Posted on 05/16/2004 6:45:26 PM PDT by Dan from Michigan
House may vote on 75-cent-per-pack increase in state cigarette tax
By AMY F. BAILEY
The Associated Press
5/16/2004, 7:54 a.m. ET
LANSING, Mich. (AP) — The state House could vote this week to increase the state tax on cigarettes by 75 cents a pack.
It's the second time Republican House Speaker Rick Johnson of LeRoy has hinted that the chamber could take up legislation imposing the $2-per-pack tax. He said he decided against holding a vote on the bill last week after support from Democrats appeared unclear.
Bills need 55 votes to win approval in the 110-member House, rather than 56, because there is one vacancy.
Republicans, who have a 63-46 majority, want to put up a minimal number of votes for the higher cigarette tax because many philosophically disagree with increasing any tax.
Johnson has publicly supported increasing the cigarette tax as a way to prevent young people from starting to smoke. But he hasn't been able to bring many in his caucus to his side.
Republican Reps. Craig DeRoche of Novi and Mike Nofs of Battle Creek, who are among those vying to take over as speaker for Johnson in January, have said lawmakers should reduce state spending before they vote to increase the cigarette tax. Johnson can't run for re-election because of term limits.
Johnson thinks he has 15 Republican votes for the tax increase, spokesman Keith Ledbetter said. If so, all but six Democrats would have to vote for the measure for it to pass. But Democrats have their own objections to the tax increase, saying it would unfairly affect low-income adults who might not be able to quit smoking or afford smoking cessation aids.
House Minority Leader Dianne Byrum, D-Onondaga, is working on getting enough Democratic votes to win approval for the higher cigarette tax, spokesman Mark Fisk said.
"It's safe to say that the majority of our caucus will support the governor's budget plan, but it's still early in the process," he said.
Johnson has said repeatedly that House Democrats must supply a majority of the votes for the cigarette tax increase because it was proposed by Democratic Gov. Jennifer Granholm as a way to help eliminate the projected $1.3 billion shortfall in the state budget for the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1.
A higher cigarette tax would generate about $295 million, with $30 million raised for smoking cessation and chronic disease programs and the rest helping the state offer health care coverage to low-income residents through Medicaid.
A House GOP task force last week floated a $379.5 million package of cuts it said would be better than Granholm's proposals. It's unclear how many House members would support the GOP cuts.
The House this week also may take up two bills that would require school districts to emphasize abstinence in their sex education classes or face the loss of state funding.
The legislation would order parents to be more involved in their children's school sex education program and require that students learn the physical and emotional consequences of sexual activity.
Current Michigan law already requires public schools to adopt an abstinence-based curriculum. Parents are given the option of keeping their children out of sex education.
The state Senate could vote on bills designed to crack down on voyeurs who use cell phone cameras, electronic surveillance or other equipment to take obscene pictures of people without their knowledge or consent.
Two of the bills were introduced by state Rep. Fran Amos, R-Waterford, after she received complaints from women who said their pictures had been taken without their knowledge while changing in a health club locker room.
Several health clubs across the U.S. have banned or are considering a ban on cell phones with cameras as a result of similar incidents.
___
The cigarette tax bill is House Bill 5632; the sex education bills are Senate Bills 943 and 944; the voyeurism bills are House Bills 5692-93 and Senate Bill 918.
holy crap! this is getting even more out of hand than even I thought it could!
I wonder if higher cigarette taxes have ever brought in more revenue than lower ones do? I suspect not, because I haven't seen that story in mainstream media.
Or maybe they count the fines for smugglers as the increased revenue?
I've always wanted to be a drug smuggler - now's my chance! Thank you Michiganders/Michiganians, you've made my fortune. "Filtered or straight, tax-free is great."
Need a distributor? I take 50% of the cut.....;)
"Need a distributor? I take 50% of the cut.....;"
I second thought........ Don't ethics suck?
I have ethics, but stupid laws like this I have no respect for whatsoever. It's like a gun grab.
The States of KY, NC, and VA thank these numbnuts for boosting their economies at Michigan's expense.
Today is day 100 for me since I stopped smoking. I live in Illinois and the last carton I bought cost $32.00 and I was smoking 2 cartons a week. the price isn't even why I quit but is a definate plus.
I will never preach to anyone about smoking, having done it myself for 45 years.
No one in my house smokes now but any of my smoking friends are welcome to light up in my home.
The taxes on tobacco are outrageous everywhere in the U.S.
Just read a thread recently where cigs cost about 7 cents a pack in Cuba.
Hogwash!
Johnson can't run for re-election because of term limits.
Good.
...the cigarette tax increase ...proposed by Democratic Gov. Jennifer Granholm as a way to help eliminate the projected $1.3 billion shortfall in the state budget...
At last, the truth.
Good logic for a an absent minded over paid twit (thanks be to the trough givers)
Parental guidance and family support would never ever be a concern of an elitist when it comes to finances.
He!! no, for the primary concern to an elitist is control, NOT what is best for the children.
"But Democrats have their own objections to the tax increase, saying it would unfairly affect low-income adults who might not be able to quit smoking or afford smoking cessation aids."
Wow!!! What a shock to hear a true intellectual point raised by a Dem. The fact that this is one of the few realities of such a tax hike being heralded by a Dem doesn't eliminate the fact that they could very well be stating such a postion to support their claim of looking out for the little guy.
Now if they could understand that these taxes have become a necessity, ie. smokers needed to fill state coffers, then intellectual honesty may finally befall some Dems.
Next project: Minimum wage and how it always (1) eliminates jobs and (2) causes resentment when one has worked up to a certain hourly wage just to see some yahoo off the street get the same rate.
ping
It's more because the Dems would rather really jack up the state's income tax, because that will take more money from the "rich". Don't confuse their argument with the agenda that their argument is masking.
I guess with gas so high they couldn't tax that .. so their next favorite is cigarettes
FMCDH
OK - I think I've got it.......
Increase cigarette taxes so people will stop smoking cigarettes, then scream that people are not buying cigarettes. And when they stop buying cigarettes and stupid socialist programs can't be funded turn around and increase the cigarette taxes once again.
Oh, how I love the circular logic of these dimbulbs.
Thanks!!!!
I was having my last cigarette of the evening when I hit refresh and got your ping!!!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.