Ammara Ansari - DRAFT
CAS 138T – Persuasion
Anne Kretsinger-Harries
According to America’s Health Rankings of 2012, 22.4% - roughly a quarter – of the
adult population of Pennsylvania is addicted to smoking the cigarette that rests between their
index and middle fingers. They are addicted to the sight of the fumes, the smell of the toxins, and
the feeling of relaxation they believe comes with smoking. Yet this figure does not take into
account the minors who smoke tobacco. What is not surprising is that it causes problems such as
cancers, weak immune systems, health risks for unborn children, and second-hand smoke which
is just as dangerous. The government has tried to overcome this smoking problem in
Pennsylvania by implementing certain policies. These include Act 112 in 2002 by the General
Assembly, high taxes, and the banning of smoking across fourteen state college campuses. These
legislations, nonetheless, have proven to be relatively ineffective. In order to reduce the number
of heavy smokers in Pennsylvania, the government should allow only one or two designated
smoking areas per every college campus in the state. Yes, cigarette businesses will be hurt.
People will feel that their liberties are being curtailed. People will be forced to stop smoking
even though they are addicted to it. This solution, nonetheless, is practical. It would mean fewer
people would be addicted to smoking or second-hand smoke. The environment will be cleaner.
Ultimately, there will be fewer preventable deaths.
As is well known, cigarettes have many toxic ingredients. Each cigarette contains
radioactive materials and poisonous metals including cadmium, arsenic, and lead. Tar is the thick
dark material that blackens your teeth. Carbon monoxide is probably one of the most dangerous
chemicals in cigarettes. It essentially reduces the flow of oxygen to many muscles and organs
including the heart and brain. Therefore, the more one smokes, the more chance of facing the
risks that are caused by these dangerous chemicals.
The toxic materials that go into someone’s body when they smoke cause many health
issues. One example is the myriad forms of cancer one may suffer. The Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention lists some including leukemia and cancers of the stomach, lung, oral
cavity, pancreas, kidney, and bladder. Moreover, smoking reduces the effectiveness of the
immune system and it takes longer for smokers who get sick to recover from their illnesses. Gum
disease is rampant and wrinkling before old age is common. Pregnant women who smoke are
more likely to face the suffering that comes with miscarriages, stillbirths, and premature
children. There is also a greater likelihood that the child will have a low birth weight, which can
in turn affect growth and lead to many physical health issues. However, one must also remember
that smoking does not affect only smokers. Those who are prone to second-hand smoke also face
many health problems. Second-hand smoke also affects unborn children. It also causes many of
the same types of cancers as regular smoking. Furthermore, the American Cancer Society
mentions that those children who are asthmatic can incur further breathing problems.
The state of Pennsylvania has implemented certain legislation in order to reduce the
number of heavy smokers. However, these policies have proven to be ineffective. For example,
in 2002, Pennsylvania passed Act 112. It prohibited the selling or “furnishing” of tobacco
through any means to minors (those who are below eighteen years of age). Those who provide
minors with tobacco can be charged with serious fines. For instance, first time offenders have to
pay fines between one hundred and two hundred and fifty dollars. At a first glance, this policy
might seem to ensure that future generations will not be taken in by the fumes. But reality
dictates otherwise. The Pennsylvania Department of Health conducts Youth Tobacco Surveys
around every year and then issues an Executive Summary. In the Summary for the 2008/2009
school year, “when asked how long they can go before feeling the need for a cigarette, 32
percent…of middle school students who smoke and 46 percent…of high school smokers
answered “a day or less” (Penn. Dept. of Health). This is approximately six or seven years after
the enactment of Act 112. This means that there are definitely ways that minors could be
acquiring cigarettes. The first is through the sellers themselves who are breaking the law for the
purpose of gaining more revenue. Another could be that those who are eighteen or over buy
cigarettes for their family or friends who are minors. This means that minors are still able to
obtain cigarettes even though this policy was meant to prevent exactly that. This, nonetheless, is
not the only policy that has proven to be unsuccessful.
Pennsylvania’s tax laws aim at making it difficult for smokers to pay for cigarette packs.
According to the Pennsylvania Department of Revenue, “the tax rate is $1.60 per pack of 20
cigarettes ($0.08 per stick), or $16 per carton of 10 packs”. On top of that, there are additional
sales and use taxes on the purchase of cigarette packs. So for a person who consumed a pack of
cigarettes per day, it would cost quite a lot. The whole point for this tax was to make people
think twice before they bought another pack. It is what one would consider a sin tax.
One must consider if this policy actually works, especially for those who are heavy
smokers. It turns out that the answer is no. Simple economic principles indicate that tobacco or
cigarettes are what one would call inelastic goods. This means that no matter how high the prices
increase, people will keep buying cigarettes because they feel they have the need for them. This
is comparable to medicine whose demand is also inelastic. Whatever the price of the medicine, a
patient would need to buy the drugs to cure his illnesses or health issues. This indicates that
increasing the prices on taxes does not necessarily mean that people will immediately stop
buying them. Those who are full-time smokers will find it extremely hard to quit and quite often
they will be willing to pay the extra price.
Apart from the initiation of Act 112 and the implementation of cigarette taxes,
Pennsylvania has banned smoking across 14 different state campuses. It seems that this would
allow for greater smoke-free environment within the state. One extra look into the demographics,
however, can prove that this ban was definitely not enough. There are a total of 3,292 state
owned stools throughout Pennsylvania and a total of around 1,785,993 people attend these
schools. This means that there were still 3,278 schools that had not banned smoking across
college campuses. Also, because of the spontaneity of the ban, it was eventually revoked. All
fourteen colleges now allow smoking across campus (except inside buildings and living areas).
Students and faculty felt that the government should not have banned smoking without
negotiation. The ban also did not allow any designated smoking areas. Those who were addicted
to cigarettes did not have even the slightest opportunity to smoke even once during the day.