Lawmaker to Missouri voters on cigarette tax: Drop dead
Yael T. AbouhalkahTim Jones is the new speaker of the Missouri House. The St. Louis area Republican apparently is full of the notion that he and his fellow GOP House members can spend hundreds of millions in potential new cigarette tax revenues any darn way they want.
Jones told The Star’s editorial board Monday that the wishes of elected officials are always going to be more important than what the voters decide through approved initiatives.
It’s the kind of arrogance that Missourians are used to seeing with their often inept General Assembly, including when lawmakers overturned some tough voter-approved protections in a puppy mill law a few years back.
In this case, though, Jones’ arrogance requires a firm, full-court push back from supporters of the cigarette tax, which is on the ballot next Tuesday.
Simply put, if Missouri voters approve boosting the nation’s lowest tax from 17 cents a pack to 90 cents a pack, all of the K-12 education officials, all of the university leaders and all of the health-related officials supporting the tax better be on guard.
They will have to make sure their local state legislators don’t monkey around with the cigarette tax money and divert it to pet projects that have nothing to do with how those funds are supposed to be spent.
Remember, the groups pushing this tax have a lot at stake - and have spent plenty to get this far.
As The Star reported today, “The anti-smoking group, Missourians for Health and Education, had raised about $4.8 million as of last week. A little less than a third of that, about $1.4 million, has come from the Health Care Foundation of Greater Kansas City.”
That’s a lot of money to put behind this important cause. And it’s a lot of money that better not go down the drain because the legislature tries to use the funds for other uses.
Make no mistake: As The Star editorial points out, there are a number of safeguards in place meant to protect the will of the people when it comes to using the cigarette tax.
However, since Jones appears ready to go on a power trip with the funds, it would behoove the education officials to be on their toes.
The most important first step is to get the tax approved on Nov. 6.
Stephen Platt
6 months, 3 weeks agoThe pay out for the anti smoking group is bigger than the 4.8 million they invested. 20% of the tax collected goes to the Missouri Healthy Families Trust Fund run by 9 board members appointed by the Governor. This is potentially $80 million dollars a year into a fund whose purpose is laid out in the CDC best practices and guidelines for tobacco control programs. This was a ballot initiative so do not ignore there is a vested interest here.
The 80% going to school - the Missouri Constitution only requires that 25% of the State’s revenue go for education. The unrestricted funds can be spent elsewhere, something we have already seen with restricted lottery proceeds freeing up general funds to be allocated elsewhere.
I truly believe the cigarette tax should be increased, however, the legislature should be doing this job and not the public at large. It is a steep increase without an offset and is regressive. Lastly, I am opposed to having the lottery and cigarette taxes pay for education when income taxation is the result from an educated electorate.
Steve Alleman
Kansas City
6 months, 3 weeks agoStephen Platt: “I truly believe the cigarette tax should be increased, however, the legislature should be doing this job and not the public at large.”
If legislators had done their job on this issue, there would have been no need to resort to the initiative process. That process clearly needs to be reformed, since it is apparently not binding.
Stephen Platt
6 months, 3 weeks agoMr. Alleman, I do not disagree. I suggest if the legislator and the Governor has made cigarette tax, and gasoline tax an agenda item it would have been done without spending 5 million dollars topass legislation. If the electorate does not like the result of the legislation let’s vote them out.
My premise though is that 20% of this tax would not have been skimmed off for Missouri Healthy Families Trust had the elected officials written the legislation.
Doug McKay
6 months, 3 weeks agoThis article, is exactly why I can never (NEVER) advocate for any tax that is presented with a, “do it for the children.” plea. Plain and simple, we have passed gambling, “for the kids”, a lottery, “for the kids” and now we want to put a t ax on a certain group of people related to a behavior, “for the kids” This is not “for the kids” and stop pretending!!! We have said no twice before, because guess what, it is everyones responsibility to maintain and educated public. Not just those who gamble, play the lottery, or smoke. This is some of the biggest smoke and mirrors I’ve seen since David Copperfield. Do yo want to know what I would support? How about a cigarette taxes who revenue went to alleviate the cost of healthcare for those on medicare suffering from smoke related diseases. I could support that kind of cause and effect thinking and taxation. This, ridiculous. NO on Prop 6.!!!!!