Tobacco tax backers to turn in signatures

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. -- Supporters of a proposal to more than quadruple Missouri's cigarette tax said Thursday they have collected more than enough signatures to put the matter before voters in November.

The ballot proposal would ask voters to add 55 cents to the state's current tax of 17 cents per pack of cigarettes. Taxes on other tobacco products would rise by 20 percent.

Supporters planned to deliver petitions bearing about 123,000 petition signatures to the secretary of state's office today.

To secure a place on the ballot, initiatives need signatures equal to 5 percent of the votes cast in the 2000 gubernatorial election in six of the nine congressional districts.

Based on the districts targeted, the tobacco tax supporters said they need 78,143 signatures.

"We think we'll have a healthy margin of error on that," said Brad Ketcher, a spokesman Citizens for a Healthy Missouri, a coalition of urban business groups and the state hospital association.

Once petitions are submitted, it can take several months before the signatures are verified and the proposal is certified for the ballot.

Generating millions

The higher tobacco taxes would generate an estimated $342.6 million annually for the state. The proposal's official cost estimate includes no figure for the effect on local governments.

A Cole County Circuit Court judge dismissed a legal challenge Thursday to the cost estimate and the ballot summary.

The lawsuit by David Overfelt claimed the cost estimate is faulty because it does not account for a likely decline in sales caused by the tax.

Overfelt, a smoker who lobbies for the Missouri Retailers Association, argued that local governments would see their own tobacco tax revenues decline because of falling sales.

Judge Byron Kinder agreed that the cost estimate by State Auditor Claire McCaskill did not address local governments, but he said state law prohibited him from referring the cost estimate back to McCaskill.

McCaskill said in a statement that her office had presented the issue in an accurate manner.

"The fact is those trying to keep this measure off the ballot have yet to produce any evidence that can show how raising cigarette taxes will impact local governments," McCaskill said.

Under the ballot proposal, 43 percent of the new state tax money would go to health care treatment, including prescription drugs for seniors and other initiatives for the poor, women, minorities and children.

Twenty-nine percent would be allocated to hospital trauma care; 14 percent to life sciences research; 7 percent to smoking prevention efforts; and 7 percent to early childhood programs.

Overfelt claimed the ballot summary prepared by Secretary of State Matt Blunt was misleading because most of those programs already exist and receive state funding.

But Kinder said the summary is "sufficient and fair."

An attorney for Overfelt said the ruling likely would be appealed.

"Win some, lose some," Overfelt said. "It was a shot at it. I tried to see if I could stop this ... but we'll have to look at the ruling and see what the judge's logic is."

Supporters of the ballot proposal said it would provide a dedicated funding stream for the programs, ensuring they are funded as future lawmakers grapple with tough spending choices.

"It's going to improve health and health care across the state," Ketcher said.