Kentucky’s tobacco opponents are furious. Their coalition crusaded for big tax
increases on all tobacco products, but the State House of Representatives
instead passed a 50-cent tax increase on cigarettes and left chew/dip products
and e-cigarettes alone. That is in
keeping with the rational tax plan (here)
authored by me, released by the Pegasus Institute last Fall and supported by 16
tobacco research and policy experts from Kentucky and across the U.S.
Coalition member Al Cross objected in a March
2 commentary in the Louisville Courier-Journal that we “didn’t know or tell the whole
story.” He is wrong, and here’s why.
Cross implied that our proposal was linked to tobacco companies,
alleging, “It appears that tobacco companies ‘came out with the 50-cent
proposal to kind of blunt the effort to go to a dollar or higher,’ said Ben
Chandler, president of the Foundation for a Healthy Kentucky.”
This is false.
Tobacco companies had nothing to do with our proposal; it was the result
of years of work in the field of tobacco harm reduction and health
economics. I first described this
approach in the Tallahassee Democrat
15 years ago (here). We based our current Kentucky tax plan on a
2015 article in the New England Journal
of Medicine written by three prestigious tobacco policy experts. Two of them supported our proposal, along
with fourteen other experts.
Cross’s article contained inconsistent statements. He claimed that “50 cents more a pack
wouldn’t be a big hit for most smokers,” but then wrote, “The big hit would be
felt by lower-income people, who are more likely to be smokers.” Chandler was even more insensitive:
“you’ve got to have the sticker shock…”
Indeed. We acknowledged that even a 50-cent increase
“could present a severe financial challenge to Kentucky smokers, many of whom
have only limited resources.” We made it
clear that we are not interested in punishing smokers; our cigarette tax
increase is not meant to force them to quit.
Instead, we “encourage and incentivize smokers to quit or switch to
less expensive and vastly safer smoke-free tobacco products” like smokeless
tobacco and e-cigarettes.
Decades
of epidemiologic studies document that the health risks of dipping and chewing
tobacco are, at most, a mere two percent of those of smoking. Unlike cigarettes, smokeless tobacco does not
cause lung cancer, heart and circulatory diseases or emphysema. A recent government-funded study conducted by
federal researchers and experienced epidemiologists found that men who dip or
chew tobacco have no excess risk for mouth cancer (here).
Kentucky
men will be especially interested in this information. Federal survey data shows that 226,000 dip or
chew tobacco, 90,000 of whom also smoke.
These dual users don’t know that smokeless is vastly safer; our proposal
gives them information and a financial incentive to escape the smoke.
Tax
policy should encourage smokers to switch to e-cigarettes, which already are among
the most common – and the most successful – quit aids in the U.S. (here). While federal health agencies demonize these
devices, United Kingdom government and health organizations endorse them based
on solid science. The prestigious
British Royal College of Physicians has stated, “…the hazard to health arising
from long-term vapour inhalation from the e-cigarettes available today is
unlikely to exceed 5% of the harm from smoking tobacco.” Britain’s Department of Health last year
formally endorsed the substitution of e-cigarettes by smokers.
Cross wrote
that “Smoking-related health costs in the state are near $2 billion a year.” We address that concern: “Federal and state
spending for Medicaid in Kentucky for fiscal year 2016 was $9.66 billion;
smoking was responsible for $1.47 billion. The only way for the Commonwealth to
lower these high costs is to provide every option for smoking cessation,
including vastly safer cigarette substitutes.”
Cross
mentioned “retailers along the state’s border who sell lots of cigarettes to
people from states where the taxes are higher.”
We addressed that by trying to “correct cross-border discrepancies in
cigarette excise taxes affecting large populations across the Ohio and Indiana
borders, and avoid creating other
significant cross-border discrepancies.” (emphasis added)
It is
well documented that traditional quit-smoking methods, which strive for
complete nicotine and tobacco abstinence, fail to help over 90% of
smokers. Kentucky Medicaid currently
spends millions on expensive and failure-prone FDA-approved stop-smoking
medicines (nicotine patches, gum, lozenges, bupropion, varenicline, and nasal
spray and inhalers).
Our
tax proposal offers a superior approach, at no additional cost to the
commonwealth. It incentivizes smokers to
switch to smokeless tobacco or e-cigarettes.
The Senate should have acknowledged the substantial health risk
differentials between combustible and smoke-free tobacco products, and endorsed
the House bill. Smokers who switch will
spend less, and live longer, healthier lives.
1 comment:
Nothing sensible makes sense to government bureaucrats who are bent on making smokeless products illegal and/or simply not affordable. I happen to live in northern Florida where smokeless products are taxed so high it is ridiculous. My solution: I drive up to either Georgia or Alabama where the taxes are far lower. A "Tobacco Free Florida" will fail.
Post a Comment