Blowing Smoke About Measure 50

[October 31st, 2007]

Thanks to Big Tobacco’s open checkbook, information overflows about Measure 50, which would provide health insurance for about 100,000 Oregon kids with proceeds from an 84.5-cent-per-pack increase in the cigarette tax.

Amid all the hyperbole and distortions in Oregon’s most expensive ballot measure fight ever—the two sides have spent $14 million as of press time—here’s an eye-opening stat: Proponents and opponents spent only $20,000 of that money on actual researched reports.

Perhaps most noteworthy about those reports are the consequences each predicts beyond the measure’s stated purpose of insuring kids.

The study on the “yes” side draws on existing research into smokers’ responses to previous price increases elsewhere (upstreampublichealth.org/healthykids.html). Its conclusion: The tax increase would significantly reduce smoking. Contrary to opponents’ arguments that the new tax unfairly penalizes low-income Oregonians, the report also argues that the tax would provide a large net benefit to poorer puffers.

The “no” side’s report (reject50.com) focuses on a different question: whether revenues from the new tax will be sufficient to cover the program’s long-term costs. The report posits that 32,477 kids now with private health insurance would be eligible for publicly funded insurance, and that all would switch over. Unlike the “yes” study, which draws heavily on data from previous tax increases in other states, the “no” study includes no supporting evidence that the program would make Oregon a mecca for freeloaders.

“You’ll notice that part of the report is not footnoted and cites no sources,” says Cathy Kaufmann, a spokesman for the pro-50 Healthy Kids Campaign. “Big Tobacco paid a lot for their study, and it says just what they want.”

Anti-50 spokesman J.L. Wilson doesn’t argue with the contention that smoking would decrease if voters approve Measure 50. He defends, however, the notion that Healthy Kids would create a boondoggle by buying insurance for children who are already insured.

“That’s just common sense,” says Wilson. “If you create a program, everybody who can will sign up.”

ANTI-50[/b]

[b]key affiliations: Board Chairman, Cascade Policy Institute (local Libertarian think-tank).

money quote: “The [Healthy Kids] program is clearly not sustainable long term.”

killer statistic: Projects Healthy Kids program could have a $484 million deficit by the 2017-19 biennium.

criticism of the other guy’s work: Declined to comment.

compensation for research: $12,000 for report, plus $6000 for updates and interviews.

Author’s Tobacco use: A dozen cigars in the past decade.

PRO-50[/b]

[b]key affiliations: Chairman, Policy Advisory Committee, American Legacy Foundation (national anti-smoking group).

money quote: “Low-income Oregonians will spend an additional $20.5 million on cigarettes following the tax increase, while receiving health insurance benefits with a value of $183.2 million.”

killer statistic: Says tax increase will cause more than 22,000 adults to stop smoking and deter 32,000 kids from starting.

criticism of the other guy’s work: Says Conerly understates tax revenues and overstates health insurance inflation. “He’s assuming 11 percent [inflation], which is way too high based on Bureau of Labor statistics.”

compensation for research: Anticipates $2,000 to $2,500.

Author’s tobacco use: Non-smoker.