Public shouldn’t have to pay for cigarettes and health problems they causeWith all the unlimited information available to the general public about how to live healthy, ignorance is no excuse for unhealthy lifestyles.Good health for many people is a matter of choice. It’s about a reasonably balanced diet (a little green on the plate), a regular exercise schedule (even if it’s just an evening walk) and, obviously, choosing NOT TO SMOKE.The correlation between these simple choices and better health is so clear that we’re seeing financial rewards for good choices and penalties for poor ones.Insurance companies, for example, are rewarding their members who participate in fitness programs. A fitness contract, in fact, can translate directly to cash discounts on premiums. Along those same lines, Minnesota legislators are considering penalizing smokers on public health and welfare programs.Rep. Marty Seifert (R-Marshall), is proposing the "new social contract," questioning how a pack-a-day smoker who spends at least $1,200 per year on the bad habit can expect taxpayer subsidies."This adds to health care costs while also costing taxpayers money to subsidize," Seifert said in a news release e-mailed last week. "It makes no sense to give out health and welfare subsidizes if the payments go to smoking, and thus, the detriment of people’s health and welfare."He estimates 20 to 40 percent of public welfare recipients may be tobacco users, despite reporting they have little money in the household.Seifert’s plan would include help with enrolling in smoking cessation programs and periodic testing for compliance.He said he’s also considering making other tax-subsidized people (students who get free state grants, for example) equally accountable."The bottom line is that this is the taxpayers’ money," he said. "My people work too hard to see their money squandered on bad habits that contribute more costs to the health care system."Seifert plans to introduce the legislation during this session in the Minnesota House of Representatives.On behalf of the taxpaying public, good luck!Good health should be reason enough for healthy choices, but for those receiving public assistance, there may be new incentives for sticking with those New Year’s resolutions.Now, if we could just figure out how to curtail steady diets of Big Macs, alcohol and gambling …
