Amendment 72: Tobacco Tax. A “yes” vote would increase the cost of tobacco and use those funds for health programs; a “no” vote keeps cigarette taxes the same.
There is currently an 84 cent state tax per pack of cigarettes. Amendment 72 would bring that up to a $1.75. Cigars and chewing tobacco would see a tax increase of 22 percent. $17 million have been spent in opposition of the measure. It’s coming from Altria Group, the parent company of Philip Morris. Proponents think the spike in costs of tobacco products will be a one-two punch, dissuading use and increasing funding for health programs in the state.
A big issue with Amendment 72 is how much is unknown. The state doesn’t know how well the initiative would work to curb smokers’ spending, or how much extra money the state would make on the new tax. But there have been tax hikes in the past.
Larson Silbaugh, is a senior economist with the Colorado Legislative Council, the experts who vet the budget numbers for the state’s ballot information booklet.
“We knew how responsive Colorado residents were in that previous tax increase... and how much consumption dropped based on that price,” Silbaugh said.
Those numbers predict that the tax would bring in $315 million next year. But opponents say where that money goes is also unknown. They use the phrase “blank check” to describe the proposed allocation to health programs.
Ross Brooks, the CEO of Mountain Family Health Centers - which provides health services to low income residents of Pitkin, Eagle and Garfield counties - said that’s not an accurate representation. Money would come directly to organizations like his.
“The dollars are allocated to programs that legitimately work, have shown results, help people quit smoking and expand access to affordable care,” he said.
Mountain Family Health Centers would apply for capital improvement grants from the new fund to double the size of its Basalt facility and improve its offerings in Glenwood Springs.
There are opponents of the measure who don't represent the tobacco industry. They say the flat-price increase will hurt low-income residents disproportionately. Another viewpoint is that if the tax actually works and people stop buying cigarettes, the health programs the initiative supports will lose that grant money. Brooks disregarded both arguments.
“Let's cross that bridge when we get there, when we really start to tackle tobacco. If we get the vast majority of Coloradans to quit their dependency on tobacco products we are going to have savings throughout the health care system that maybe we can reinvest in other ways, so bluntly, I’m not that worried,” Brooks said.
Smokers who were on a work break behind the Hotel Jerome all said they would keep buying their cigarettes even if they get more expensive.
“It’s not going to get me to quit,” said one smoker. “It’s just like gas, going up or down you’re still gonna drive if you have to.”
