-QUIT
American Cancer Society - 1-877-YES-QUIT
American Lung Association - 1-800-LUNG-USA (ask for the call center)
And here's a map with more numbers to call in each state.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
The Brewers should be sued for impersonating a baseball team. (rimshot)
See, what I think is, absent the Cold War (which was huge!) we need to start some new wars that cost lots of money, involve lots of bureaucrats, and, gosh darn it, make us feel good about ourselves.
I mean we still have the War on Poverty and the War on Illiteracy, but they don't really add up to squat and they've gotten kinda stale. We've recently added the War on Terrorism (big help!) and now want to engage the War on Smoking (small $$$ but I feel good about the mission, don't you?).
Next up: the War on Obesity, Guns, Drinking, and, as a last resort, Fun-of-any-Kind.
Wait, how can they raise money from the tax if all those folks who "will supposedly quit" no longer buy them legally?
All this will do is drive up the black market.
How much does a pack of cigarettes cost in the US?
We (or rather the politicians) tried to raise the taxes on cigarettes in Sweden a couple of years ago. It worked out really fine, at least for the people in the black market. So they lowered the taxes after a while.
The only law politicans seem to be unaware of is the law of diminishing utility.
"You guys need a governmental administration with balls." says Kennedy from (formerly Great) Britain. Yeah, y'all have got that alright. What will you give up after the freedom do defend your home with a firearm, jury trials, etc? Maybe your country needs a population with balls, Mr Kennedy.
(my bad, at least half the country, I mean)
On the liter side, I thing we one the war on literasee, so y should me and ur tax $$ be waysted on that noncents?
Last comment, as much as it is nice to dream, suing the lawyers is not gonna work. Remember, that the judges were all lawyers once. But, how bout outsourcing them to Bombay?
Thoreau:
My quitting smoking is more selfish than you think. Not ONLY am I no longer paying taxes to the state but, since I am statistically going to live longer, I will receive several extra years' worth of pension payments (paid for by the state since I'm a schoolteacher).
Health queen!
Let's calculate just how badly I'm fleecing my fellow taxpayers, shall we? Since I quit smoking while still young, and taking other lifestyle factors into account, I should be here seven extra years. Ignoring inflation, between the cigarette taxes I'm not paying and the extra pension money I'm getting, I figure I'm costing the state AT LEAST $210,000 in today's dollars. Aha ha ha ha ha!
And I'm going to be the scariest damn old lady you've ever seen. Already I'm counting the months until I can carry a walking stick and still be taken seriously.
Correction: $240,000.
But we don't take you seriously now, Jenn.
Jenn, I figure you're not a math teacher on accounta you took two posts for your calculations.
Start carrying a cane now and see how people react. Wave it in the air while making important points. The students who don't already have a nickname for you will get one pretty fast, I bet.
I just quit a few months ago. I don't know about other smokers, but phone conversations were often a big trigger for me to light up. Maybe a 'National Quit Smoking Punch in the Chest' program would make more sense.
It costs $25 million to set up a freakin' toll free number and call center? Well, gosh, no wonder all phone support is being outsourced to India! I haven't had any experience with it, but that seems like an awful lot for a redundant agency (as evidenced by the links provided) to provide people answering phones. And yes, I realize they'll be trained 'counselors', but I don't see that much traffic.
On another note, how come it seems every stupid policy decision is debunked by a 30 second Google search? And how come the person looking for the information never seems able to do the Google search? As a friend of mine says to people always asking him stuff:
"Google: It's not just for me!"
You Americans are strange. You'll throw millions and millions, year after year at saving the populace from death by cigarette, but you won't outlaw the cigarettes. Those four ex-surgeons have the smarter plan. I'm not an anti-smoking zealot (I do enjoy one every now and again) but I don't understand how anybody is expected to respect a politician who fails to see the completely bloody obvious: remove the problem at its source. It's not rocket science. You guys need a governmental administration with balls.
I swore -- waaaay back when -- that I would quit smoking when cigarettes hit $1.00 per pack.
Haven't quit yet. Adding a few bucks to the cost isn't going to convince me.
Unless they really go for gold, and jack it up to, say, $20 per pack.
Despite the governments best effort, and throwing literaly billions of dollars away to keep americans from dying, people still die. Its as if mother nature herself is against them.
Whats amazing to me is they admit that the poorest people in america are the most likely to smoke, yet they want to raise the price of ciggerettes 2 more dollars a pack. Thier reasoning, if you cant afford them, then they wont buy them.
Yea right, just ask people in New York what happened when ciggerette prices went up. Did it stop people from buying?? Hell no, it instantly created an illegal black market, creating an entire industry for organized crime syndicates.
