State Sen. Marian Welsh proposed increasing the alcohol tax by 5 percent so the state could use the money for alcohol abuse prevention programs. Similar to the state tobacco tax that pays for anti-smoking programs, this tax may provide the state with a way to help curb alcohol abuse.
However, the issue of excessive alcohol use differs from smoking because of the way that tobacco companies originally advertised cigarettes and cigars. The huge debate and court cases filed against tobacco companies stemmed from the fact that they touted their products as healthy and hid their harmful effects and addictive nature from the public. Besides, alcohol use can offer people some health benefits if used in moderation, while smoking has few redeeming values.
On the other hand, people who drink alcohol are aware of the potentially damaging effects of abusing it. If people fail to drink responsibly, they choose to do so knowing that it may lead to addiction.
For those people who do drink responsibly to have to pay for abuse prevention programs would be unfair. They should not have to suffer because others choose to abuse alcohol.
In addition, a 5 percent tax increase is arbitrary and excessive. The people who would pay this tax would have no way of knowing how the money was being spent or how effective programs would be. While alcohol abuse prevention programs may be founded on a noble cause, they may not always achieve the desired effect.
Before voting to enact this law, Beacon Hill legislators should consider how this proposal might infringe on the people who do not need to use these prevention programs and should look to other means of aiding those who suffer from addiction.
This is an account occasionally used by the Daily Free Press editors to post archived posts from previous iterations of the site or otherwise for special circumstance publications. See authorship info on the byline at the top of the page.
