Jackson Free Press

In the wake of the cigarette tax hike death, Mississippi lawmakers face a bankrupt fund designed to give drivers a car tag discount. Legislators were counting on revenue from part of the increased cigarette tax—$25 million—to shore up that fund, reports Forbes.com.

Mississippi House and Senate members had until last night to come to a compromise on an increased cigarette tax, but were unable to do so. To revive the bill will take a two-thirds approval of both houses, but neither the House nor the Senate seems to be willing to come to terms on the issue.

In the meantime, the Legislature has to come up with an alternative for the car tag fund, which reimburses counties for a tax credit given to car owners. The fund has run out of money, Kathy Waterbury, spokeswoman for the Mississippi State Tax Commission told Forbes.

Here's more of the story:

"At this point, we owe the counties $7.2 million," Waterbury said Thursday.

Legislators in the mid-1990s created a complicated formula to reduce the price of license plates for cars and trucks, and because of a drop in vehicle sales, that formula is running short on money. Legislators had been looking to a cigarette tax increase as a way to stabilize the annual price of renewing vehicle tags.
…
Rep. Bryant Clark said given the current economic situation, it's critical the state fulfill its obligation to the counties. Clark, D-Pickens, said tapping the $362 million in Mississippi's rainy day fund could be an option.

"When I look outside, it's raining. It's raining hard," Clark said.
...
House members said the death of the cigarette tax proposal amounts to a tax increase on vehicle owners.

"You can buy cheap cigarettes in Mississippi and high car tags," said Rep. Tommy Reynolds, D-Charleston. "We worship the tobacco, noxious weed."

Previous Comments

ID

145160

Comment

Surely I am mis-reading this. Let me see if I am understanding it: the legislature, during an economic depression, cannot arrive at concensus to pass a tax on an item that kills people--tobacco. And, the Governor is in the bed with Big Tobacco. So, we middle classers are struggling to work and looking for jobs and we can now expect to pay more for the license to drive the car to get us there while Big Tobacco keeps killing and the legislature and Governor keep fiddlin'. Have I woken up on a strange planet? No? Then please please please tell me that this is a bad dream. If there were ever a time for the legislature and the governor to get their act together and do the right thing, it is 2009. If they can't figure this out or they don't want to figure this out, they all ought to "go walkin'" and not wait til their terms are over.

Author

J.T.

Date

2009-03-26T17:13:26-06:00

ID

145167

Comment

I'm stunned to learn that we've been getting a discount on car tags. J.T. is right. We need some real leadership in MS.

Author

Tim S

Date

2009-03-27T04:45:43-06:00

ID

145175

Comment

...haven't any of you bought a car tag in Hinds? It spells out the details on the little card they send you and your recipt. There's been a credit on there for years.

Author

Ironghost

Date

2009-03-27T07:57:03-06:00

ID

145176

Comment

It is well documented that a tax on smoking disproportionately effects middle and lower income people because they are the majority of smokers. Even with the flawed logic that the tax should be imposed to offset health care costs that smokers incur on the system it sort of makes sense if you don't look too deep at it. But why should I, because I smoke, subsidize car tags for everyone else? Listen to yourselves, you want to tax middle and lower income people so you won't have to pay as much to drive your new car. You guys are on some kind of pills, I'll agree with you there. Tax your meds to pay for your tag or how about this novel idea. Pay for your freaking tag yourself and stop looking for someone else to do it.

