See, this is why I have trouble taking conservatives seriously when they talk about cutting the deficit or finding ways to pay for essential spending programs. Tanning salons are shrieking over what the Washington Post calls an “overlooked” provision in the health care reform bill that charges those salons a 10% surtax on the use of ultraviolet indoor tanning beds:
One of the less-publicized measures in the new health-care law, the tax imposes a 10 percent surcharge on the use of ultraviolet indoor tanning beds.
Supporters — including the Obama administration, congressional Democrats and dermatologists — have argued that the tax will raise an estimated $2.7 billion toward the cost of expanding health coverage to the uninsured, while discouraging a practice that increases the risk of skin cancer by as much as threefold in frequent users, according to scientific research.
But outraged owners of tanning salons worry that the levy could deal a death blow to an industry already reeling from the recession.
“In 26 years of business, this is the worst I’ve seen it,” said Scott Shortnacy, owner of the Arlington Solar Planet as well as six other branches in the Washington area. “Normally for people who tan, it’s a part of their lifestyle. They keep doing it even in a recession. But everybody has been looking for ways to cut back on those areas. . . . Our sales are down 20 to 30 percent.”
So an industry that caters to rich people is hurting because even rich people have been affected by the recession.
But this story is not why I have trouble taking conservatives seriously on debt reduction or spending cuts. It’s the way some on the right have reacted to it. Here is William Teach at Right Wing News with a post titled, “ObamaCare Tanning Tax: Why Do Democrats Hate Women?” (That’s the women who work in tanning salons, in case you’re having trouble figuring that one out.)
Look. If you’re to say the government should practice fiscal responsibility and offset even emergency spending with cuts or revenue-raising elsewhere, then you can’t be slamming the government for raising money to pay for an essential public good — reducing the number of Americans who do not have health care coverage — by taxing a luxury lifestyle service that is not only non-essential, but health-endangering as well. At least, not if you want your “fiscal conservatism” to be taken seriously.
PAST CONTRIBUTOR.