I don't agree with taxing only one segment of the population with a "sin" tax. If the city can't balance its budget then we need to increase property tax or cut social services. I don't like footing the bill for Eaglecrest.
Haven't we already hit smokers pretty hard? How about adding a $1 per drink tax to all the drinkers of alcohol or $1 per can of soda pop - or let's tax the governor on each of the campaign promises he broke.
No. It's a tax imposed by a vocal, intolerant group, many of whom have habits and activities that are equally offensive but not the social scapegoat of the decade.
Why not tax coffee and other caffeinated products? Why not tax alcohol? Alcohol is a much worse drug that causes a lot of problems in Juneau.
Yes. We all pay the price for tobacco in paying for smokers' illnesses.
The government should not tax people because it does not like an individual's lifestyle.
Increase the tobacco tax. I have worked with high-risk teens for many years and have watched countless kids become addicted to tobacco. Studies have concluded tobacco is as addictive as heroin and cocaine. Anything we can do to deter them from starting is a excellent idea.
I don't need to repeat the studies and statistics that are affected by increases in taxes on tobacco products; but I do wish to weigh in very heavily in favor of the increase in taxes - as a parent of a teenage son, and as health care professional with 20 years of experience and education in the field of public health.
I am a non-smoker. But, I voted "NO." Why do we feel raising taxes will make a difference on something that is addictive? We should support programs that help!
The Assembly has not explained what social service programs are underfunded, what they do to serve the community, or whether they are successful and deserve to be funded. A cigarette tax proposal is unjustified.
CBJ managers should take a hard look at some of the luxuries this community no longer can afford. Why can't we get back to basics? Cut back on the extras before wasting time on another sin tax.
Yes, because higher tobacco prices are correlated to lower teen usage.
The proponents of the tax claim it will help people quit smoking. Ironically, the tax supporters don't really want them to quit. They levy taxes on cigarettes to generate tax revenue for programs no one else cares to fund.
I am a reformed smoker; having quit after 14 years of smoking as many as three packs a day and having not smoked in over 18 years. I disagree with penalizing smokers with an unfair and excessive tax. Where is the tax on people who choose to participate in extreme sports?
I would have no problem paying the higher tax if some of the revenue generated was used to benefit smokers.