Odd to help health of children by bill on raising tobacco taxes?

Bush vetoed a bill proposingraising tobacco taxes to help children with health insurence. Does this bill on raising tobacco costs seem odd if in improving the health of children it does so at the expense of adults. Making tobacco more expensive would this be the right approachOdd to help health of children by bill on raising tobacco taxes?What is not odd about Hillary ? We have officailly entered the twilight zone and I gots to get out!Odd to help health of children by bill on raising tobacco taxes?This would make tobacco more expensive. I'm not for making any drug illegal, but I do believe that it is the best plan in order to give the working class their needs without burdening them with more taxes.Odd to help health of children by bill on raising tobacco taxes?I am a smoker and if raising my price means more children will receive health care then SO BE IT! Why the heck not? Why is it we can fund a war but we can not fund children's health? I would much rather my tax funds go for something good right here at home then to pay some debt that I did not incur or ask for.Odd to help health of children by bill on raising tobacco taxes?
On the one hand, it sounds like an incredibly good idea.



On the other hand, the economics work against it.



Raise the taxes, and those who find the increase too much, will quit.



So you lose part of your revenue base. But you've committed to support a specific funding level. Where does the difference come from? It still gets funded... which means other taxes go up.



That's part of his point, which the media is neglecting to point out.



On the other hand, there are other programs that are receiving massive increases in funding that could be used to help fund this type of program.



It all boils down to the guns vs butter debate in economics of a government. At a high level it all sounds obvious, but once you start digging into the nitty gritty, there are all sorts of gotchas.