Tobacco bill advancing through legislature
SIOUX FALLS, S.D. (KELO) — If it becomes law, Senate Bill 54 would decrease the amount of money that goes into South Dakota's Tobacco Prevention and Reduction Trust Fund. Those who support the change call it a necessary step because of the state's tight budget. Opponents worry it could impact smoking and vaping rates.
Under the current South Dakota law, the first $30 million of tax revenue from cigarettes and other tobacco products goes to the state general fund. The next $5 million goes into the Tobacco Prevention and Reduction Trust Fund.
Senate Bill 54 would reduce the amount going toward the Tobacco and Prevention Trust Fund to $2 million, allowing an extra $3 million to go into the general fund.
Jim Terwilliger, commissioner of the Bureau of Finance and Management, is a proponent of the bill.
'This is one of the areas where we felt we could still do a really good job of offering tobacco prevention services but also be smarter with how we spend the money and then allocate some of those funds to the general fund, which will help cover some of our increased health care costs that we're seeing on the general fund side,' Terwilliger said.
Carla Graciano with the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network opposes the $3 million cut.
'The tobacco companies are spending about $24.9 million per year on marketing for their products in South Dakota,' Graciano said. 'We're only spending $5 million to fund our tobacco prevention and control program, and a $3 million cut is going to be detrimental to reduce smoking rates.'
Terwilliger points to a recent decrease in smoking rates in South Dakota. Graciano says Senate Bill 54 could turn those numbers around.
'That problem has gotten gotten smaller over time. The public's attitude towards tobacco has changed, so we thought it was an opportunity to reinvest those dollars into other areas,' Terwilliger said.
'If we don't have the resources to keep programs like the Quit Line, we know that the smoking rates are going to increase, and the smoking deaths are going to also increase,' Graciano said.
SB 54 passed the Senate by a vote of 21-14. Next, it heads to the House.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
7 days ago
- Yahoo
Override by lawmakers revives bill to stiffen DUI penalties
OKLAHOMA CITY (KFOR) – Oklahoma legislators used their final hours of the legislative session to override 47 of Governor Kevin Stitt's vetoes. One of the bills revived dealt with stiffer penalties for DUI offenders. Senate Bill 54 unanimously passed through the override process in the House but squeaked by in the Senate, gaining the necessary two-thirds majority. Jeff Murrow, executive director of Victims of Impaired Drivers (VOID OK) has been actively advocating for tougher DUI laws at the State Capitol since his daughter's death. 'Marissa was killed in October of 2020 by a man that was nearly three times the legal limit. Driving the wrong way on the Kilpatrick Turnpike,' said Murrow. Oklahoma lawmakers override record number of vetoes, remove Stitt appointee in dramatic end to legislative session He said the man behind the wheel had four previous DUIs.'You can't say it's a mistake when it's their second, third, fourth time to repeat,' said Murrow. He helped draft the bill which expanded penalties for aggravated DUI to include other crimes like causing an accident, eluding police, speeding in a school zone, and driving with someone under 18 in the car. Governor Stitt vetoed the bill saying that it was 'imposing one-size-fits-all penalties risks unjust outcomes and unnecessary incarceration.' But Murrow disagreed.'What we're trying to do is stop treating DUI as a one-size-fits-all,' said Murrow. According to the Oklahoma County Detention Center, the jail has dealt with 678 DUI charges since January 1, 2025. The jail saw 84 people facing DUI charges brought in during the month of May, with 17 of those as repeat offenders. It's a patter Murrow hopes to prevent with the new law.'We can't just put people right back on the street and let them continue to drink and drive or abuse drugs and drive,' said Murrow. The new law will go into effect November 1st. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Medscape
15-05-2025
- Medscape
Opt-Out Default Helps Smokers Get Treatment, But Not Quit
Changing the default for a behavioral change smoking cessation program from opt in to opt out resulted in large gains for referrals to treatment in new research. However, gains in referrals didn't lead to gains in quitting smoking. Scott Sherman, MD, MPH, with VA New York Harbor Healthcare System in New York City presented his team's poster at Society of General Internal Medicine (SGIM) 2025 Annual Meeting in Hollywood, Florida. 'This change, which did not require additional staff, had a profound effect on care,' the authors wrote. But Sherman told Medscape Medical News he was disappointed when they found out with surveys at 2 years and electronic health record information that increased referrals and engagement didn't lead to the ultimate goal of quitting. Behavioral Treatments Underused Behavioral treatments for helping patients quit smoking are effective but underused, and most use an opt-in approach so patients have to enroll, the authors wrote. This opt-out approach refers everyone to treatment unless they choose not to participate. The researchers conducted a cluster randomized trial at the VA New York Harbor Healthcare System and randomized all nursing assistants and registered nurses (NAs/RNs) either to an opt-in or opt-out approach. In the opt-in approach group (n = 1975), providers got clinical reminders annually to refer