<!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<html><head><style type="text/css"><!--
blockquote, dl, ul, ol, li { padding-top: 0 ; padding-bottom: 0 }
--></style><title>Re: [Vision2020] S.J.R. 107</title></head><body>
<div>Ted,</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>One possible downside is the result of the various tax cuts of
the last few years: the tobacco money has been routinely used to fill
the funding gap left by the reductions in income tax revenues. We hear
all the time from the governor (past and present) and the majority
party legislators that we are now exceeding tax revenue forecasts so
those cuts must be working and presumably they don't "need"
to keep raiding the tobacco/public health fund. This conveniently
overlooks the simple facts that to balance the budget for the past
five years or so they have starved public education, higher education
and state employee compensation (last year was the first time in that
period in which state employees saw a raise and even that barely kept
up with COL adjustments for the one previous year). A reasonable
guesstimate of the unfunded needs of the state dwarfs the entire
current state budget.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>This is a long way of saying that under the current political
leadership in Boise, removing the tobacco fund from the general budget
revenue sources could be used as an excuse by leadership to further
starve or cut state funded obligations.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>But who knows, maybe that leadership will change on
Tuesday.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Mark S.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>At 11:41 PM +0000 11/5/06, Ted Moffett wrote:</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>Bruce-<br>
<br>
Thanks for your response on S.J.R. 107.<br>
<br>
As far as I can ascertain, voting "Yes" on S.J.R. 107
appears to be reasonable. But legislation can have many
unexpected and hidden consequences, as we all know, and is sometimes
presented to the voter deliberately to hide these consequences.
I was expecting someone might be in the know about the possible
unexpected or hidden consequences of a "Yes" vote on this
issue.<br>
<br>
Ted Moffett<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>On 11/5/06,<b> Bruce and Jean
Livingston</b> <<a
href="mailto:jeanlivingston@turbonet.com">jeanlivingston@turbonet.com</a
>> wrote:<br>
<blockquote>My understanding is that Idaho received a proportionate
share of money received from tobacco companies as part of a national
settlement of class action lawsuits against tobacco companies.
If my understanding is correct, the money has been used by the
Legislature on general state spending in times of state
government economic hardship, and has not been spent on health and
education issues that relate to tobacco smoking as the settlement was
originally intended. The issue on the ballot is an attempt to
create a separate endowment for this money, isolating it from the
State's general fund and preserving it for use in tobacco related uses
of anti-tobacco education and to alleviate negative impacts of tobacco
caused illnesses on our health care system.</blockquote>
<blockquote> </blockquote>
<blockquote>The Lewiston Tribune had this editorial regarding it this
morning:<br>
<blockquote>SJR 107: Another amendment, but a less controversial and
less dangerous one, this creates a permanent endowment fund that would
receive 80 percent of Idaho's revenue from the multistate settlement
with tobacco companies. This will protect that share of the receipts
from being used for ordinary state spending, as has happened in the
past. It's a smart move, and deserves your support.<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>Perhaps Reps. Trail or Ringo, or someone else in the
know, might elaborate on this, as I am writing from a general
feeling or vague recollection, and although I<i> think</i> that I
am speaking accurately, I might inadvertently be
mischaracterizing the facts in some fashion.</blockquote>
<blockquote> </blockquote>
<blockquote>Bruce Livingston</blockquote>
<blockquote> <br>
<blockquote>----- Original Message -----</blockquote>
<blockquote><b>From:</b> <a href="mailto:starbliss@gmail.com">Ted
Moffett</a></blockquote>
<blockquote><b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">
Vision2020</a></blockquote>
<blockquote><b>Sent:</b> Saturday, November 04, 2006 11:59
AM</blockquote>
<blockquote><b>Subject:</b> [Vision2020] S.J.R. 107</blockquote>
<blockquote><br></blockquote>
<blockquote> </blockquote>
<blockquote>All-</blockquote>
<blockquote> </blockquote>
<blockquote>My team of Boston lawyers kept on the payroll to explain
complex legal language that might mislead is on
vacation...</blockquote>
<blockquote> </blockquote>
<blockquote>This might not be the hottest political issue or race on
the ballot, but can anyone offer their opinion on S.J.R. 107, which
will create something called the Idaho Millennium Permanent Endowment
Fund for tobacco settlement funds, etc.?</blockquote>
<blockquote> </blockquote>
<blockquote>Ted Moffett<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<hr></blockquote>
<blockquote>=======================================================<br
>
List services made available by First Step Internet,<br>
serving the communities of the Palouse since
1994. <br>
<span
></span> <a
href="http://www.fsr.net">http://www.fsr.net</a
> <span
></span> <br
>
mailto:<a
href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">Vision2020@moscow.com</a><br>
=======================================================</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<div><br></div>
</body>
</html>