Just how much money did the CDC spend in their New Hampshire study that concluded that raising cigarette prices will curb smoking? Any first year economics student could tell you that increasing price will decrease demand. Perhaps the biggest question is what business is it of the CDC, or any governmental body for that matter, to try to control human behavior?

You can raise the price of beer, gasoline, water, electricity, cigarette, SUVs, and doritos, and you are likely to see a decrease in demand. But what right does the government have to do that? The CDC has absolutely no right to try to control human behavior.

Pleasure police argue that smoking raises health care costs, but the argument doesn't hold water. First of all, smokers already pay higher insurance premiums. Second, health insurance is not a communal expense, even though socialists would like it to be.

The recent legislative attacks on cigarettes and smokers is the start of a new temperance movement, similar to the prohibitionist movement of the early 20th century. It is nothing less than an attempt to control personal habits, and it is starting to spread into alcohol and fatty foods.

It is also a perfect example of what is wrong with a true democracy and the idea of 'majority rule'. With smoking, there are the smokers, the anti-smokers, and the non-smokers. The smokers enjoy their personal freedom to puff on their cancer sticks and get their nicotine fix. The anti-smokers think smokers are the anti-Christ. The non-smokers are people that don't smoke, and are probably apathetic about the restrictions that anti-smokers push on the rest of society.

Those that are apathetic toward smoker's rights need to be careful. Right now the smokers are outnumbered, and it won't be long before smoking is made illegal. After which, the anti-smokers will move on to another pet peeve like alcohol, fatty foods, SUVs, or who knows what.