Voters Trust Big Tobacco Over Politicians

By 60.2% to 39.8%, the measure in Oregon was defeated to add 84.5 cents of tax per pack to cigarettes, to fund a scheme for universal health care for children.

In liberal-leaning Oregon, distrust of politicians’ promises of why and what for they want added taxes was evident, even when against a foe – Big Tobacco -- and for a cause – universal health care -- liberals tend to like.

This is in a state that went for Kerry and tilted liberal in 2004, and whose House congressional delegation is 4 to 1 Democrat. Indeed, the more educated are generally more liberal, and Oregon’s college grads split for Kerry 58-46%, while the split was even nationally.

The predictable explanations are that Big Tobacco outspent the measure’s proponents by 4 to 1. For example,

Supporters said they were simply outgunned by tobacco company money.

"These are the best marketers in the world," said Carol Butler, the campaign manager for Yes on 50. "They sell a product that kills you."

At the end of this Salem, Oregon newspaper piece bemoaning the fate of Measure 50, however, we find that,

The Measure 50 defeat follows similar tobacco company efforts to fend off cigarette tax-increases in Missouri and California in 2006. Now other states may be more cautious about taking on tobacco companies.

But, it’s not just the tobacco companies. It’s also voters’ distrust of the uses to which politicians put the presumably targeted taxes they impose.

The anti-smoking organization Tobacco Free Kids has tracked the tens of billions of dollars flowing from the 1998 tobacco settlements, expected to generate $246-billion to the states over 25-years, which was supposed to (though not guaranteed) be heavily used for loosely-defined stop smoking programs. In its latest report, Tobacco Free Kids reports,

[T]he vast majority of states are still failing to keep the promise of the tobacco settlement and falling far short of funding such programs at even minimum levels recommended by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

This graphic from Tobacco Free Kids tracking of the states’ siphoning off of the tobacco settlement funds and tobacco taxes is telling. For example, in 2007, $590-million out of $21.7-billion (3%) was spent by the states on tobacco-use prevention.

California’s Democrat legislative leaders seek to impose a $2 per pack tax on cigarettes to help fund a $14+ billion scheme for universal health care. California Democrats think that conditions will be better in California to pass such a tax. They say,

The strange bedfellows campaign combo of Schwarzenegger/Legislative Democrats/Unions/Business would be a formidable foe for Big Tobacco.

That remains to be seen, as the San Jose Mercury reports:

…Allan Zaremberg, head of the California Chamber of Commerce…. criticized the Democrats' reliance on a $2-a-pack tobacco tax to fund subsidies for people who cannot afford insurance. Zaremberg said it was unreliable, because it generates less revenue as people stop smoking. Meanwhile, he said, health costs will be going up.

Assembly Speaker [Democrat] Fabian Nunez said polling shows voters like the tobacco tax better than other taxes, such as a sales tax increase that some business groups have proposed to fund health care. But just last year, voters rejected a tobacco tax increase to fund emergency rooms.

And, Governor Schwarzenegger agrees that added tobacco taxes are not the way to go, even to help fund a universal health care scheme he’s generally in favor of.

Schwarzenegger also opposed the tobacco tax measure, and it was unclear whether he would agree to the Democrats' plan.

Seems to me that some politicians believe they can snooker the voters into higher taxes, and some hear voters’ repeated expressions that taxes are not the route to electoral success.

I think I’ll lean back, strike up, and enjoy the next scenes of the Democrats against the voters.

In Oregon's NEXTDOOR neighbor, in Washington state, voters:

Backing an effort for increased fiscal restraint, Washington residents approved statewide measures to require a two-thirds vote by the Legislature for fee increases and a constitutional amendment requiring that 1 percent of general state revenue for each fiscal year be placed in a budget stabilization account.

The Northwest's rain doesn't cause moss to grow over their voters' eyes.

AND the Wall Street Journal weighs in, with “Schip Wreck: Oregon voters send a message on HillaryCare.”

Oregon reproduced the current Schip fracas in D.C. on the state level--and the referendum took a major shellacking, with voters siding three to two against…. There are political lessons here, in case anyone in Washington is paying attention…. As for 2008, most of the national press corps has already assumed "universal" coverage will both carry Hillary Clinton to the White House and march easily into law. The message from the Oregon trail is--not so fast, especially if her Republican opponent advances a credible free-market alternative.