BIG YEAR AHEAD FOR MISSOURI'S TOBACCO FUNDS

At long last we have what the lawyers call "state-specific finality" in Missouri's tobacco litigation.

With this week's unanimous ruling by the Missouri Supreme Court, Missouri becomes the last of the 46 states to reach this finality, which means all appeals and litigation have been exhausted. Such finality is a necessary pre-condition before money from the national tobacco settlement can start flowing into state coffers.

What the Supreme Court did

The state's high court did several things:

1. It approved the settlement.

2. It upheld the denial of various motions to intervene by private parties and cities.

3. It found the attorney general had authority to enter into a contingency fee contract with private attorneys to represent the state.

4. It modified the subsequent attorneys' fee arrangement in the Master Settlement Agreement, whereby tobacco companies pay the fees of private attorneys representing the state. The court allowed the General Assembly until Dec. 31, 2001 to disapprove the arrangement.

It has long been said that Missouri's share of the tobacco funds will be $ 6.7 billion over 25 years. Informed observers, however, warn that Missouri's share will be less, perhaps far less. Indeed, among the unresolved issues are scores of continuing lawsuits against the tobacco companies, the continuation of which could mean bankruptcy court for the once-mighty tobacco kings.

Now that Missouri, along with most other states, is essentially in partnership with the tobacco companies, any such fate for them would reduce Missouri's share by some presently unknowable but significant amount.

Plenty of ideas for spending the money

Ideas for spending the money are as plentiful as blackberries in July, and each of the 197 members of the Missouri Legislature probably has his or her own.

While lawmakers mull their options in advance of next month's beginning of the 2001 session, a group of special interests has upped the ante by beginning a well-funded and highly organized initiative petition campaign. (See state Sen. Wayne Goode's thoughts on this matter elsewhere on this page.)

This effort, which is being spearheaded by hospitals and life-science companies in our major cities, will ask voters to write into the Constitution how this money is to be spent, literally seeking to place there specified percentages as to how much goes for this and how much for that.

We haven't studied in detail the proposed constitutional amendment. The petition has just been filed with the secretary of state's office. Still, we think it fair to comment on the dubious nature of this proposal.

Why do we have state lawmakers in the first place?

Don't we elect them to go to Jefferson City and, working through the lengthy and arduous appropriations process, decide when, how and where to spend our tax money?

Isn't this an attack on the Legislature's constitutional responsibility to establish state policy?

Why should we write into the Constitution arbitrary percentages concerning how this loot is to be divided up?

Concerns are well-founded

The concerns of Senator Goode, who is chairman of the Senate's Appropriations Committee, are shared by many in both parties. They cry out for an answer from proponents of this constitutional change.

Still another court has held that these tobacco funds are part of "total state revenues" within the meaning of the Hancock Amendment. This issue is before the Supreme Court. You'll be hearing lots about tobacco money in the year ahead.