Tired of ads? Subscribers enjoy a distraction-free reading experience.
Click here to subscribe today or Login.

Tuesday, February 01, 2000     Page: 6A

Thank you for your editorial in sup port of spending a large percentage of
tobacco settlement funds on tobacco control, prevention and treatment programs
(Jan. 27).
   
It appears that many state officials would rather appease special interest
groups than provide the stewardship necessary to achieve the goals of the
states’ lawsuit to reduce the taxpayers’ burden for smoking costs and to
reduce youth nicotine addiction.
    And what about the ethics of hospitals, cancer centers and health-care
advocates who justify funds for themselves by downplaying the ravages of the
drug addiction that afflicts 2.2 million Pennsylvanians and that kills 22,000
every year?
   
Medical expenditures for treating tobacco diseases were $4 billion in 1993
in Pennsylvania. These costs will be about $5.7 billion this year and are
projected to be $7.3 billion by 2005.
   
In contrast, the state will receive only between $350 and $400 million
annually in tobacco settlement revenue. Unless a significant portion of these
funds are spent to reduce nicotine addiction, Pennsylvania taxpayers will
continue paying even more to treat lung cancer, emphysema, heart attacks and
other deadly diseases caused by tobacco industry products.
   
But Gov. Ridge has proposed spending just $50-$60 million annually for
tobacco control programs, which is just $25 per smoker and just 20 percent of
what Big Tobacco now spends urging Pennsylvanians to smoke. Can anyone imagine
reducing cocaine or heroin addiction by spending just $25 per addict?
   
Pennsylvanians need to remind their elected officials in Harrisburg that
programs to reduce smoking are not only sound health and fiscal policy, but
will achieve the goals of the state’s lawsuit.
   
Bill Godshall
Executive Director
   
SmokeFree Pennsylvania
   
Pittsburgh