Second, older, larger and more established groups are more likely to win in public health policy than newer and smaller groups.59 As soon as the ASM agreement established that MSA funds should not be “dedicated” (that they could be used in one way or another, which one state considered fair), the matrix was cast. MSA funds are “found money” and the most politically powerful groups are more likely to get their hands on them. Proponents of tobacco control need to understand that their goals, no matter how valid, will generally be less important to state legislators than the need to raise taxes, minimize them and, at the same time, satisfy the eternal essentials of public spending, particularly education and Medicaid. If tobacco control is to continue, it will have to do so as a junior partner in an alliance with institutional interests such as this one. To fill this gap, the National Association of Attorneys General (“NAAG”) introduced the Allocable Share Release Repealer (ASR Repealer) in late 2002, a model status that eliminated the RSA. In a September 12, 2003 memo, Attorney General William H. Sorrell of Vermont, president of the NAAG Tobacco Project, stressed the urgency that “all states take steps to combat the proliferation of NPM sales, including the adoption of additional legislation and allied action laws and the consideration of other measures to serve the interests of states to avoid a reduction in tobacco benefits.” He noted that “NPM sales across the country hurt all countries,” that NPM sales in each state reduce payments to any other state, and that states have an interest in reducing NPM sales in each state.  Fellows at the Cato Institute, such as Robert Levy, argue that the complaint against tobacco comparison was triggered by the need to make payments from recipients to Medicaid recipients. After the passage of legislation that eliminated the ability of tobacco companies to prove their defence in court, tobacco companies were forced to set up shop. The big four tobacco companies agreed to pay billions of dollars to state governments, but the government in turn had to protect the big four tobacco companies from competition. The Master Settlement Agreement, they say, created an unconstitutional agreement that ended both government and big tobacco.
  Under the “qualifying law,” non-signatory tobacco companies (also known as “non-participating producers” or “NPMs”) must deposit a portion of their revenues into a trust account.
Categorised in: Uncategorized
This post was written by ammoore