Mike Ferguson Online
Mike Ferguson Online--Logo Mike Ferguson Online
Mike Ferguson Online

You are reading an ARCHIVED ARTICLE.  Wednesday 08th of September 2010 7:42:04 pm



Publication date: October 14 2006


Publisher’s note: I had hoped to publish an interview with Senator Jim Talent in this edition, which would complete the series of features on Missouri’s established-party candidates for that office

Publisher’s note: I had hoped to publish an interview with Senator Jim Talent in this edition, which would complete the series of features on Missouri’s established-party candidates for that office. Unfortunately, despite numerous requests and communications over the course of several weeks, Sen. Talent’s campaign has refused to participate in an interview with this website. I encourage voters to visit the "Past Articles" page and view the interviews with the other candidates in the race for U.S. Senate, Democrat Claire McCaskill (www.claireonline.com) and Libertarian Frank Gilmour (http://gilmour2006.lpmo.org).

MPCA’s Ron Leone Discusses Missouri’s Amendment 3

Missouri voters will consider several ballot measures along with the candidates for office on November 7th. Among those measures is Constitutional Amendment 3, which would levy an 80-cents per pack tax on cigarettes (in addition to the current 17-cent per pack tax) as well as additional taxes on other tobacco products. The money would be directed to a "Healthy Future Trust Fund" to fund various health-related programs. You can read the text of Amendment 3 by visiting the Missouri Secretary of State’s office through this link: http://www.sos.mo.gov/elections/2006petitions/ip200623.asp?pid=25

Among the opponents of Amendment 3 is the Missouri Petroleum Marketers and Convenience Store Association. MPCA’s Executive Director, Ron Leone, addressed some questions about Amendment 3 and why his organization is opposing the measure.

To learn more about MPCA, visit http://www.mpca.org

1) Amendment 3 would levy higher taxes on tobacco products. Supporters of the plan point out that those who don't use tobacco, you don't pay the taxes. Why should non-smokers be concerned with this proposed tax increase and vote "no"?

Leone: "This is the most deceptive, the most misleading portion of the proponents campaign and it is why the proponents are seeking a Constitutional Amendment, which can not be modified by your duly elected officials in the Missouri Legislature, and not simply a statutory change which can be modified by the Missouri Legislature.

"Amendment 3 is attempting to place into the Missouri Constitution, right along side our sacred rights to free speech, trial by jury, and a free public education, a fundamental and Constitutional right to healthcare for all citizens at or below 200% of the poverty level.

"MPCA and the other Amendment 3 opponents strongly believe that if Amendment 3 is passed an activist judge, most likely an activist federal judge, will rule that Amendment 3 creates a Constitutional and fundamental right to healthcare that the State of Missouri must fully fund for all eligible citizens.

"That unfunded Constitutional mandate for all eligible citizens at or below 200% of the poverty level will cost the State and all taxpayers between $800 million and $1.7 billion per year in massive new tax increases or massive program cuts."

2) Amendment 3 calls for the money raised by the tax increase to fund health care and smoking prevention programs. Proponents say this is fair because tobacco use increases the cost of health care. How do you respond?

Leone: "No matter what the proponents say, Amendment 3 is not about smoking or the dangers of tobacco. Amendment 3 is about the greed of ‘Corporate Health Care’ - hospitals, HMOs and drug companies - and the government wasting even more of our tax dollars. All you have to do is follow the money.

"More than 4 out of 5 dollars - 82.5% - of Amendment 3’s outrageous 470% tobacco tax increase is not required to be spent on tobacco related diseases or tobacco cessation programs.

"Shouldn’t a so-called ‘sin tax’ be used to cure the ‘sin’?

"That very same 4 out of 5 dollars - 82.5% - of Amendment 3’s outrageous 470% tax increase fattens the wallets of ‘Corporate Health Care’ - the greedy hospitals, HMOs and drug companies - that have bankrolled the massive and oppressive tax increase and are trying to hoodwink voters into approving their very own Constitutional slush fund."

To further illustrate the proponent's insatiable greed, retailers were willing to support a 100% compromise tobacco tax increase which would fund a first class tobacco cessation program in Missouri. The proponents refused to meet or even consider a 100% compromise and instead are pursuing Amendment 3’s outrageous 470% tax increase.

3) Proponents of Amendment 3 say raising the cost of tobacco through the tax increase will deter people from using these products, which they say is a good reason to vote "yes". Is this a fair statement? Why or why not?

Leone: "No, it's not a fair statement. According to an August 28, 2006 AP story, the percentage of Missouri teens who smoke has decreased by almost 50% in the last decade and Missouri’s teen smoking rate is now below the national average.

"Thus, Amendment 3 proponents are just plain wrong when they say that Missouri is lagging behind other states, is not doing enough, and that we need to throw more tax dollars at this problem.

"Why tinker with a winning formula that is the envy of most other states?

"Finally, adult smokers will not stop smoking because of Amendment 3. They will simply look for ways to avoid the tax by purchasing tobacco products on the internet, on the black market, or in one of our cheaper border states."

4) Your campaign materials refer to the Amendment 3 proposal as a "regressive tax". What do you mean by that statement?

Leone: "The poor will be hit hardest by the tax. The poor, as always, who have the least ability to pay, will bear the greatest burden of the tax.

"It’s Robin Hood in reverse – the greedy hospitals, HMOs and drug companies are robbing from the poor to fatten their already bloated wallets!"

5) Some proponents of Amendment 3 say the tax increase will not harm the state's economy because deterring the purchase of tobacco product will result in the money not spent on tobacco simply being spent on other goods and services instead. Is this an accurate assessment? Why or why not?

Leone: "NO, it is not an accurate assessment. Amendment 3’s outrageous 470% tax increase will cripple Missouri’s economy for decades to come by:

a. Putting Missouri retailers at a competitive disadvantage with 6 of our 8 border states.

b. Decreasing cross-border sales and consumer traffic from our currently higher-taxed border states - especially Illinois and Kansas - which will result in a substantial decrease in sales, fuel and tobacco tax revenue for state and local coffers, public schools, roads and bridges, etc.

c. Decreasing the profitability of the many small businesses in your local communities which thereafter will be forced to cut costs, decrease investments and lay-off employees.

"No matter how much perfume the proponents try to put on this pig, it’s still a pig!"

6) Missouri currently has the second lowest tax on cigarettes in the nation. Currently, our tax rate on tobacco is significantly lower than those of all the states that border Missouri. Proponents of Amendment 3 claim that the plan simply moves the state's tobacco tax rate closer to the national average, so it's not an excessive increase. How do you respond?

Leone: "Amendment 3's outrageous 470% tax increase is proportionately the largest tax increase in Missouri's 185 year history.

"If approved by voters, Amendment 3’s outrageous 470% tax increase will put Missouri retailers at a competitive tobacco tax disadvantage with 6 of our 8 border-states and will all but eliminate the competitive advantage we have over the remaining 2 border-states.

"Thus, consumers from our higher taxed border-states – most notably Illinois & Kansas - will no longer have a financial incentive to come into Missouri and spend their money on lower-taxed fuel, tobacco and other goods & services. This reduction in cross-border sales will cripple many small businesses & retailers – resulting in decreased profits & employee layoffs - and will also translate into a substantial decrease in fuel, sales and tobacco tax revenue for local and state coffers, public schools, roads & bridges, etc."



Mike Ferguson Online



mike@mikefergusononline.com



Return to the top of this page



Subscribe to the email announcement list



site contents © 2007 Mike Ferguson--all rights reserved

webmaster: David White