Email
Password
(Forgot Password?)
Supporters of a measure that would more than quadruple Missouri's cigarette tax filed a lawsuit Monday challenging a decision by Secretary of State Matt Blunt to keep the issue off the November ballot.
Citizens for a Healthy Missouri, which filed the lawsuit in Cole County Circuit Court, alleges Blunt's office provided outdated and mislabeled copies of the state's centralized voter registration database, which the group used to verify the signatures it collected.
"The secretary of state's office is the only official source of statewide voter registration information. They are required by statute to keep it accurate and up-to-date. Therefore, we rightly believed we were working with reliable information," said Brad Ketcher, a spokesman for the group. "It would be wrong to keep this proposal from the ballot because of their error."
Ketcher said it didn't appear anything intentional was done by Blunt to mislead the group, which describes itself as a broad-based coalition made up of health professionals, public health advocates, business organizations and others.
Jump to full article »
California is set to shut off nearly $61 million in funding for state tobacco prevention and education programs as a way for Gov. Gray Davis to balance the state's projected $24 billion deficit next year...
Heath officials said available funding would be redirected to "projects addressing 18-24-year-olds" because it has the "highest smoking prevalence" of any age group. The department also has elected to cut funding to advanced youth tobacco control projects and funding for projects aimed at curtailing smoking in the entertainment industry...
Ken August, a spokesman for the Department of Health's Tobacco Control Section, said no Prop. 99 money "will be redirected" to other agencies. Rather, he said the state had a "surplus" of unspent Prop. 99 money that would be utilized to offset Davis' proposed budget cuts. And, he said, Davis' proposal included a new 50-cents-per-pack tax hike on each pack of cigarettes. . .
Heath officials said available funding would be redirected to "projects addressing 18-24-year-olds" because it has the "highest smoking prevalence" of any age group. The department also has elected to cut funding to advanced youth tobacco control projects and funding for projects aimed at curtailing smoking in the entertainment industry.
Officials decided to leave funding intact for law-enforcement control projects, however, as well as all three "Tobacco Control Through the Arts" pilot programs.
This newspaper reported the other day that a corporate- funded group called Citizens for a Sound Economy is running ads against the McGreevey administration's plan to raise taxes on cigarettes.
Many conservatives oppose this tax hike. Not me. I think the cigarette tax is the very best kind of tax -- the kind that doesn't affect me. Since I am not stupid, I don't smoke. Therefore I don't have to pay this tax. The tax burden is picked up by other people, those more inclined to indulge in unintelligent behavior. . . Smokers may not be stupid, but their behavior is. And what could be better than a tax that targets stupid behavior? If the person affected by the tax prefers to start acting intelligently, then he pays not a cent. On the other hand, if he wishes to keep acting stupidly, the tax burden is reduced proportionately for the rest of us.
The very name of the group pushing the ad campaign, Citizens for a Sound Economy, shows how transparently bogus its claims are. The implication is that New Jersey's economy would become unsound if smoking rates dropped. Actually, we already have one of the lowest rates of cigarette use in the nation. We also have the highest household income. So any link seems tenuous.
The state that would suffer if New Jerseyans stopped smoking is North Carolina, which produces the tobacco . .
Yet many Republicans in the Legislature are opposing this tax hike. Some echo the claim in those ads. They say they oppose the tax hike not because of their concern for the rich tobacco companies that give them campaign contributions but for the poor, hard-working smokers who don't. Some can even say this without laughing. That's the mark of a real pro.
Even if that concern were real, however, it is nonsensical. The poor and working class are already largely exempted from the income tax, both state and federal. The theory is that they need all of their income to pay for necessities such as food and shelter. These necessities are not taxed, which is good public policy. But if instead of buying necessities, these people prefer to buy cigarettes, the intelligent thing to do is to tax the hell out of them. The more they pay, the less will have to be paid by traditional Republican constituencies such as rich people and business owners.
