Area 417: Missouri Amendment 3 Archives

John Kennebec of Camdenton wrote this wry letter to STLtoday.com concerning the the tobacco tax amendment:

The tax envisioned in Amendment 3 is wonderful. This remarkably forward-looking tax is all that a truly progressive tax measure should be. Since it is primarily a tax on the poor, who smoke in far larger numbers than those who are better educated and compensated, it provides a number of advantages that largely have gone unmentioned:

— The poor are unlikely to raise any meaningful complaint about being disproportionately taxed.

— It gives the elite, educated, wealthy and politically correct an opportunity to control the behavior of their fellow citizens.

— Instead of addressing the health concerns of smokers, the tax can replace health care money, which will be directed into the general fund to avoid increasing the taxes of the elite, in the exemplary manner of state lottery moneys.

All in all, a perfect tax.

Proponents of the huge, CONSTITUTIONALLY MANDATED tax hike think that one good reason to raise the tax is because our's is the second-lowest rate in the nation. Reminds me of the sort of reasoning your average 5 year-old child would come up with.

The increase, at 97 cents per pack, would have a person with a pack-a-day habit spending just under $355/year more and would hit lower income families (who seem to have a higher percentage of smokers) hard. Looks like the extra tax will take a big bite out of the minimum wage increase, should it pass.

And do we really trust them to spend the money like they say they will? This money is supposed to be spent treating "individuals with medical conditions associated with tobacco use or secondhand smoke" (which could mean almost anything) and only 17.5% of the money would go to treatment and cessation programs.

The Kansas City Star has this to say:

About 53 percent of the new revenue from higher cigarette and other tobacco taxes would be directed to the doctors, hospitals and others who see Medicaid patients and those without insurance.

...Under the proposed amendment to the Missouri Constitution, 29 percent of the new tobacco tax revenue would go toward expanding health care benefits for the poor.

So first we'll tax poor people more for their cigarettes, then we'll use the money to provide health care for them.

The Star goes on:

Missouri has received more than $1 billion through the national settlement with big tobacco companies but has spent very little on anti-tobacco efforts. Most the money was used to shore up the state budget in lean years.

Representative Mark Wright isn't a fan:

...We as a state cannot afford Amendment 3. Amendment 3 is a constitutional amendment. If passed, it creates huge funding deficits because it mandates that the state of Missouri must make payments for services regardless of how much money is generated. And because it amends the states constitution, our legislators and governor are hapless [sic] to take corrective actions.
I am asking you to join with me, the Governor, the Speaker of the House, the Minority Leader of the House and even the Attorney General against this measure.

You might be surprised to learn that even Missouri Right To Life is against Amendment 3:

For pro-life reasons, social justice, and moral common sense, the tobacco tax initiative should be defeated.

The proposed constitutional amendment to tax tobacco products in order to raise money for health care poses significant problems for pro-life citizens. The most serious is that the initiative fails to contain any language preventing the money from being used for abortion and abortion referrals.

Don't be fooled by all the hype. VOTE NO ON AMENDMENT 3.

Blogging Links