In actuality, according to the State of Oregon's Legislative Revenue Office, 70% of the revenues raised will not be spent on the Healthy Kids Program, which Measure 50 is to fund. And sixty-five million dollars will be left to the discretion of the Legislature to spend - the so-called blank check part of this Measure. In our view, the last thing we should give Legislators is more money to spend. So, why is the ballot title so misleading? In an unusual move, the Legislature specifically exempted its ballot title from the normal process whereby deceptive titles can be challenged and changed. So, our first concern with Measure 50 is its misleading ballot title.

We also oppose this Measure because it attempts to create a new unfunded entitlement. Oregon already has taxpayer subsidized health insurance for children in low-income households. This Measure would expand such programs to children in higher income households. It would fund the Healthy Kids Program, which is eligible for any uninsured child under the age of 19, regardless of income. It also covers some adults. In essence, this means that Measure 50 takes a giant step towards creating a health-insurance entitlement for everyone, a key move towards socialized medicine.

The second part of Measure 50 is the funding mechanism. Supposedly, this new health insurance entitlement will be funded by new cigarette taxes. But the government experts tell us that the costs of these new health care programs will sky-rocket in the near future, while cigarette revenues will, at best, stay the same. So, the deceit continues. The Ballot Measure misstates its purpose, and lies about how it will fund what it establishes over the coming years.

We think that the cigarette tax mechanism is objectionable on its face. Why put a tax on a specific commodity in the Constitution? The answer is that the backers of this measure couldn't muster the 60% vote required for tax increases in the Oregon Legislature, so they had to go to the people for the tax increase. But the Constitution is no place for a commodity-specific tax. And why tax tobacco? The obvious answer is that cigarette smokers are the new villain minority that nobody minds kicking when they're down. We find this sort of class-taxation objectionable. Add to that the fact that most cigarette smokers are low income, and most would like to quit but can't, and this whole taxing scheme seems reprehensible.

Clearly, we all want healthy children. We think the solution lies in reducing, not increasing, state control of medicine. Current government mandates on health insurance companies have added to the costs of insurance by forcing them to cover, for instance, contraceptives and mental health counseling. But even if the bulk of Oregonians want to provide for healthy kids through taxation, it should be taxation on all of us, not just a few. It's easy to spend someone else's money to do your good deed. That's not noble or praiseworthy. And that's what Measure 50 proposes - tax smokers so the rest of us can think we did something good for kids. The approach is wrong-headed. We urge your No vote on Measure 50.