Unclear
policy produces amendment's refusal
Sean Comstock, posted Nov. 17, 2006
On
Election Day, Missouri voters dismissed Amendment 3 which
would have increased the cost of tobacco products. Amendment
3 was dismissed with a 51.5 percent majority. While Boone
County responded with a 53 percent vote in favor of the tax,
along with majorities in Kansas City and St. Louis, the endeavor
fell short in rural counties as reported in the final polls
of the Smart Decision 2006 election guide.
Amendment 3 proposed the highest tax increase in the state’s
history with a 470 percent increase on cigarettes, raising
the current tax of 17 cents to 97 cents per pack. This generated
speculation towards the dramatic tax increase and the efficiency
in which the funds would be used. “We were told the
lottery money was going to be protected too. Look what happened
to that,” said MU Sophomore Jordan Jameson.
Missourians Against Tax Abuse is a self described, “state-wide
coalition of citizens, elected officials, businesses and organizations
who oppose rewriting the State Constitution to increase taxes.”
MATA suggests that the tax is unfair to those of lesser incomes
and the money needed to finance the health programs severely
exceeds the funds that will be raised, according to a fiscal
impact study performed by MU Professor Joseph H. Haslag.
Supporters of the initiative maintain that the funds raised
from the tax would be protected by law in that the amendment
will be written into Missouri’s Constitution. Money
raised was designated in large part to fund supplemental payments
for medical programs and a small portion of the money would
finance smoking cessation programs. “It would make smokers
pay their fair share,” said MU Sophomore Alison Baurlich.
Smoke-free Air for Everyone is an organization that seeks
to inform people of the hazards of smoking and the dangers
of second-hand smoke. “Amendment 3 wasn’t a moral
issue, it was a health issue,” said SAFE organizer Dean
Andersen. SAFE also coupled with Peers Against Second-Hand
Smoke, forging anti-smoking campaigns on campus. MU’s
PASS program recently won a national award commemorating their
excellence as a student-lead organization.
Voters’ assessment of the amendment was not limited
to a position on smoking alone. The pro-life organization
Missouri Right to Life urged voters to reject the proposal
with concerns of funding from the tax supporting abortions.
The amendment cites that a percentage of the tax will go to,
“medically necessary health care services for individuals
with incomes that are 200 percent or less of the federal poverty
guidelines.” This would include Planned Parenthood as
a possible recipient of tax funds.
The 2006 November election saw record numbers in campaign
funding. In California, the nation’s second leading
tobacco agency, Reynolds American Inc. along with Phillip
Morris U.S.A. contributed over $50 million in an attempt to
wipe out the proposed tobacco tax increase. An additional
$40 million was supplied to prevent further campaigns across
the country. Tobacco tax increases were also on ballots in
Ariz., Nev., Ohio and S.D. The previous proposition for a
tobacco tax for Missouri in 2002 saw a mere $10 thousand opposition.
