• More Blogs
• Observations »
• Bering in Mind »
• Cross-check »
• Extinction Countdown »
• Solar at Home »
• Expeditions »
• Guest Blog »
• Anecdotes from the Archive »

Alaska is making the best use of cigarette taxes and Big Tobacco settlement money distributed to states in the decade after authorities negotiated a deal with the companies over smoking-related health costs incurred by the states, according to a new report released today by a coalition of advocacy groups. South Carolina ranks the worst.

States have received $203.5 billion in tobacco revenue since the Master Settlement Agreement between states’ attorneys general and cigarette makers in 1998. The agreement required the companies to reimburse states for the money they spent treating smoking-related illnesses. It didn’t stipulate how states should spend the funds, but many attorneys general and public health officials said they’d use it and revenue from cigarette taxes to discourage children from smoking. But just over 3 percent of that money – about $65 billion – has been spent on tobacco prevention and treatment programs, according to the report.

This year, Alaska is spending 86 percent of what the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends it should, compared to 1.6 percent by South Carolina, the report says. The CDC guidelines are different for each state, based on its population and percentage of smokers. The complete rankings can be found here.

Most of the money has been spent plugging budget holes, says Joel Spivak, a spokesman for the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, one of the groups that worked on the report.

Under the terms of the agreement, states “are not bound by any formula to spend anything if they don’t want to and a lot of people are shocked by that: Wasn’t the purpose of this settlement to indemnify states for all the sick smokers?” Spivak says. “The answer is yes but, at the time the settlement was reached, the governors and attorneys general said they didn’t want to be bound by any formula. The CDC guidelines were just that: guidelines. In effect, they [the AGs and governors] said, ‘trust us do the right thing,’ and they haven’t.”

U.S. smoking rates fell to just below 20 percent this year, the CDC reported last week. But it kills nearly half a million people annually through cancer and heart disease.

The report calls on Congress to pass legislation that would require the Food and Drug Administration to regulate the manufacturing and marketing of tobacco products. The legislation was approved by the House in July by a 326 to 102 margin, and it has wide support in the Senate.

Other organizations that contributed to the report were the American Heart Association, American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, American Lung Association and Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

Image by iStockphoto/Ivan Mateev

2 Comments

1. 1. ductileironman 10:21 AM 11/19/08

   This is what happens when you take money from the dealer, give it to an addict and tell them to use it to fix the habits of another addict. The states are addicted to spending money with no accountability that it reach a set result. The smokers are addicted to nicotine. The tobacco company wins in the end, because, as the dealer, they get to pass the cost back to the smoker.
   
   Who wins? Noone. Who loses? Everyone. We all pay more in the long run because the money doesn't fix any problems it just creates a dependency cycle within government, where there is NO cure beyond elimination of the government department that has become dependent on the money.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

2. 2. Hibernian 02:08 PM 5/15/09

   That's right, the states made no restriction on cigarette firms from simply passing the "settlement" costs right back to their customers...their victims actually, if you take into account the virtually secret product contamination with residues of any of 450 or so tobacco pesticides, with radiation from use of certain phosphate fertilizers, with added burn accelerants, with dioxin-producing chlorine pesticides and chlorine-bleached paper, and all sorts of toxins and carcinogens in the 1400 or so additives from with manufacturers concoct their secret recipes.
   
   If justice prevailed, those cigarette makers AND their ingredients suppliers AND their insurers/investors ought to have paid the victims compensation, instead of the money going exactly the other way.
   
   But there is more:
   * No state laws prohibited members of the cigarette industry from receiving "settlement" money from the states. That is, tobacco pesticide firms could get money for bio-tech R& D, suppliers of crop products for ingredients got money for nice "nutrition programs", cig advertisers got money for "no smoke" programs, Pharms that supply tobacco pesticides and cigarette ingredients could get the money for nice drug programs for the elderly, etc, and even top health insurers that own huge investment holdings in cig manufacturing and the pesticides etc could get the money for nice programs for the uninsured.
   
   * The "big" 200 plus billion dollar "settlement" represents a fraction of what Big Cig would have to pay (well into the Trillions of dollars) if they had to pay even conservative compensation to their Guinea Pigged victims.
   
   * Some of the attorneys behind this "settlement" previously pulled off a "settlement" with Big Asbestos...a move that saved that industry and denied untold numbers of asbestos victims rights to challenge and rights to compensation.
   
   Both of those "settlements" were designed to protect, not punish, the supposed targets.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this