Claiming that, because of smoking bans, "[s]mokers are now the political minority, much like homosexuals have been treated as the political minority" on the January 19 broadcast of Newsradio 850 KOA's The Mike Rosen Show, Independence Institute president and guest host Jon Caldara told a caller that “we should not be banning smoking, we should be encouraging smoking because smoking saves tax dollars because it gets stupid people to die sooner.” In fact, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has estimated the societal costs of smoking at more than $167 billion annually, a significant portion of which is the result of increased medical care costs.

As Caldara correctly pointed out, smoking is blamed for a considerable number of premature deaths in the U.S. -- approximately 438,000 each year, according to the CDC's July 1, 2005, "Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report." But the CDC's findings directly contradict Caldara's assertion that taxpayers would be “saving [more] money than if they [smokers] stayed alive longer.” On the contrary, in 2002, a CDC study examining the costs of smoking for the years 1996-1999 found that "[t]he consequence of smoking a pack of cigarettes is estimated to cost the nation $7.18 per pack in medical care and lost productivity." A press release accompanying the subsequent 2005 report noted that "[s]moking cost the nation about $92 billion in the form of lost productivity in 1997-2001, up about $10 billion from the annual mortality related productivity losses for the years 1995-1999." The report further estimated smoking-related health care costs to be $75.5 billion in 1998, thus totaling more than $167 billion annually.

Caldara's remark also discounts the economic impact of second-hand smoke. A 2006 report from the U.S. Surgeon General's office concluded that second-hand smoke “is harmful and hazardous to the health of the general public and particularly dangerous to children. It increases the risk of serious respiratory problems in children, such as a greater number and severity of asthma attacks and lower respiratory tract infections, and increases the risk for middle ear infections.” The same report also addressed the economic benefits of promoting smoke-free environments. Citing a 2004 study, the report noted that “a simulation model projected that implementation of smoke-free policies in all U.S. workplaces would result in ... $49 million in direct medical cost savings being realized, all within the first year.”

From the January 19 broadcast of Newsradio 850 KOA's The Mike Rosen Show, with guest host Jon Caldara:

CALDARA: Smokers are now the political minority, much like homosexuals have been treated as the political minority. It's interesting that political -- or homosexuals have so much acceptance now in their lifestyles to the point where we're talking about civil unions and gay marriage as real possibilities. At the same time, we've turned around to smokers and their lifestyle decisions and we say, “Uh, we're not going to let you do that.”

[...]

CALLER: I am opposed of -- going back to the smoking ban -- I'm opposed to the ban. But the thing that gets me is when the personal freedom starts to infringe on other people. You keep bringing up the minority and the majority thing. Well, I think the minority is affecting the majority in the bigger picture that I don't -- that hasn't been brought up this morning that I've heard, and that is our taxes. The taxpayers that are going to pay for these smokers who go for lung cancer -- they go to the hospital for whatever reason -- it's infringing on my rights and on my personal --

CALDARA: Terrific. [Caller], allow me to address that. We've heard, we've heard three arguments now, and you've now hit the third argument when it comes to smoking bans -- or different levels of nannyism. One, of course, was we need to save the stupid from themselves -- and then that gets shot down pretty quickly as being intolerant. Number two, we say well, we need to save the workers from unsafe work conditions -- and then that gets shot down because of that nasty little 13th Amendment and freedom of choice to work where you wish and freedom to leave and the whole market place there. And then the final line of defense for nannyists is the social cost argument. And the social cost argument goes like this: Well, if you do damaging things to yourself, then society will have to pick up the tab. And when society picks up the tab, it gives them the authority to ban that behavior. There's two ways of looking at it. One: If that's the case -- and we're only looking about this on how it affects governments' bottom line for health care -- we should not be banning smoking, we should be encouraging smoking because smoking saves tax dollars because it gets stupid people to die sooner. And when stupid people die sooner, they save not only Social Security money --

CALLER: Yeah, but I'm paying, I'm paying for them to die sooner.

CALDARA: Yes, and therefore you'll be saving money than if they stayed alive longer.