It also made normal law abiding citizens into overnight criminals for driving out of city limits to purchase then smuggle in cartons of ciggerettes .
The war on drugs will now expand to include ciggerettes, and the sheepole welcome it. Amazing.
Smoker or non-smoker, regardless of your preferance, you should be concerned about this. According to page 94 of the September issue of Scientific American smoking and obesity are tied for the higest percentage of responsability for fatal cancer. Whats next, a 2 dollar tax on all fattening foods?? Laugh now, but remember you laughed when they sued ciggerette companies for thier customers choices, and said, well they wont target McDonalds, you bet your ass they did.
http://pbisotopes.ess.sunysb.edu/classes/oldclasses/cei542/notes/Cancer.html
Kennedy--
Outlawing cigarettes to end tobacco addiction? It didn't work for alcohol or drugs; why should nicotine be any different? Besides, here in the USA the number of people who drop dead each year due to obesity-related problems is greater that the number of drinking and tobacco deaths combined. If you really want to make people healthier, getting a 400-pound behemoth hooked on tobacco in lieu of Haagen-Daaz might be the best thing to do.
I quit smoking four weeks ago, thanks to "the patch." I quit because I couldn't afford to smoke anymore, what with the high taxes. Meanwhile, here in Connecticut, the governor recommends increasing cigarette, alcohol and other so-called "sin taxes" to help balance the budget. Having given up my pack-a-day habit, I personally am responsible for a yearly loss of about $1,000 from the state's budget.
One thing the SA article left out:
The best way to prevent cancer is to die young.
We all have to die of something. Cancer rates are just the natural product of us living so long.
There was less obesity back when people smoked.
And when they were poorer.
Ah, the signs of the Elect.
Jennifer-
You should be ashamed of your lack of social responsibility! Resume smoking immediately, to boost tax revenues! Besides, if it hastens your demise you won't collect as much from social security and Medicare...
Seriously, although I've never smoked in my life, I'm tempted to do a little study: Call both the publicly funded hotline, and the private hotlines, and pose as a smoker needing help. See which hotlines seem to offer better advice, and see which one spots me first as a troll who doesn't really smoke. Any bets on the outcome?
If the public line is as bad as I suspect it will be, and if I point out a way to save $25 million, any chance I'll get a cut of the savings for my efforts? Oh, wait, this is the government. OK, so if I point out that the public line is bad and hence "needs even more funding", any chance the bureaucrats in charge of the hotline will give me a cut of their funding increase? 🙂
david: Raise it to $20/pack, and I swear I _will_ quit my job and become a cig-legger. I mean, there have reportedly been shootouts in NYC between free-market cigarette dealers, but for that kind of money... And I'll cut you a special deal for being the one to bring me into the lifestyle - only $10/pack for you.
Kennedy: I assume you're being sarcastic or trollish...you might want to find a history book and look up "Prohibition".
And I just saw this in the news:
Group Sues Brewers, Claims Minors Are Targeted
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=568&e=3&u=/nm/20040204/bs_nm/food_beer_lawsuit_dc
This makes me sick to my stomach. The legal system seems to be becoming purely a system for shaking down unpopular companies. (Tobacco, fast food, guns, alcohol...I am waiting for the lawsuit against motorcycle manufacturers.) Didn't there used to be a time when you actually had to show that you were an injured party or something to bring a lawsuit?
I'm just waiting for the day when it all comes around and we can sue the lawyers.
It'll be great! We'll accuse them of causing strife and waste by over-selling litigation services. We'll nail the the American Bar Association, the Association of Trial Lawyers of America, and all the state Trial Lawyers' associations for fostering a conspiracy lead by all the big law firms.
The forces of Big Law will meet their doom!
Group Sues Brewers, Claims Minors Are Targeted
Is that story about alcohol or baseball?
"And the right to own guns just means more people get shot;"
Yeah, Switzerland is rife with shootings.
Arm a people and you deter. And maybe some people committing certain actions might deserve to get shot? 🙂
Ahem. Clearly I didn't explain myself well - I'm not proposing outlawing smoking to stop people from doing it. Self-destruction is a prevalent human impulse, and references to the black market, prohibition and the like are self-evident and don't need highlighting. This is a thread about spending, and my point is this: outlawing cigarettes won't stop people from smoking, but it'll absolve your government from the social responsibility of having to pump millions of dollars into healthcare for people who choose to smoke. If that's a hard line, so be it - the money is better spent on education or other areas of healthcare. Just my opinion.
Oh, and Jimmy - it's New Zealand, not GB =) And the right to own guns just means more people get shot; if anything, I would conject it takes more balls not to have to pack heat just to feel safe in your own country.