A SCHIP-like referendum in Oregon should give those advocating more government in health care some pause:
Oregon reproduced the current Schip fracas in D.C. on the state level — and the referendum took a major shellacking, with voters siding three to two against . . .. . . We’re surprised the Governor thinks voters in his left-leaning state are so easily gulled — especially in a contest between “healthy kids” and cigarettes. More persuasive is the notion that voters didn’t want to pass a state tax increase to finance a health-care expansion that Congress might soon pass, along with buckets of federal dollars. But most likely, voters understood that a tax increase on cigarettes is still a tax increase, and a highly regressive one at that. Only about 20% of Oregonians smoke, and most of those are lower income.
Similar Posts:
- E-cigarettes are not safe, and here’s why
- Health care reform requires listening to doctors and patients; my New York Times take
- Analysis of the Senate Finance Committee health care reform bill
KevinMD.com on Facebook
{ 3 comments }
There is the speculation that when only poor people smoke, it will finally be outlawed.
And there’s also the question, why, even if you do support large scale government takeover of health care dollars, would you want to tie your funding to maintaining a large number of smokers in your state? It makes no sense, no matter how you slice it.
The Oregonian newspaper calculated that the tobacco industry spent $24 for each “no” vote… outspending the supporters by at least 4-to-1.
Comments on this entry are closed.