patients who smoke either to the New York State Quitline program or to a text messaging service. Interested patients completed a referral form. In the opt-out group (n = 749), the reminder instructed the NAs/RNs to tell people who smoke that they would be automatically referred to the Quitline or to text messaging unless they opted out by completing a form. Referrals Spike With Opt-Out They found people seen by NAs/RNs in the opt-out group (n = 749) were much more likely to be referred to text messaging (46% vs 6%; odds ratio [OR], 21.0; 95% CI, 8.9-49.8) or the Quitline (45% vs 5%; OR, 29.2; 95% CI, 11.5-74.2) than those seen in the opt-in approach. Those in the opt-out group were also much more likely to participate in text messaging (43% vs 5%; OR, 23.5; 95% CI, 9.7-56.9) and more likely to engage in counseling through the Quitline (5% vs 0.7%; OR, 8.9; 95% CI, 4.1-19.5) than patients in the opt-in group. Patients were just as likely in either group to report they were strongly encouraged to receive a referral (OR, 1.48; 95% CI, 0.87-2.51) and that the overall quality of discussion was very good or better (OR, 1.23; 95% CI, 0.79-1.98). However, the researchers noted, those in the opt-out group were twice as likely to report they felt forced to receive a referral (OR, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.14-3.68). No Added Staffing, But Unknown Costs Jennifer Hauler, DO, a family and emergency medicine physician and chief medical officer at Premier Health in Dayton, Ohio, noted that behavioral counseling programs have proven effective in helping people to quit smoking. She told Medscape Medical News that strategies that increase referrals to these programs are of high interest especially when they don't require additional staffing. However, she said, 'While the study highlights that no additional staff resources were required, it does not quantify the potential increased costs incurred by the Quitline or cessation programs.' Hauler added that combination with pharmacotherapy may boost results. 'The addition of pharmacotherapy to behavioral interventions has been shown to enhance cessation outcomes,' she said. Sherman said he hopes to tweak the protocol in future research to see if changes could bring better results in quitting. 'We got them to treatment, so why didn't it work?' he said he asks himself. He said there are still messages in the work for physicians. One is that 'simple changes to the way we deliver care can have profound effects,' Sherman said. 'The only thing we did was change the default.' More physician encouragement for patients trying to quit may also help those who have gotten as far as treatment, he said. 'Patients often say that the doctor's advice really matters to them.' Sherman said he was surprised to see that twice as many patients in the opt-out group felt forced to receive a referral. 'As a primary care doctor, I certainly don't want to force my patients to do anything, but at the same time I don't mind pushing them to do something that's really good for their health.' Finding the right balance is key, he said.
Yahoo
04-04-2025
- Yahoo
South Dakota tobacco tax shift burns up mosquito control money for cities, counties
A move to put more tobacco tax money toward South Dakota's day-to-day government expenses might mean more mosquito bites — and a greater risk of West Nile virus — after July. Gov. Larry Rhoden signed Senate Bill 54 into law on Friday. It reduces the amount of yearly tobacco tax revenue used to help people quit and avoid smoking from $5 million to $2 million. The rest of the money raised annually by the tax — more than $40 million, typically — goes to the state's general fund. Backers of the bill said smoking rates have dropped, the need for prevention is lower, and the state needs the money to pay for its expanded Medicaid program. Opponents called the move foolish, citing spikes in the use of nicotine vape products as a blind spot in tobacco prevention that could cause public health trouble down the road. One piece of the tobacco tax change didn't get much attention, though. For the past 10 years, South Dakota has funneled a half-million dollars of the sin tax bounty it collects annually from tobacco users into mosquito control grants for cities and counties. Those grants, cities and counties learned last week, won't be available for the next fiscal year, which starts July 1. The goal of the grant program was to reduce the risk of West Nile virus, the most severe version of which can be deadly. Fifty-four South Dakotans have died from West Nile since 1999. The loss of the grant money could impact smaller communities more than larger ones. Joe Kippley, public health director for the city of Sioux Falls, said his department anticipated the loss and has budgeted to continue mosquito spraying. In smaller towns, the loss of grant funding could be a little harder to replace. After this summer, 'we're not sure what will happen,' Viborg Finance Officer Brandy Skonhovd said. The story of how cigarette dollars turned into insecticide grants begins in 2006. That's the year voters passed Initiated Measure 2, which slapped an additional $1-per-pack tax on cigarettes and an extra 25% tax on other forms of tobacco on top of the state's existing tobacco taxes. The first $30 million of tax revenue generated as a result went to the state's general fund, the measure specified, after which $5 million would be put in the Tobacco Prevention and Reduction Trust Fund and used for anti-smoking programming. Tax collections beyond $35 million would split between the Property Tax Reduction Fund, the Education Enhancement Tobacco Trust Fund and the Health Care Tobacco