In a column on May 18, Michelle Malkin wrote that the villains creating the opportunity for cigarette smuggling are the states with the highest tax on tobacco. She postulates it is only the high tax that permits this activity, the profits of which have allegedly been diverted to the terrorist group, Hezbollah. The real reason for smuggling is the huge difference in price between the states with the high tax, including New York ($1.50), Connecticut ($1.11) and Michigan ($.75) and those with the lowest, Virginia ($.025), Kentucky ($.03) and North Carolina ($.05). To proclaim the states with the lower taxes are innocent and those with the higher taxes are guilty represents the crassest form of bias. The average tax for all states is 48 cents. . .
All but two states mandate each pack of cigarettes have a tax stamp on it. This was true in North Carolina until the legislature repealed the stamp in 1994. Reinstating the tax stamp would help stymie smuggling.
Well, now it's the finger-wagging government's turn to 'fess up to its own indirect role in funding terrorism through sky-high cigarette taxes. Let me explain.
Next week, the alleged ringleader of an organized-crime cell based in Charlotte, N.C., will go on trial for providing cash and military-style technology to Hezbollah. . .
If not for taxaholic bureaucrats, this suspected terrorist operation wouldn't have gotten off the ground. States addicted to nicotine-stained revenue are all too happy to participate in the sanctimonious charade of condemning the vice while pocketing a chunk of the profits. But those who advocate punitive tobacco taxes to reduce smoking and "protect kids" continue to ignore the connection between sin taxes and illegal sales. Every state along the East Coast that has slapped astronomical and regressive taxes on tobacco has been invaded by increasingly savvy and organized smugglers.
It's the same story in Canada and Sweden . . .
The feds have used taxpayer funds to draw a tenuous link between drug abuse and terrorism. But the link between high tobacco taxes and terrorist funding is far stronger. Sure, greedy state and federal lawmakers didn't directly fund Hezbollah terrorist killers.
As "Timmy" put it so well, they "just kind of helped."
I have a beef with King Ralph and his cohorts regarding their recent increase in tobacco taxes. Manufactured cigarettes or "tailor-mades" have increased by 35 per cent, which I suppose is reasonable.
On the other hand, I am a senior and roll my own cigarettes. The cost of 50 grams of tobacco went from $7.27 to $14.33 which is almost 100 per cent. This has got to be a real travesty. Some people pay 35 per cent extra and we pay 100 per cent more.
It's too bad the state Department of Human Services didn't release its latest report on smoking a few weeks earlier, while the Legislature was still meeting in a special session. The report makes it clear that Oregon voters made a good choice when they raised cigarette taxes in 1996 - a finding that might have stiffened legislators' spines when they confronted the same choice this year.
Measure 44, approved by a healthy margin in 1996, added 30 cents per pack to the state tax on cigarettes, initially bringing in about $85 million a year in revenue. . .
The results have been dramatic. Since 1996, cigarette consumption has fallen 29 percent in Oregon, more than twice the nationwide rate of decline. The percentage of eighth-graders who smoke is down 44 percent . .
The revenue generated by a cigarette tax increase should be regarded as a temporary gain that is incidental to the substantial public health benefits. Under the current circumstances, that revenue gain, though temporary, would have provided more lasting support to state government than will come from several of the one-time raids and borrowings supported by the Legislature.
Measure 44 has had even better effects than its supporters hoped. The Legislature had a chance to follow that success with another. The latest report on smoking in Oregon should persuade lawmakers to reconsider, or at least allow Oregon voters to decide the issue.
Today ASH received a damaging internal tobacco industry document revealing a covert strategy to undermine the Alberta government's proposed tobacco control program.
The name "Jock" appears at the bottom of the document. Jock Osler of Osler Communications in Calgary is believed to be the tobacco industry's primary lobbyist in Alberta. Osler is well known in political circles in Alberta and he is regarded as a veteran Tory organizer. Osler is also the chairman of the Alberta Foundation for the Arts-an Alberta government foundation.
The document describes an underhanded campaign to fight the proposed strategy, stating, "The apprehension on the part of at least some MLAs suggests that a grassroots lobbying campaign should be mounted and executed immediatel (sic) to capitalize on that apprehension". The document then suggests "The retailers (not the manufacturers) should now lead the charge individually with their MLAs and collectively with the health minister, the premier and others".
