Both tobacco tax hike proposals Missouri voters will decide in November are flawed.
Constitutional Amendment 3 would raise the cigarette tax to 67 cents per pack with the revenues earmarked for a newly created Early Childhood Health and Education Trust Fund.
Proposition A would raise the cigarette tax to 23 cents a pack with the money dedicated to transportation infrastructure projects.
Missouri's cigarette tax is now 17 cents a pack.
Neither proposal prioritizes dedicating tobacco-related revenue to smoking prevention and cessation programs. In that regard, both proposals would mirror Missouri's woeful practice of diverting funds from the tobacco settlement to unrelated programs and services.
To be fair, Amendment 3 at least directs a fraction amount - between 5 and 10 percent - to tobacco prevention and cessation grants.
Opponents of the measure - including the Petroleum Marketers and Convenience Stores Association - contend it is a scam created by the major tobacco companies. "Big Tobacco," said Ron Leone, the association's executive director, "is funding Amendment 3 because it increases Big Tobacco's cigarette profits and market share by massively and unfairly taxing their competition."
Another strike against this proposal is it would amend the Missouri Constitution.
Unlike Proposition A, which could be amended by the Legislature, a constitutional amendment could only be altered by a subsequent statewide vote.
Proposition A, however, also contains a bitter pill. If approved, any subsequent tax increase proposal would begin from the current, 17-cent base, rather than the 50-cent tax the proposed law would establish.
In an oddity for this election, these are competing proposals. Voters can't have both, even if both are approved by a simple majority; in that event, only the one receiving the most votes will survive.
On matters of public policy, choosing the lesser of two evils is ill-advised. Based on their respective flaws, both Amendment 3 and Proposition A deserve to be rejected.