Enticing greenery from the tobacco settlement -- in the form of billions of dollars -- has people falling all over each other to spend the anticipated windfall and to claim credit for the deal. Sorting it all out should not be that complicated.
First, it is the epitome of arrogance for the federal government -- unable to broker a national resolution that would have been preferred to settling directly with the states -- to now come calling for part of the cash.The Clinton administration has threatened to seek what it claims is the federal government's share unless states agree to spend settlement money on health-related matters. Governors -- including Utah's Mike Leavitt -- have rightly responded that since states fought for the cash, the feds ought to keep its mitts off of it. That they should.
Congress bungled a great opportunity to settle for more money and more consistent restrictions against tobacco companies. The states picked up the ball and ran with it. Now Washington is asking for it back, but it's a bit late for that. If it can't collect the money, the federal government is threatening to mandate how the states spend it in typical "big-brother" fashion. That routine wore thin long ago. Fortunately, there are some in Washington who have the sense to recognize that.
Senators last Thursday killed Sen. Arlen Specter's amendment to a $1.9 billion spending bill that would have required states to spend 50 percent of the money on programs to reduce smoking and assist tobacco farmers. Majority Leader Trent Lott, R-Miss., called it "typical federal government arrogance." Fortunately, a majority of his colleagues agreed.
Utah's own Rep. Jim Hansen has a much more reasonable idea. He has sponsored legislation that would let states keep all of the money from the tobacco settlement if they agree to spend at least 25 percent of it on tobacco control. That is a common-sense compromise that would ensure a reasonable share of the money went toward reducing tobacco use. That, after all, is what the whole settlement was about. The money should be viewed as more than merely a general windfall.
Hansen's bill would address the problem of teen smoking as Washington wishes, but it would still provide the states discretion to spend 75 percent of money that in reality is all rightfully theirs. It should be supported, or the federal government should altogether butt out of a tobacco settlement it had nothing to do with.