I wonder what would happen if we lined up EVERY city official and made them piss in a cup and take a drug test.
Surely they would defend that.
Posted on 03/27/2002 12:09:35 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
This is mind boggling and the implications of it are staggering to say the least.
In the first-ever policy of its kind in Central Florida, St. Cloud no longer will hire people who use tobacco. Sanford officials also may adopt the get-tough policy, which took effect Monday in the Osceola County city and is aimed at reducing health-care costs and improving productivity.If tobacco can indeed be considered to be addictive, this policy violates the ADA. Good for the goose, good for the gander.
-Eric
It also makes me sick when I hear about smoking's "cost to society." Nobody ever informed me when I was growing up that society had a claim to the fruits of my efforts, I thought it was a FREE country.
Big surprise, huh? When you view this in the context of their activism in trying to get algore elected in 2000, it all makes sense.
The first of these Clymers comes up on the ballot in the general election in November for re-affirmation. I am going to vote NO early and often.
Non-smoker: "Aaaaaargh! I cut my finger on the copy paper. I'm bleeding! I have to go the infirmary for antibiotics and bandages - cover for me!! Be back in a couple of hours".
Smoker: "Whoops, I severed my finger in the machinery. Never mind, I'll just pack the wound with tobacco. There. OK, let's get back to work".
Ok, maybe a bit hyperbolic, but the biggest crybabies I've ever worked with have all been non-smokers. The smokers more often than not just to tend to keep on goin', no matter.
I wonder what would happen if we lined up EVERY city official and made them piss in a cup and take a drug test.
Surely they would defend that.
Administrators in the city of 19,000 say refusing to hire people with AIDS will hold down the cost of health insurance, which is rising 30 percent a year...."The bottom line is health economists and the surgeon general have endorsed the idea that AIDS patients are costing their employers and the overall economy."
I think this is one of the reasons they're pushing so hard to have guns labled a health issue.
Gosh, wouldn't that entitle smokers a check under the citizens with disablities act.
Bump!
I remember when Orlando was a nice town on the drive from St. Petersburg to Daytona Beach.
Now it's wall to wall strip malls and amusement parks.
BUT I THOUGHT CONN HAD AN INCOME TAX, A SALES TAX AND GAMBLING? THEN HOW CAN THEY BE BROKE???? Gail
States Mulling New `Sin Taxes'
By MATTHEW DALY .c The Associated Press
HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) - First it was cigarettes. Now it's beer, wine - even candy.
A few weeks after Connecticut lawmakers approved a 61-cent-per-pack increase in the state's cigarette tax, they are considering a plan to double taxes on alcohol and impose new taxes on sales of some sugary snacks.
And if one state lawmaker has his way, the state's 6 percent sales tax might be extended to yarn, seeds and some other ``optional products.''
At least nine revenue-strapped states have recently looked at ``sin taxes'' to help balance the budget, said Lee Dixon, a health policy analyst with the National Conference of State Legislatures. Besides Connecticut, alcohol tax increases have been proposed in Alaska, Hawaii, Kansas, Nebraska, New Mexico, Oregon, South Carolina and Tennessee, he said.
Democrats, who control the Connecticut General Assembly, say plans are preliminary as they look to close a $1 billion, two-year budget gap. But that hasn't stopped Republicans from denouncing what they call an attack on Joe Six-Pack and his Twinkie-eating siblings.
``From beer drinkers and home gardeners to grandmothers knitting baby clothes, no one is safe when the Democrats are on a taxing frenzy,'' said House Republican Leader Robert Ward.
``It's not a sin to eat apple pie. It's not a sin to drink alcohol in a moderate way,'' he said.
In Hawaii, the Senate has approved a 50 percent increase in the state liquor tax, only half the increase proposed by Gov. Ben Cayetano, while the House approved an unspecified increase in the tobacco tax.
``Alcohol doesn't help anybody, and if I could wipe out alcohol with a law I'd do it. The same thing with tobacco,'' Cayetano said Tuesday.
``If people want to use it, then they should pay because the cost to the state government in terms of health care, in terms of welfare and all of that is very, very large,'' he said.
As proposed, Connecticut's tax rate on liquor would jump from $4.50 per gallon to $9 per gallon.
The bill would also remove a sales tax exemption on candy and other sweets purchased in school cafeterias, nursing homes, hospitals and other large institutions. Those items are already taxed when bought at convenience stores, though they are considered groceries - and non-taxable - when bought at a grocery store.
Separately, a key lawmaker wants to lift sales tax exemptions on yarn purchased for non-commercial use, vegetable seeds - flower seeds are already taxed - and even health club memberships.
``These so-called sin taxes are all on optional products and can be additional revenue sources for the state,'' says Sen. Martin Looney, co-chairman of the Legislature's tax-writing Finance Committee.
Most of the ideas will go nowhere, said Senate President Pro Tem Kevin Sullivan, a Democrat from West Hartford. Still, he said, ``There is an issue of fairness and balance. People want to talk about all options.''
Connecticut Democrats said they are building on Republican Gov. John G. Rowland's call to raise the state tax on cigarettes by 61 cents per pack. The increase takes effect April 3 and will make Connecticut's $1.11 per pack tax the third-highest in the nation.
Some liquor-buyers said they think the tax increase is a good idea.
``I wouldn't go for doubling, but maybe 20 percent would be OK,'' said Harry Shook of West Hartford, who was buying a case of port at Rogers Fine Liquors in West Hartford.
``I don't think it should only be smokers'' who pay higher taxes, Shook said. ``Everybody should share it.''
Sentiment at a recent public hearing was decidedly different.
A spokesman for beer brewer Anheuser-Busch said the plan would ``increase a regressive and inequitable tax that hits working families the hardest.''
Steve Leon, owner of Steve's Price Cutters Liquors in Wethersfield, said the plan would just encourage Connecticut residents to drive out of state to buy a case of beer. It also would discourage residents of neighboring states from coming into Connecticut to buy alcohol, Leon and other critics said.
The proposal could cost as much $500,000 in liquor revenue and eliminate as many as 2,000 jobs, said Peter Cressy, president of the Distilled Spirits Council of the United States.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.