Questions? Call us!
In one of the earliest studies on the impact of ASM, Gross et al31 concluded that ASS funding did not have a significant impact on public funding for tobacco control, not least because only a small portion of MSA funds were spent on relevant public programs. Others concluded that by 2003, states would spend 39% of their ASM funding on health care, including health services, smoking prevention, long-term care and biomedical research32. Because of the economic downtown, 36 states (twice as many as in 2002) used tobacco revenues to support general state funding.32 More detailed studies conducted by individual states confirmed these results of generally mixed efforts and effects. According to the Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education, California`s tobacco policy was “stalled and stalled” between 1999 and 2001,42 with the Davis administration refusing to spend large amounts of MSA credits on anti-smoking programs for youth. However, the other noted that California`s record has become much more positive in recent years, 25.43 In Massachusetts, a national tobacco control program in operation since 1992 experienced serious budgetary problems until 2003, because the state was unwilling to pursue much of its MSA funds since 1992. – North Carolina (like other tobacco-producing countries) has allocated far more resources to tobacco producers and their communities than to tobacco control efforts45. that the state used MSA funds to support the Initiatives of the North Carolina Fit, a number of obesity reduction programs.46 A particularly controversial practice was the placement of cigarette products and their use in films that often have a high proportion of young viewers. A recent study suggests that about 390,000 teens start smoking each year because they have smoking behaviours in movies. It has been estimated that 89% of films have at least some images of smoke, and that the frequency of these images has increased considerably in recent years, including in PG-13 films. One study concluded that the placement of tobacco products in films generated additional revenues of $4.1 billion and nearly $900 million in additional benefits to the U.S. tobacco industry.28,29 Second, older, larger and more well-established groups are more likely to be involved in public health policy than newer and smaller groups59 once the MSA agreement has established that MSA funds should not be “dedicated” (that they could be used in any way), the matrix has been 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.