States across the country are experiencing a marked decrease in their anti-smoking program budgets. In Massachusetts, for instance, funding for such initiatives dropped from $50.5 million in 2001 to $4.1 million in 2011 a decrease of more than 90 percent. Where has the rest of the money disappeared to? Predictably, the funds that were supposed to be allocated to anti-tobacco initiatives, as outlined by the 1998 Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement, are too often actually diverted to fill other budget holes as state governments find themselves in dire financial straits.
But as Tom Carbone, president of the Massachusetts Health Officers Association, aptly points out, directing more monies toward anti-smoking initiatives is important, given the toll that tobacco takes on state health care costs. Every dollar we spend on prevention is a few dollars saved on the treatment side, he tells the The Herald News of Massachusetts South Coast.
The problem, however, is not unique to Massachusetts, but is a dilemma affecting the entire nation. And the news comes as no surprise to ACSH s Dr. Gilbert Ross. As we predicted in 1999, he says, taxes and penalties extracted from businesses in the name of public health often meet the same fate; they rarely get used for the purpose they were intended.
And this is a problem indeed, especially for cities like Fall River, Massachusetts, where approximately 28 percent of adults still smoke and about 20 percent of women smoke during pregnancy which is nearly triple the state average. Given a 90 percent decrease in funding, it's difficult to see how the state will combat these rates.
