---

                         Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: SATURDAY, March 6, 1993                   TAG: 9303080774
SECTION: EDITORIAL                    PAGE: A-7   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: 
DATELINE:                                 LENGTH: Short

---

HEALTH REFORM

SURE, IT would be nice if national health-care reform would pay for itself - if controlling costs and reducing red tape would underwrite the extension of health insurance to millions of Americans who now lack it.

But if reform isn't entirely self-financing, a great place to look for more funds is the federal cigarette tax. Discussion of this option within the Clinton administration is welcome.

According to a recent poll, 76 percent of Americans favor higher cigarette taxes to help finance health-care reform. They do so with good reason. Budget analysts estimate that raising the tax by $2 per pack would bring into the treasury some $35 billion a year.

This figure would fall as cigarette consumption declines, but that wouldn't be a bad thing.

Smoking is down almost a third in Canada, where combined federal and local taxes grew from 46 cents in 1980 to $3.27 in 1991. Teens in particular are sensitive to price; smoking in that age group is down by two-thirds. Who would lament such a response here?

As smoking declines, meanwhile, health-care costs related to smoking would fall as well. The tobacco addiction kills as many as 400,000 Americans a year, and costs the country an estimated $65 billion annually in health-care and other costs. That breaks down to an estimated $2.17 per pack.

Doesn't it make sense to tax cigarettes more, to pay for improved national health?

---