KANSAS CITY, Mo. – Outgoing Rep. Jeremy LaFaver, D-Kansas City, has been one of a handful of legislators to wholeheartedly support Amendment 3, also known as the Early Childhood Education Amendment. While he aims to garner support for the proposal alongside sponsor Raise Your Hands for Kids, he has also criticized a vocal opponent of the ballot measure – the American Cancer Society.
In March, the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network (ACS CAN), along with a host of other health care organizations, released a joint statement calling the proposal “insufficient” to reducing tobacco use in the state and found large tobacco companies’ support of the measure “alarming.” (Reynolds American Inc., the parent company of R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, has been a large donor to the campaign.)
“Small increases to the tobacco tax – like the proposals being considered – will generate new revenue, but will not keep kids from becoming addicted to cigarettes or help adults quit,” the statement said. “Tobacco taxes work when the price increase is substantial enough to motivate current smokers to quit and prevent kids from starting. A dime here or there is not sufficient.”
In another statement reiterating their opposition released Oct. 3, the coalition continues to criticize large tobacco companies’ support of the measure.
“Missouri voters shouldn’t let the tobacco industry write policies that ultimately keep our state’s youth hooked on these deadly products,” the recent statement said. “Tobacco products in Missouri are too cheap, and the health costs are too high. Our state is long overdue for a tobacco tax increase, but it needs to be one that will make a difference and save lives.
“When it comes to Amendment 3 and Proposition A, we encourage Missouri voters to question motives and follow the money, which leads directly to the tobacco industry.”
Missouri has the lowest tobacco product tax rate in the United States at 17 cents per pack. Amendment 3 will raise that tax to 77 cents per pack by 2020 to fund early childhood education should it pass. It is estimated that it will raise roughly $300 million in revenue per year.
Over the past 12 months, the ballot measure has been hounded by opposition largely from a competing tobacco tax initiative that would raise tobacco taxes but to fund infrastructure improvements. The ACS CAN opposes that ballot measure as well.
LaFaver’s take
However, LaFaver calls the ACS CAN’s opposition “unreasonable” and “maddening.”
“They remind me of my daughter who throws temper tantrums when she only gets one scoop of ice cream,” he said. LaFaver detailed that the organization also opposed a bill that would ban children from electronic cigarette use, or vaping. They opposed it because it lacked a tobacco tax, yet they offered no alternative.
“Instead of supporting banning sales of vaping cigarettes to children, they opposed it because it wasn’t good enough,” he said.
The ACS CAN countered that they did offer alternative language that would have included electronic cigarettes in the definition of tobacco products. The organization said they opposed the bill because it would have treated e-cigarettes as different than traditional tobacco products without scientific evidence to support such a distinction.”
LaFaver has done work in the past with the organization, which only makes their opposition to the amendment all the more frustrating for him. After his father died from cancer, he volunteered for Relay for Life and he eventually became the chair of the event in Santa Fe New Mexico. He estimates he has raised over $200,000 for the ACS in total.
“However, they continue to take positions that are contrary to the mission of making people healthier, and I believe those reasons are largely selfish,” he said. “That makes me sad more than anything.”
Cancer Action Network responds
The ACS CAN responded to LaFaver’s criticism with the following statement.
“Big Tobacco has put more than $5 million behind Amendment 3 under the auspices of helping education when in fact what it actually would do is help ward off a larger tobacco tax increase that would significantly reduce smoking in Missouri. The American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network opposes Amendment 3 because the available evidence points to the fact that small, incremental tobacco tax increases do not keep cigarettes out of children’s hands or motivate current smokers to quit. Tobacco taxes work when the price increase is high enough to change consumer behavior, and an increase of 15 cents a year is wholly insufficient towards that policy objective.
“Our public policy positions are formed only after an exhaustive review process that includes the examination of scientific evidence and data to determine if a policy will effectively reduce the burden of cancer. Our sole purpose is to save lives and create a world with less cancer. Any insinuations otherwise are misguided and baseless.
“ACS CAN and its partners will continue to advocate for truly evidence-based, effective policies to reduce the burden of tobacco in Missouri. It would be a disservice to our mission and volunteers to be complacent to policy changes crafted and supported by the tobacco industry that are designed to protect their profits and keep smokers addicted in Missouri.”
Making it to the ballot
The amendment has had to overcome multiple struggles on its way to voters. It endured months of legal harassment and appeared to be in dire straits when a judge changed the ballot title and language after signatures for the measure had been turned in. Secretary of State Jason Kander approved the signatures turned in, and the Missouri Supreme Court reaffirmed a lower court’s opinion by a vote of 7-0 that he was allowed to do so, guaranteeing the measure’s inclusion on the ballot.
Even before that, it faced significant opposition as proponents of Proposition A pushed against the petition. It received further denouncements from health research organizations for language regarding abortions put into the bill, as well as education groups who feared that the state money could go to private entities. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch flip-flopped their endorsement, supporting it in February and then opposing it in April.
However, the situation has improved markedly in the past few weeks for the ballot measure. Health organizations that advocate for women and children endorsed the measure, and the Post-Dispatch even changed their position back to an endorsement.
UPDATE – 1:50 p.m.: Added statement of response by the ACS CAN.
