Topeka — Gov. Kathleen Sebelius wants a cigarette tax increase to pay for health care.
"A user tax to pay for additional health care makes wonderful sense to me and makes wonderful sense to a lot of Kansans," Sebelius said Monday.
It hasn't made sense to the Kansas Legislature, however.
During the regular session, Sebelius proposed a 50-cent increase in the state cigarette tax, which is 79 cents per pack, to fund an expansion of health coverage.
But it went nowhere in the Legislature. Some complained that it was too soon to hit smokers again after having increased the state cigarette tax from 24 cents per pack to 79 cents per pack in 2002 to prevent a budget shortfall. Others said another substantial increase would prompt Kansas smokers to buy cigarettes outside the state.
Asked Monday if a smaller increase would be more acceptable to lawmakers, Sebelius said, "They didn't even discuss it this year, so it's hard to tell."
Mary Jane Hellebust, director of the Tobacco Free Kansas Coalition, said a cigarette tax increase could be used to expand health care coverage to thousands of Kansans, while also providing an incentive for people to quit smoking, and help fund programs that assist people in quitting.
"A cigarette tax is automatically a win-win situation," Hellebust said.
She also said that Kansas' 79-cent per pack rate ranks 27th in the nation and is below the national state average of 91 cents per pack. Among surrounding states, Kansas' rate is higher than Missouri, 17 cents; and Nebraska, 64 cents; but less than Colorado, 84 cents, and Oklahoma, $1.03.
Sebelius said expanding coverage to uninsured Kansans, getting control of increasing Medicaid costs and responding to federal government changes in health care would be a priority for her in the coming session.
But House Speaker Doug Mays said increasing tobacco taxes would do little to deal with the state's rising Medicaid costs, which have more than tripled over the past decade to more than $1.4 billion annually.
Mays, R-Topeka, also questioned Sebelius' commitment to the proposal, saying it wasn't debated because the Democratic governor didn't push it with the GOP-dominated Legislature.
"We didn't think she was really serious, to tell you the truth," Mays said.
Lawmakers also are focusing on ways to contain the Medicaid costs that have tripled over the past 10 years.
Comments
LJWorld.com doesn’t necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.
merrill (anonymous) says…
Rep.Mays is slamming Gov. Sebelius due to his inability to schedule the important matters that were on the table. This man has his priorities mixed up.
Yes...absolutely raise the tobacco tax. Then begin to lower costs for all Kansans through a taxpayer funded single pay system. This would be a huge benefit for small business. As it is all those currently insured are picking up the tab for those who are not through increased costs in charges for care.
Some are saying they are paying more however receiving less in benefits. Some also say premiums are not increasing
but benefits are decreasing. Either way equals increased cost to each policy holder. Hospitals and medical clinics need to make it up somewhere. Cancer treatment is not only very painful but expensive as my mother in law is discovering as we speak.
Perhaps if thousands cancelled their health insurance simultaneously the health insurance industry would get the message that clients are sick and tired of being gouged. The health care industry is always considered a safe investment on Wall Street...why is that? Health care CEO salaries are just as obscene as most others. Investors likely love their returns. The question becomes what are we supporting?
30% of the cost is for paperwork and the handling of such.
A single pay system could dramatically cut the cost to everyone.
erichaar (anonymous) says…
Whether it's Doug Mays, Jerry Moran or a trained squirrel, Kansas must get rid of Kathleen Sebelius. She is truly the do-nothing governor. Do-nothing except raise taxes on working families, that is.
dirkleisure (anonymous) says…
Thanks Eric. At least we know she hasn't raised your taxes, as you don't work.
Oh, wait. You're an "entrepreneur," or at least like to ID yourself to reporters as such.
Is that what they call slimy staffers for Ryun these days? Stop wasting federal tax dollars posting political messages.
Love your bumper stickers. So original. What's next, the Macarena against Sebelius? Or maybe the Lambada?
topekahawk (anonymous) says…
merrill,
Single-payer is a GREAT idea. Maybe Kansas could get someone from Tennessee to manage it. They did wonders with TennCare. Oh, I guess it didn't work there. OK, maybe we can just raise the tobacco tax to $2/pack and raise income taxes 50%. That will fund even MORE government programs. Maybe we can make government in Kansas so big that Sebelius will water and mow my yard for me. This governor is a JOKE. She's great at photo-ops and press releases and proposing tax increases though.
Becky (anonymous) says…
So one group of people will pay for health care? Shouldn't we all pay for it? Taxing one item is not going to help.
pursegirl (anonymous) says…
How can anyone accuse our governor of being a "do-nothing" when it is the Republican led legislature that stops any positive improvements for Kansans? Let us not forget the recent special session needed due to the unwillingness of Republicans to work beyond party lines and FOR Kansans. Taxing cigarettes is problematic, but an inactive and un-creative legislature leaves little choice. The people in Kansas need better access to affordable and quality healthcare. Somehow we have to accomplish this.
merrill (anonymous) says…
To Becky ...yes. Everyone would be paying for it if everyone could afford it.
Eric why are you and your boss Jim Ryun against everyone having health care. Your boss Rep Jim Ryun hates big government yet he will not remove himself from the taxpayers payroll and will be more than happy to allow the taxpayers to send him a retirement check in addition to paying for his health care for his entire family until the day he dies. Sam Brownback is the same way.
Topeka Hawk... I am glad you like the idea. Governor Sebelius and Sandy Praeger would do a much better job at managing the system. They know what they are doing. Just because it did not work from the home state of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist who probaly disapproved of the concept does not mean it would fail in Kansas. Did the program cut into the Frist family HMO profits?
Rep Doug Mays cannot manage tax dollars or schedule properly matters that taxpayers want dealt with...he's more concerned with other peoples private lives and so are his pals on the state board of education. And he is so vindictive.
merrill (anonymous) says…
Our tax dollars pay government employees at the local,state and federal levels. We pay for federal elected officials and their families for the rest of their lives. So if the state government wants to manage,more or less, medcial care for all Kansans why not do it? Isn't a high dollar healthcare premium a tax on your income? Why not let the Governor do it for less.
Many politicians would say no. Of course the health care industry spends lots of your health care dough on political campaigns, high salaried CEO's and stockholders.
opinionated (anonymous) says…
Why make one group of people pay more taxes than everyone else? It's not like they are millionaires.
I think the state of Kansas just needs to learn how to manage their money better instead of taking more of mine. I support a family of 3 on a meager income. I have to always budget for everything, why can't the state of Kansas learn to do the same. But instead of budgeting with money they don't have, they should budget with what they have. Stop digging into my pocket for more and more money. Pretty soon everyone in Kansas is going to be broke from paying taxes and starving to death, but we will have healthcare, if you can afford it of course.
merrill (anonymous) says…
To avoid filling in
and requesting payment from dozens of insurance companies (which requires the hiring of many extra personnel by medical providers,) all payments need to be handled by one institution, and there would be one standard insurnace form used. All companies have different plans,provisions,
etc, payments, etc. Most people who are working toward health care for all believe this "one party" would be the government (as in Medicare,
which is efficient). Because some people interpet this as "socialized medicine" (which it is not) the one party term has been adopted, you might say euphemistically to make it more palatable. The point is that so much money is absorbed by the insurance companies (this is where they
make their money), in administrative costs, that health insurance is astronomical It is not the actual cost of the care. Also, medical providers must pay many extra salaries to hire personnel for all this paper work for so many different companies.