LOTS OF QUESTIONS BEFORE VOTE ON TOBACCO FUNDS

A plan by state Sen. Ed Quick that would allow voters to decide how Missouri should spend its $6.7 billion share of a national tobacco settlement sounds like a fair way of deciding the matter, but the Legislature must give it serious thought before putting the question before Missourians.

Quick raises good points when he says a vote of the people would be the "cleanest" and "fastest" way to settle the issue, and if voters don't decide the matter it most surely will end up in court for years.

The matter already is before the Missouri Eastern District Court of Appeals in St. Louis. The state can't begin receiving any of the settlement money until that court case is settled. It centers on whether the state has an obligation to give part of the settlement to parties who claim economic or personal injuries from tobacco. The state already has $50 million of the tobacco money in escrow pending outcome of the court's decision.

Under Quick's proposal, voters also would decide whether the money should be considered total state revenue. If they were to decide it is, that would entitle taxpayers to refunds under the Hancock Amendment, which specifies that revenue growth can't exceed by more than 1 percent the growth in the personal income of Missourians.

Quick's measure proposes that voters decide the issue next November. The Legislature would have to pass another measure officially putting it on the ballot. In addition, Quick's legislation proposes creation of a Missouri Tobacco Settlement Trust Fund to hold the funds until voters decide the issue.

The measure will face a tough battle in the Legislature. Fellow Democratic Sen. Wayne Goode, the Senate budget chairman, insists lawmakers should be left with the responsibility of appropriating the money. Goode says the annual payment is a small amount, making up only about 1 percent of the state's total budget. Goode believes the public isn't familiar enough with the state budget to decide how the money should be spent.

The real problem with Quick's proposal is how the ballot question would be worded. Would Missourians be given an either-or choice on how to spend the money, or would they be given a list of multiple choices?