Author

WMartin

Date

2009-03-27T07:57:26-06:00

ID

145182

Comment

Tobacco kills. Documented. Tobacco is addictive. Documented. Tobacco should be taxed. Whoever chooses to smoke, including me, this writer, should be taxed. Really, WMartin, surely I am not understanding that you are equating tobacco and medicine--"Tax your meds to pay for your tag." I pay for my "freaking tag" myself--whatever I am charged, with or absent any kind of credit. So be it. I prefer to pay less for everything in today's economy. But my argument has less to do with credits on car tags and more to do with the reality of and correlations between our shaky economy and the realities of tobacco's taking advantage of us as people and of our individual and corporate pocketbooks. My point is intended to be that I am tired of tobacco and tobacco lobbyist oppressing us and getting away with it with our legislature, that is simply tapping Big Tobacco on the hand, taxwise, because we have been buggar-beared by an X tobacco lobbyist protecting his friends. And, if you are right, WMartin, that middle and lower income people are the biggest smokers, the conclusion that can be drawn is that they are the part of society being most oppressed by Big Tobacco. Which is plain wrong. And is further proof that Big Tobacco is winning--controlling their bodies, their health, their pocketbooks, the health care system that has to pick up their costs, even as the smoker keeps finding the money to pay for the cigs, coughing his/her way to the sales counter. I have smoked. I am still tempted by wonderful little cigars. My argument is not a moral one. Tobacco is a seducer, a terrible body ravishing seducer. I have been seduced and have loved it and am vulnerable to further seducing by the rascal tobacco. The only thing Big Tobacco understands is money. Also, as I have to fork over higher taxes for tobacco in today's economy, it might help me question whether I still want to continue regularly killing myself as I puff on my smoke.

Author

J.T.

Date

2009-03-27T08:42:36-06:00

ID

145190

Comment

I don't accept your assertion that we as people are "oppressed" by "Big Tobacco". People quit smoking everyday for many different reasons. Some for health concerns or monetary concerns but somehow they manage to break the chains of the "control" you talk about. At the end of the day it's a personal choice to either smoke or not to smoke. If you were correct about having the freedom and actually being able to afford a pack of cigarettes being a form of oppression you are merely trading one form of oppression for another. That whole argument smacks of dodging personal responsibility and wanting to blame a boogey man for the decisions of an individual. That rascal tobacco is an inanimate object it can't oppress you. The anti-smoking movement allied with government are the one's trying to control you.

Author

WMartin

Date

2009-03-27T10:07:42-06:00

ID

145193

Comment

We are definitely in agreement, WMartin, that smoking is a personal choice. As I mentioned, I used to smoke, myself, and have quit, but, as I mentioned, tobacco is addictive and seductive and for some people it is almost impossible for them to quit without some help because of its addictive nature. Thus, the emphasis by tobacco on making it seem cool to smoke. Hook'em and then hold on to 'em. That said, here's my beef: If I choose to smoke and risk my health and the health of others--from my second hand smoke--and create upheaval in the health care system from the increased diseases that tobacco causes, then I ought to be willing to pay taxes to help defray the expenses I create for other taxpayers, e.g., because of increased health care costs, increased Medicaid costs, increased Medicare costs, increased costs for cleaning clothes that reek of tobacco, increased health care premiums because of the higher risks that smokers bring to insurance pools, increased costs to filter air in public places to remove tobacco odors, and I could go on and on and on. You are so right, WMartin, this whole thing is about accountability. And, if there is an industry that is not accountable, it is the tobacco industry. It has used us. If using people isn't oppression, I don't know what is, and that applies whether the people are tall, short, old, young, rich or poor. And, if you think that big tobacco is not lining their coffers and our coffins with out money and our bodies, respectively, and laughing all the way to the bank, think again.

Author

J.T.

Date

2009-03-27T10:55:12-06:00

ID

145196

Comment

I am not going to defend a corporation for doing what corporations do. They make money for their shareholders, moral or not it's what they do. A few are ok, most kind of suck and some are down right evil. My problem with this whole tobacco tax for healthcare deal is that I believe it's not really about tobacco. It's about control, oppression if you will. How you ask? In a nutshell, like this: The government decides they are going to provide healthcare. Then they realize that it's enormously expensive, partly because they have decided to provide it effectively removing the market controls that helped to keep prices at levels that the average consumer could afford to pay. Then since the public is paying for your outrageously expensive healthcare they get to decide what activities or behaviors you are allowed to engage in. If you think smoking is the only thing they will try to either make unaffordable or prohibit outright because it is deemed to be unhealthy you should think again. I should say that I believe in freedom. Freedom for people to make their own choices. If an anti-tobacco activist wants to rail against it and try to convince everyone not to smoke I think that's great. At the point he starts using the government to control the people he can't convince using his rights of free speech I think he's gone off the deep end.

Author

WMartin

Date

2009-03-27T12:03:23-06:00