WASHINGTON, July 7, 2007

Smokers May Pay For Kids' Health Insurance

U.S. Tobacco Taxes Viewed As A Likely Source Of Children's Health Funding

  •  (CBS/AP)

  • Photo Essay Smoking Bans

    Some breathe deeply while others fume as tough anti-smoking rules catch on.

(AP)  The United States' 45 million smokers will probably help pay for the spending increase that Democrats want for children's health insurance, say analysts familiar with deliberations in Congress.

Democratic lawmakers will push for $50 billion in new funding for the State Children's Health Insurance Program over the next five years. To pay for that increase, they must find new sources of revenue or cut existing programs.

Powerful trade groups representing doctors, hospitals and insurers have united around the idea of taxing tobacco. Democratic leaders have not said to what extent they will agree.

Still, the question now is not whether the tobacco tax will go up — but how much it will go up, said Ron Pollack, executive director of Families USA, an advocacy group that promotes universal health insurance.

"I've every reason to believe an increase in the tobacco tax will be part of the way expanded health insurance for children is paid for," Pollack said.

Pollack said his assessment was based on "frequent and relatively recent conversations" with the committees that have jurisdiction over SCHIP. Democrats from the House and the Senate are expected to unveil their respective SCHIP proposals soon.

The federal tax on tobacco stands at 39 cents per pack, and it generated about $7.2 billion in 2005. The money goes into the general fund of the U.S. Treasury.

States also tax cigarettes. The rates range from $2.58 a pack in New Jersey to 7 cents a pack in South Carolina.

Tobacco companies oppose another tax increase on their product, but it is unclear whether the industry has enough clout to fend this one off. The ban on unlimited contributions to the political parties, called soft money, has resulted in a significant drop-off in campaign contributions from the industry.

The Center for Responsive Politics reports that total campaign contributions from the tobacco industry fell from $9.2 million in the 2002 election cycle to $3.5 million in last year's cycle. The center also ranks industries when it comes to campaign contributions; since 1996, tobacco has fallen from 26th in the center's rankings to 62nd.

Most of the industry's contributions in recent elections — about three quarters — have gone to Republicans.

Bill Phelps, spokesman for Philip Morris USA, the largest U.S. tobacco company, said tax increases have already led to an 80 percent increase in the cost of a pack of cigarettes since 1999. The average cost of a pack now stands at $4.13, though those costs vary dramatically from state to state.

"We feel this trend is unfair to adult smokers as well as to tobacco retailers," Phelps said.

He said an excise tax increase may have unintended consequences because sales of cigarettes have been declining at about 2 percent a year while the cost of medical services provided through SCHIP have grown at least 4 percent annually.

"Relying on the cigarette excise tax to fund an important government program such as SCHIP will create long-term funding shortfalls," Phelps said.

But a tax increase on cigarettes would also have its benefits, said supporters of a tobacco tax increase.

For example, the American Medical Association, the trade group for doctors, said that for each 10 percent increase in the price of cigarettes, youth smoking is reduced by 7 percent, and overall consumption by 4 percent.

"The higher the tax, the more substantial the future public health benefit," said Dr. Ronald M. Davis, president of the American Medical Association. "Fewer smokers means fewer people with strokes, heart attacks, cancer, and other smoking-related health conditions."

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says that about 440,000 people in the U.S. die prematurely each year as a result of illnesses attributable to smoking.


© MMVII The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Share:
  • Share
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Mixx
Add a Comment See all 128 Comments
by michellem99-2009 July 10, 2007 1:48 AM EDT
Tucker, I am wondering you be one them there science person. Yer brain has electricity too. It is a computah as well. I use a flat panel monitoah. I am a hillbilly.
I call them cigerette cancer sticks. Yer know this here board we be talkimg about yer kids and yer having to pay their medical bills cos yer a smoker and yer kids they be smokers and this is why yer cigerette smoke is their 2rd hand smoke. Now it don't take fancy book learning to know that. Ben Franklin he done figger out the electricity whent he did that kite in da lightin storm so the history book saids. OH WELL.
Reply to this comment
by tuckerndfw July 9, 2007 7:33 PM EDT
It is not currently possible to conduct a valid scientific experiment regarding electricity and cancer due to the fact the entire population has been contaminated. Everything on earth has been irradiated with electromagnetic radiation. Due to man's reliance on electricity, the earth's atmosphere is roughly equivalent to a microwave oven.

The fact remains that "electromagnetic radiation" (aka "electricity") is known to cause cancer.

From the CDC's website:

"Radiation: energy moving in the form of particles or waves. Familiar radiations are heat, light, radio waves, and microwaves. Ionizing radiation is a very high-energy form of electromagnetic radiation."

"Exposure to radiation can cause . . . cancer."

Source: http://www.bt.cdc.gov/radiation/glossary

Electricity is the commonly used layman's term for "electromagnetic radiation."