Trust Fund. That setup had shifted by 2014. That's the year Doneen Hollingsworth, who was the secretary of the Department of Health, asked lawmakers to sign off on using a half-million dollars from the $5 million anti-smoking fund for mosquito control grants. The recession of 2007 through 2009 tightened budgets, she said. The state had already begun to dip into that fund to pay for things like childhood immunizations, she told them, and there was a new problem to address in 2014. The federal money for West Nile monitoring and mosquito control made available to states when the virus first emerged had dried up. Then-Gov. Dennis Daugaard proposed using tobacco tax money that year, Hollingsworth said, 'to address this urgent public health issue' by keeping the grant money flowing to local governments. That wouldn't break the law, Hollingsworth assured the Legislature's Joint Appropriations Committee. The state, in 2014 and today, gets about a million anti-smoking dollars a year from the federal government. As long as that money is available, she said, the state could skim up to a million prevention trust fund dollars off the top and still meet voters' expectations. 'We've always spent at least $5 million on tobacco prevention and control,' she said. Since then, the state has spent about $5 million from the fund to control mosquitoes. Grant awards, used for chemicals or the equipment needed to spray it, are tied to the prevalence and risk of West Nile in local communities. During debate on this year's legislative Senate Bill 54, Bureau of Finance and Management Commissioner Jim Terwilliger told lawmakers it never made much sense to tie the grants to tobacco funding. 'That's an example of the different things that I think can go away, and we could be smarter with these funds,' the commissioner told the Senate Appropriations Committee in February, during his pitch for reducing the amount of tobacco tax money the state spends on anti-smoking programs. Terwilliger rattled off statistics on lower smoking rates among teens and adults in the years since voters passed the tobacco tax, too, and said South Dakota spends more on anti-tobacco programming than other states. Jennifer Stalley, Midwest policy director for the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, was on hand to refute Terwilliger point-by-point in her opposition testimony. But she and Terwilliger saw eye to eye on one thing. 'I would tell you that I don't think that fits within the letter of the law,' Stalley said of the use of tobacco money for mosquito control. Lawmakers' passage of SB 54 put an end to the $500,000 carve-out for West Nile, and appropriators didn't supplement the state budget with any replacement funds to keep the grants going. Tia Kafka, spokeswoman for the state Department of Health, said the state will continue parts of its West Nile virus programming. That includes federally funded risk prediction modeling and a federally funded epidemiologist to serve as the program's overseer. Also continued will be the state's West Nile Virus dashboard, which shows modeled risk and the mapped results of the mosquito collection efforts that attempt to catalog the prevalence of the mosquito species that spread the virus. 'However, very limited mosquito testing will occur in 2025, and the program's sustainability beyond that year is uncertain,' Kafka said. Virus modeling predicted 60 cases for 2024; the dashboard lists 21 total West Nile cases and one death from the disease. The Health Department's website does not show a prediction for 2025. It costs Viborg around $2,500 to buy the insecticide used to reduce West Nile risk, according to Skonhovd, the city finance officer. The city got $8,000 last year, though, to pay for new equipment. The spraying in and around the southeast South Dakota town of 834 starts in May and continues into the fall. 'When we have football games, we try to keep the mosquito population down for those,' Skonhovd said. Paul Kosel runs the mosquito control program for Groton, population 1,355. Kosel is also the newspaper publisher and information technology supervisor for the community, bordered by wetlands on the eastern side of Brown County. That county has long been the state's most reliably risky for West Nile in the two-plus decades the disease has been endemic in South Dakota. 'Trying to do mosquito control in Groton is a living nightmare because we're surrounded by water,' Kosel said. Kosel and Skonhovd both say they feel confident they'll be able to pay for this year's work with the money that's available until July 1, when the tobacco-funded grant spigot turns off with the end of the state's fiscal year. After that, they both hope the state finds a way to keep things going. Insecticide and equipment can be a strain on a small-town budget. 'It's not cheap, that's for sure,' Kosel said. Larger cities could have an easier time. Joe Kippley, public health director for the city of Sioux Falls, set aside $750,000 for mosquito control this summer. Last year, the city received $20,000 from the state for spraying, but Kippley said the city knew the money would go away this year, and that it had previously set its budget up to withstand the expense of spraying with or without state help. 'We do not budget for these grant dollars annually because they are distributed through an application process and are therefore not guaranteed each year,' Kippley said in an emailed statement. 'The discontinuation of this funding will not impact the city's mosquito control program and services.' This article originally appeared on Sioux Falls Argus Leader: Tobacco tax shift burns up mosquito control money for cities, counties
