As a healthcare provider, I witness daily the health problems caused by smoking. Cigarette smoking costs the taxpayers 
millions of dollars a year and I feel that this extra cost is unfair the non-smoking taxpayer.
The Senate passed H. 3567 which places $5 million in smoking cessation programs and the rest going to Healthcare. These funds are split between premium assistance in the form of a tax credit and Medicaid funding. Unfortunately, as revenues decline as expected, we will face Medicaid shortfalls in the future which would result in either additional tax increases or lowering the number of qualifying recipients.
H. 3567 essentially supplements the Medicaid system with an additional $300 million in a budget shortfall year with across the board agency cuts. I am a registered pharmacist and am part owner in a pharmacy/HME business. This increase will have a personal financial impact, therefore, ethically, I found it necessary to recuse myself from voting on H. 3567. Also, I refrained from voting on amendments relating to Medicaid during the debate on H. 3567.
[...] ryan wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptThese funds are split between premium assistance in the form of a tax credit and Medicaid funding. Unfortunately, as revenues decline as expected, we will face Medicaid shortfalls in the future which would result in either additional … [...]
[...] Continue Reading [...]
Kevin
I respect your perspective.
Your constituents chose you to be their representative, and they knew you were a pharmacist when they elected you. Health care is a critical issue. Be open and public about your votes and the reasons for them, as you always are, and then let your constituents decide if you voted the right way. I think that is the ethical obligation you have.
If the good guys recuse themselves from votes on issues as important as health care, there becomes a significant negative bias in the legislature. The trial lawyers dominate the system because they have a personal financial interests in the outcome, and they never recuse themselves.
In order to reduce this problem, as with everything, we must reduce the cuase. Unfortunately, increasing cigarette tax increases smugling. On the other hand, we could ban cigarettes. However, this would cause illegal cigarette smugling to run rampet.
Unfortunatly the situation we are in now blocks us from dealing with the root cause in such a direct way.
In conclusion, there is no easy way to deal with this problem. Hoever, doing all that we can to reduce this problem is wise.
It is so easy to use the buzz words of “Health Care” and “Your Children” as a means to direct others on their transgressions and how they should be living their lives. The additional cigarette tax sounds like another “Bit & Switch” to me. How much of the Tobacco Settlement money was spent on health care, and was it spent on the smokers, who supposedly caused their health care crisis in the first place?
If you are going add additional cigarette tax in the name of “health care” while claiming that the smokers are costing the government as a result of the smoking, then you should cover all who smoke with an insurance policy, not expand another welfare program. Have the smokers pay just their own way, not pay for everyone else as well.
If health care is the real issue, we should increase the cost (tax) of certain fatty junk food items, like hamburgers & fries, corn fructose additives, etc, since they contribute to obesity and other longer term health problems for those who partake of those transgressions. This is an opportunity for the Legislature to curtail more sins of the people and have more tax money for vote buying giveaway programs, expand government, etc. So put this on the agenda for next year’s legislature. It is a must!!