If cancer has a single, major, causative factor it is electricity (in all its forms), not tobacco.
Reply to this comment
by michellem99-2009 July 9, 2007 7:20 PM EDT
Retraining your brain is hard. When he was told in hospital by Doc quit. Went home and removed all the smoking items. He never smoked in doors, my rule. He has copd plus others health issues. Out doors and I did not care if it rained. He went out.I am not a cold person. If you smoke in the home than that smell is there so that might make harder to quit. Try. I have heard if is harder for ladies. Some who quit eat more than they should sense they no longer smoke. He did not.
Reply to this comment
by rushman71 July 9, 2007 4:56 PM EDT
MichelleM99: Thanks for your positive feedback. I appreciate it. Already had a couple of spells today thinking,"Ok, cigarette time." Then realize, I got the patch on, I don't need a cig. It's hard the first few days, but as time progresses, the urge starts to fade. Now I have tried cold-turkey a couple times in the past. But always ended up going to the store an hour or two later to buy some. Not everyone can quit just like that. It works for some, but not all. Even my mother, who started smoking at age 13, and is a house-wife, has trouble trying to quit. She still smokes. The good news about her smoking, though, is that she smokes the Capri Menthals; that's like smoking air. I still wish that she would quit, too.....
Reply to this comment
by Syndicate July 9, 2007 4:54 PM EDT
I guess they will have to up the nicotine level to make sure we stay addicted.
Reply to this comment
by jimfinster July 9, 2007 4:41 PM EDT
tuckerndfw:

I do not find any basis for your claim in scientific studies, except for exposure to very high levels (such as powerlines).

Here are the conclusions from a National Academy of Sciences study in 1997 (Possible Health Effects of Exposure to Residential Electric and Magnetic Fields, http://www.nap.edu/openbook/0309054478/html ):

1) There remains a statistically significant correlation between childhood leukemia and the wire code of a house (mostly based on the distance between the house and high current power lines). The highest-code houses have about a 1.5 risk factor (50% increase). There is no significant correlation for other childhood cancers or for any adult cancer.

2) There is no correlation between EMFs measured inside the households and childhood leukemia (measured after leukemia was diagnosed).

3) In vitro effects (cell culture) reveal abnormalities only at EMF doses 1,000-100,000 times greater than typical residential exposures. These effects on cells do not include genetic damage.

4) Exposure of lab animals to EMFs has not shown any consistent pattern with cancer, even at high EMF doses. Some behavior responses are seen at high doses, and there is an intriguing result that animals exposed to both a known carcinogen and intense EMF show increased breast cancer levels.

Reply to this comment
by jimfinster July 9, 2007 4:41 PM EDT
tuckerndfw:

I do not find any basis for your claim in scientific studies, except for exposure to very high levels (such as powerlines).

Here are the conclusions from a National Academy of Sciences study in 1997 (Possible Health Effects of Exposure to Residential Electric and Magnetic Fields, http://www.nap.edu/openbook/0309054478/html ):

1) There remains a statistically significant correlation between childhood leukemia and the wire code of a house (mostly based on the distance between the house and high current power lines). The highest-code houses have about a 1.5 risk factor (50% increase). There is no significant correlation for other childhood cancers or for any adult cancer.

2) There is no correlation between EMFs measured inside the households and childhood leukemia (measured after leukemia was diagnosed).

3) In vitro effects (cell culture) reveal abnormalities only at EMF doses 1,000-100,000 times greater than typical residential exposures. These effects on cells do not include genetic damage.

4) Exposure of lab animals to EMFs has not shown any consistent pattern with cancer, even at high EMF doses. Some behavior responses are seen at high doses, and there is an intriguing result that animals exposed to both a known carcinogen and intense EMF show increased breast cancer levels.

Reply to this comment
by michellem99-2009 July 9, 2007 4:40 PM EDT
I do hope you can quit. Friends who smoke. I think it is hard. It will take will power to not smoke. When my friend smoked. He ran out. I would bum cigs for him. Oh they give them to me. And I don't smoke. I d go can ya spare a cig. Smoker. sure here. He had his first heart attack and it was the doc. quit or no treatment.He quit that night. that was 00. It is hard when every one smokes and you have to be strong and win the battle. Drink water . You have the power.Beat it. Keep your hands/mind busy so you don't think it you want to quit. Keep trying. You may fall and there is the next day, Don't bum cigs. I use this No thank you I don't smoke in your case add now to it. Never smoked.
Reply to this comment
by rushman71 July 9, 2007 12:30 PM EDT
I just wanted to say that I am a smoker trying (very hard) to quit. I just started the patch--again--today, and hopefully succeed this time around. But the hard part remains, hanging around my friends, which is the challenge to conquer. But aside from all of this, I do believe that companies going out of their way to not hire people who do smoke, and insurance raising rates on smokers is totally bogus. Smoking is a hard habit to quit. If only these companies would provide ways instead of threats, things would be much easier on the common people.
Reply to this comment
by tuckerndfw July 9, 2007 9:08 AM EDT
The commonly used, layman's term for "electromagnetic radiation" is "electricity."
Reply to this comment
See all 128 Comments
  • MOST POPULAR
Discussed
  1. Tempers Flare In Climate Change Flap

    (714 recent comments)

Latest News
News in Pictures
Scroll Left Scroll Right
Connect with CBS News

Stay connected with the CBS News using your favorite social networks and online news applications: