macjoe53
08-16-2007, 11:03 PM
THIS JUST IN.....
August 16, 2007
Dear Mr. Gibson:
Thank you for contacting me regarding the tobacco tax increase that Congress proposed. I appreciate your taking the time to share your views with me.
I am a strong supporter of the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), which will be funded by the tax increase. On August 2, the Senate passed the Children’s Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007 (S. 1893). I voted for this legislation.
I understand your concerns about a tobacco tax increase. The proposed tax per cigar is 53% of the sale price, and the bill originally included a $10 cap on the tax per cigar. However, the Senate approved an amendment that reduced the cap to $3. With this reduction, cigars with a sale price of $5.66 or higher would be taxed no more than $3. According to the Cigar Association, the average manufacturer’s sale price for popular-priced cigars, which make up 94% of the cigar market, is 30 cents. Therefore, under this bill, the average tax on 94% of all cigars sold in the U.S. would be 16 cents.
The Children’s Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act will increase the tobacco tax that currently funds the federal matching grant for CHIP, which will allow the program to continue to cover the children from low-income families whom it is meant to serve. This bill increases the funding that is needed to provide coverage for children who are currently eligible for CHIP. If this bill is not enacted, 800,000 children currently in CHIP could lose their coverage. This bill also covers 2.6 million children who are already eligible but do not have coverage. It expands coverage to only 600,000 new children.
Thank you again for writing me regarding this matter. Please feel free to continue to contact me on issues of mutual concern.
With warmest regards, I am
Sincerely,
Mary L. Landrieu
United States Senator
MY REPLY TO HER REPLY
Dear Senator Landrieu,
Thank you for taking the time to clarify you position. The information on the Senate proposed tax on cigars is interesting and is definitely better than what the House has passed in terms on how much the tax is.
I too am in favor of providing that qualified children are provided with the health care they need. Where I disagree with you on the bills which have been passed is the expansion of the program to include even more children and families, many of which do not meet the current criteria.
For example, I find it hard to define as a “child” someone who is 25 years old. At 25 years of age, they are old enough to vote, buy alcohol and tobacco, get married or enter into a partnership, own a business, buy and own a home, and serve in the military. I also disagree that a family or individual earning $80,000 a year is poverty stricken. Under the new bills, a individual could be 25 years old and earning $80,000 a year and qualify for the CHIP program.
$80,000 is more than 95 percent of the people serving in the military make and Congress and the Senate has never considered military personnel to be poverty stricken. Indeed, when it comes time for military pay raises, many members of Congress and the Senate remark on how well compensated the military is when they are voting to lower the pay raise percentage.
I am sorry but you and the other supporters of the CHIP reauthorization acts are not acting in the best interest of this country. And while I understand that no politician wants to be viewed as being “against the children”, I feel that expanding CHIP in the manner which both the House and Senate have chosen is nothing more than building a bigger government program that will eventually hurt many middle income wage earners like myself.
Sincerely
Joe Gibson
August 16, 2007
Dear Mr. Gibson:
Thank you for contacting me regarding the tobacco tax increase that Congress proposed. I appreciate your taking the time to share your views with me.
I am a strong supporter of the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), which will be funded by the tax increase. On August 2, the Senate passed the Children’s Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007 (S. 1893). I voted for this legislation.
I understand your concerns about a tobacco tax increase. The proposed tax per cigar is 53% of the sale price, and the bill originally included a $10 cap on the tax per cigar. However, the Senate approved an amendment that reduced the cap to $3. With this reduction, cigars with a sale price of $5.66 or higher would be taxed no more than $3. According to the Cigar Association, the average manufacturer’s sale price for popular-priced cigars, which make up 94% of the cigar market, is 30 cents. Therefore, under this bill, the average tax on 94% of all cigars sold in the U.S. would be 16 cents.
The Children’s Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act will increase the tobacco tax that currently funds the federal matching grant for CHIP, which will allow the program to continue to cover the children from low-income families whom it is meant to serve. This bill increases the funding that is needed to provide coverage for children who are currently eligible for CHIP. If this bill is not enacted, 800,000 children currently in CHIP could lose their coverage. This bill also covers 2.6 million children who are already eligible but do not have coverage. It expands coverage to only 600,000 new children.
Thank you again for writing me regarding this matter. Please feel free to continue to contact me on issues of mutual concern.
With warmest regards, I am
Sincerely,
Mary L. Landrieu
United States Senator
MY REPLY TO HER REPLY
Dear Senator Landrieu,
Thank you for taking the time to clarify you position. The information on the Senate proposed tax on cigars is interesting and is definitely better than what the House has passed in terms on how much the tax is.
I too am in favor of providing that qualified children are provided with the health care they need. Where I disagree with you on the bills which have been passed is the expansion of the program to include even more children and families, many of which do not meet the current criteria.
For example, I find it hard to define as a “child” someone who is 25 years old. At 25 years of age, they are old enough to vote, buy alcohol and tobacco, get married or enter into a partnership, own a business, buy and own a home, and serve in the military. I also disagree that a family or individual earning $80,000 a year is poverty stricken. Under the new bills, a individual could be 25 years old and earning $80,000 a year and qualify for the CHIP program.
$80,000 is more than 95 percent of the people serving in the military make and Congress and the Senate has never considered military personnel to be poverty stricken. Indeed, when it comes time for military pay raises, many members of Congress and the Senate remark on how well compensated the military is when they are voting to lower the pay raise percentage.
I am sorry but you and the other supporters of the CHIP reauthorization acts are not acting in the best interest of this country. And while I understand that no politician wants to be viewed as being “against the children”, I feel that expanding CHIP in the manner which both the House and Senate have chosen is nothing more than building a bigger government program that will eventually hurt many middle income wage earners like myself.
Sincerely
Joe Gibson