The author of the document also reveals his involvement with the lobbying campaign by stating "The Alberta Committee for Responsible Tobacco Retailing, an ad hoc group representing manufacturers, distributors and retailers to which I give guidance is probably going to meet late next week in Calgary. The retailers will be encouraged to lead the charge." . .
"This incredibly damning document reveals the disturbing lengths to which the tobacco industry will go to undermine public health in Alberta", said Les Hagen, executive director. "The tobacco companies know that they have very little credibility and that's why they are using retailers to do their dirty work for them", he added. "MLAs who are getting lobbied by tobacco retailers should know who is really behind the initiative".
The document also reveals the author's concern over the strategies proposed by an interdepartmental committee lead by AADAC, including initiatives to reduce tobacco use among youth. The author lists several "unsettling highlights" in the AADAC report, including recommendations to "Prohibit youth under 18 from using, possessing or selling tobacco" and to "Prohibit... starter products".
"This document confirms the tobacco industry's interest in preserving the youth market despite vigorous public denials", Hagen stated. . .
"We urge the Alberta government to reject these sleazy and underhanded tactics by approving the proposed tobacco reduction strategy in its entirety" Hagen declared.
Philip Morris U.S.A. voiced its strong opposition to Mayor Bloomberg's proposal to increase consumer taxes on cigarettes by more than 1700 percent.
The Company said the tax increase could hurt New York City by driving shoppers and retail jobs outside city borders.
A tax is a tax
The Mayor has promised not to raise taxes, stating "I can pledge that we will not raise taxes. I think it's exactly the wrong signal to send in a period when you're trying to encourage economic activity. If you want to destroy this city, raise taxes and people will leave, jobs will leave and your total revenue will go down."
"The same logic that the mayor has used to hold all other taxes steady applies to the proposed cigarette tax increase and its impact on shoppers and retail jobs," said Michael Pfeil, Vice President, Communications and Public Affairs, Philip Morris U.S.A. "Increasing taxes on cigarettes will drive adult smokers and retail jobs to lower tax areas."
"The result of this dramatic tax increase will be to encourage commuters to purchase their cigarettes closer to home, to drive New York City residents to cross city lines, turn to the internet and Native American reservations to find lower cost alternatives to these outrageous tax rates," said Pfeil. "Among the hardest hit will be New York City store owners who will lose sales and may be forced to layoff their employees or relocate their businesses to more consumer friendly locations outside of the city." . .
Philip Morris U.S.A. shares the Mayor's desire to reduce youth smoking and is committed to playing an active role in helping to make progress on this issue. The company believes that there are a number of ways to reduce the incidence of youth smoking without creating unintended adverse financial consequences for adult smokers and small business owners. The company has been actively encouraging state and local elected officials to consider spending a significant portion of tobacco settlement funds on programs that can reduce and prevent youth smoking. New York State has budgeted millions of dollars to fund anti-smoking efforts while the city has recently cut its funding for such programs.
NEW YORK, Feb 13 (Reuters) - New York City's Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who ran for office on an anti-tax stance, on Thursday proposed raising the 8-cents-a-pack cigarette tax to $1.50 as part of a $41.3 billion budget plan he recommended that must close the staggering shortfall of $4.8 billion he inherited from his predecessor, Mayor Rudolph Giuliani.
While this tax hike -- which would increase the cost of cigarette pack to about $7 -- would give the city an extra $250 million of revenues, that is not its driving purpose, the new mayor told City Hall reporters.
Instead, the media mogul turned politician said the aim was to save children's lives.
``Smoking cessation programs are a little bit successful ... all public health officials tell you they are not as effective as raising taxes,'' said Bloomberg, the founder of Bloomberg LP, a privately held financial information services company.
Prudential Securities tobacco analyst Rob Campagnino said smokers will be driven to smuggle cigarettes or buy them over the Internet.
``Every single New York City resident lives about 10 minutes from another lower tax region,'' Campagnino said.
New York City's hometown tobacco company, Philip Morris Cos. Inc., urged Bloomberg to stand by a campaign promise not to increase taxes.
