A report by the national Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) says California isn't using tobacco money for smoking prevention programs, thus stiring up the debate over a ballott vote next week on an increase of cigarette taxes.
Between 1998 and 2010, just 6 per cent of the money collected from a massive lawsuit settlement and from cigarette taxes went to tobacco interdiction and education programs, the CDC reported last week, far below federal spending guidelines for effectively curbing tobacco use.
The report has provided fuel for both sides of the debate over Proposition 29, a 5 June ballot measure over the California Cancer Research Act, which would increase California's cigarette tax by USD 1.00 (EUR 0.80) per pack to USD 1.87.
This would raise the price of a pack of cigarettes to USD 7.50 on average. An equivalent tax increase would be applied to other tobacco products such as chewing tobacco or cigars.
Revenue generated from the tax increase, estimated to be USD 735 million annually, would be used to pay for cancer research, smoking cessation programs and tobacco law enforcement. The funds would go to Cancer Research Citizen’s Oversight Committee that would be appointed by the governor to administer the funds.
Opponents say the tax is unfair, the money generated will not be used in California and it unfairly targets smokers. Further, the measure would create a huge new bureaucracy. That echoes claims of wasteful government spending which helped defeat a 2006 statewide measure that urged a USD 2.60 tax on packs of cigarettes.
Major medical groups support the measure. The top of the donor list for Prop. 29 include the American Cancer Foundation (USD 7.4 million), the Lance Armstrong Foundation (USD 1.5 million), the American Heart Association (USD 546,000), and billionaire New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg (USD 500,000), according to the SF Weekly.
Opponents include Altria/Philip Morris (USD 24 million), R.J. Reynolds (USD 11 million), Smokeless Tobacco (USD 2.6 million), Reynolds-division American Snuff Company (USD 1.75 million), Reynolds-division Santa Fe Natural Tobacco Company (USD 1.1 million), and the California Republican Party (USD 1.1 million).
The ballot measure in California is of national importance because other U.S. states often follow its lead in confronting problems in public health, the environment and other areas of public policy.
California's experience reflects a national trend that shows states and local governments have used tobacco-related revenues for just about everything but curbing tobacco use. In the 13 years that ended in 2010, states collected nearly USD 244 billion in cigarette taxes and settlement cash and appropriated just USD 8 billion for tobacco control programs, less than one-third the USD 29 billion the CDC says should have been spent. (pi)