[kcpopps]

This stinks - but at least MO will let voters decide (for now). In KS, there was no vote, the legislators just decided to raise the taxes and did it.

I'm getting sick of hearing deceitful politicians say they support this because of health concerns "for the children". In reality, they just see a new way to reach into peoples pockets. They want the money - end of story.

Non smokers should be against this attack on tobacco. It will not stop with tobacco - nor fast food. Once precedents can be set, statists will eventually be able to punish those who do anything that they declare unhealthy... including the way you think and what you teach your children.

[kcpopps]

would you ping the puff list?

[BallandPowder]

Powder..Patch..Ball FIRE!

And our Gov. Holden cant wait to get a holdon the tax revenue!

[SheLion]

MISSOURI SMOKERS' CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE STATE ECONOMY - 2001

Not only do they already contribute to the MO economy, they will be losing their big grant from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation at the end of this month.

So, in order to make up for THAT loss, they want to raise the taxes. Or, since the RWJ Foundation is all about banning smokers, controlling smokers and restricting smokers, perhaps the higher taxes imposed on the MO smokers will just satisfy the RWJFoundation and keep the blood money flowing:

Projects They Fund

Then click on Tobacco and scroll down almost to the end. You will see how much money MO is facing to lose if they do not raise the cigarette taxes.

[Steve_Seattle]

"Non smokers should be against this attack on tobacco."

The majority will be for it, because it is one more chance for them to take money out of other people's pockets, and feel self-righteous while doing it. That's a hard combination to beat. The whole thing is very muddled from a moral perspective; it is kind of like selling Playboy magazine to subsidize a sexual abstinence program.

[Lokibob]

You know the are not going to spend it on health care, but, lets assume every penny of the new tax goes toward health care.

That would free up the money from the state budget that was supposed to go toward health care for other things in the budget.

The ONLY way these funds would go to health care is if the legislators PROMISED to RAISE health care funds by the amount of what the new taxes collected. You know that isn't what they will do.

[dcwusmc]

But...but it's for the kiddies. Surely you can't object to THAT, you evil ogre!!! Isn't that what they said?

Follow the money!

[Burlem]

California did the same thing and all the monies went into the general fund and for pet projects, same holds with most of the other states as well, the states also put the monies collected from the law suits in the general fund. I had a web site that told which states did what but I lost it!

[KC_Conspirator]

So what happened to all those millions of dollars paid by the cigarette companies to Jay Nixon's MO state AG office that was supposed to pay for health programs answer is that NONE of it went to haelth programs and all it did was go to democrat constituents. This is such a sham I don't know where to begin. Mark my words - this tax money will be spent on welfare programs and other state socialism and is jsut a ploy to pay for those programs since the state is in debt now.

[INSENSITIVE GUY]

If you wanna make some real money TAX HEALTH FOOD!Those people are obsessed and crazy and would pay anything.

[waterstraat]

Are there still some fools who pay cigarette taxes and do not buy their cigarettes on the internet?

So many Canadians bypassed the Canadian tax hike a few years ago, that the tax increase was repealed.

[CrossWalker]

What do you expect from a state that elects a dead man?

[o_zarkman44]

And who gets the money from the taxes? Of course the state!! Now have they really demonstrated that they can fairly administer taxes for the reasons they propose?
NO!
Remember the 1991 gas tax and all the promises that were not delivered on when the State called time out?

Tobacco taxes appear to have replaced the tea taxes levied by England against Americans. What did that tax, and other taxes result in? I believe it was called a Revolution.

I don't smoke, but used to. What I did to my body should be of no concern to anyone but myself. All the worry about raising more money to target anti tobacco ads geared towards children is not a good enough reason. I thought that was covered by the huge lawsuit against big tobacco and the windfall settlement that followed. More money available to the state is like a kid in a candy store with money in pocket. The immediate urge of self gratification is usually fulfilled first.

By the state sanctioning the sale of tobacco in exchange for the tax revenue, they have become marketing partners for the sale of tobacco, so it is in their best interest to continue to collect higher taxes to make up for the gaps in funding pet projects that might otherwise not be met by decreasing tobacco use.

It's all about money and control. Not health. If the state was so worried about public health, they would have an outright ban on tobacco. Then we would find out how much money they are raking in, because they would ask Missourians to approve record tax increases.