European Union governments are set to agree to plans which will make Italy, Spain, Greece, Portugal and Luxembourg raise taxes on cigarettes in a bid to cut smuggling and discourage smoking, the European Commission said.
Current rules set excise duty at a minimum of 57 percent of the retail price in the most popular price category in each country and allow wide variation in price. The new law would set an additional minimum tax of 60 euros ($52.71) for every 1,000 cigarettes from July this year.
``Present differences in excise rates for tobacco products between member states disrupt the smooth functioning of the internal market,'' the commission said in a statement. Finance ministers meeting tomorrow will adopt the plan ``without discussion'' the 15-nation EU's executive arm said.
European Union lawmakers urged governments to water down plans which would make Italy, Spain, Greece, Portugal and Luxembourg raise taxes on cigarettes.
The European Parliament voted 325 to 151 with 50 abstentions to call on the 15 EU governments to lower the minimum excise duties on tobacco agreed in November. Finance ministers may take the parliament's opinion into account when they try to reach a final agreement next week, a parliament spokesman said.
Cigarette taxes in Europe ``are extremely high, accounting for 70 to 80 percent of their price,'' said Giorgos Katiforis, a Greek member of the parliament who led the debate. He argued that the higher taxes would hurt small companies in countries with low fixed tobacco taxes, cause prices to increase fourfold in countries soon to join the EU and fail to eliminate smuggling.
A presidential commission that recommended a 17-cent tax increase on cigarettes may be close to abandoning the idea in light of strong opposition from the public, the White House and Congress.
Tobacco growers and public health officials who served on the panel have begun looking for other ways to pay for one of its chief recommendations - a buyout program for farmers who no longer want to grow the crop.
The panel recommended in a report last May that the buyout be funded with a 17-cent increase in the federal excise tax on cigarettes. The tax is now 34 cents on every pack.
But with anti-tax sentiment strong in Washington and President Bush vowing that a tax increase will happen ''over my dead body,'' some key commission members who once advocated a tax hike now admit they must find another way to pay for a buyout.
''I think an excise tax increase is out of the question,'' said Rod Kuegel, co-chairman of the commission.
Farmers believe the time has come to abandon the idea of a tax increase, but public health advocates are reluctant to write off the proposal until finding another funding source.
Facing an enormous revenue shortfall in next year's budget, Gov. George E. Pataki is considering raising the state's tax on cigarettes to $1.50 a pack, which would be the highest tobacco tax in the nation, several lobbyists speaking on the condition of anonymity say.
Asked about the proposal during a walking tour of downtown Troy today, the governor neither denied that the tax increase was an idea being batted about in his budget office nor directly acknowledged that he was considering it.
"No decision has been made at this point," the governor said of the tobacco tax.
No one knows precisely how much tax revenue the state government will lose as a direct result of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center. Mr. Pataki has estimated the drop-off could be $1.6 billion to $3 billion in this fiscal year, which ends on April 1, and $6 billion in the next.
Smokers across New York, already the highest taxed in the nation, soon could be paying another 39 cents per pack to light up.
The Pataki administration, desperate for cash for the upcoming 2002 state budget, is eyeing a sharp hike in cigarette taxes that would require smokers to pay $1.50 in taxes for every pack - boosting the cost of brand-name cigarettes to more than $5 per pack in some places, according to sources.
A tax hike from the current $1.11 per pack to $1.50 would keep New York's cigarette taxes the highest in the nation. . .
With the governor set to release his budget plans this month and possibly as soon as next week, more than a month early, his fiscal advisers are pushing the cigarette tax increase to help close a budget hole of as much as $9 billion - a direct hit from the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, according to lobbyists and others aware of the plan.
A cigarette tax hike will lead to further complaints by the tobacco and retail industries, which have long tried to convince tax regulators that higher taxes push smokers to purchase their cigarettes from bootleggers, Internet sites and Indian reservations.
Health groups, however, say higher taxes push more people - especially teenagers - to quit smoking.
The Pataki administration Monday did not rule out a cigarette tax hike.