If tobacco money is spent elsewhere, everyone loses

If tobacco money is spent elsewhere, everyone loses
EDITOR:
Securitization is a fancy word for loan. Securitization is what Gov. Ted Strickland has proposed the state do with its future tobacco settlement dollars. Strickland will sell Ohio's yearly tobacco settlement checks up through 2012 to investors and in return receive a lump sum payment of 5 billion - up front. Sounds like a good idea. What a great way to get a running start at turning Ohio's economy around and balancing the state budget.
It sounds even better when we see that Gov. Strickland wants to use this money to build schools and give a property tax break to seniors. There are few that would argue that seniors could use a property tax. And, more money for schools is a worthy pot to put your money in. But what about putting aside a portion of the securitization for what we originally received the money -- to lessen the burden tobacco use causes to Ohioans? It sounds outlandish, but Gov. Strickland has not included a nickel for future tobacco prevention and cessation programs.
In 2001, the Ohio Tobacco Prevention Foundation (OTPF) was created to implement prevention and cessation programs for Ohio. OTPF received the original 330 million endowment and has been funding four areas of programs: the Ohio Tobacco Quit Line (has helped over 15,000 Ohioans quit tobacco), Community Grants (locally in all counties, prevention and cessation programs implemented), stand (which has reached tens of thousands of youth with the prevention message), and most recently Regional Cessation Centers (we have one at St. Elizabeth's and St. Joseph's). Since 2002, the state has taken tobacco settlement dollars every year to balance the budget. This has amassed 568 million due to OTPF that was promised to be re-paid. Without additional funds, OTPF will run out of money in eight to ten years.
What will that mean for Ohio? Increased tobacco use. People may think that, overall, adult tobacco use will go down after a smoke-free law is enacted. But, studies have shown (Massachusetts is an example) the opposite when a state simultaneously reduces its spending on prevention and cessation services. The same happens for youth tobacco use when tobacco prevention funding is reduced (California is an example).
So, who loses with the governor's budget? Everyone. Even though the state percentage of smokers has gone down since OTPF has been around (from 27.6 percent in 2002 to 22.3 percent in 2005) taxpayers are still paying 458 million to Medicaid for tobacco disease laden recipients every year. This amount has no chance of receding if OTPF programs are cut.
Our children will lose. Tobacco companies spend 750 million a year marketing their products in Ohio alone. Most of that marketing is directed to youth. If there is no counter-advertising, what will stop our youth from starting? Tobacco users lose. Who will be able to help the thousands of Ohioans that are addicted to tobacco when cessation services are cut? Certainly not a state government that doesn't invest in these programs now.
HEATHER KRAUSE
Poland
A story of Easter angels
EDITOR:
I am writing this letter to acknowledge the generosity in our area. On Easter Sunday my little beagle (Bagels) was attacked by my other dog. I had to rush her to the animal hospital and I only had 200 to spend on her. If it wasn't for a wonderful family from Ravenna paying for her hospital bill she would not be with me right now.
These angels who came into my life that night were the most caring family I have ever met. My words could not express how thankful I was to the family. I still haven't been able to fully believe that it happened to me. Things like this don't normally happen to me.
I just wanted it to be publicly known that there are still good people out there, and they are around us when we may most need them.
BRANDY TATAR
Youngstown