Investigating the effects of the 2007 Texas tobacco tax increase on the smoking behavior of adults

Smoking is major cause of premature mortality and morbidity in the United States. The health consequences of tobacco usage are increasingly concentrated in minority and lower socioeconomic groups. One of the most effective means of deterring tobacco consumption and generating revenue to fund prevention activities is the levying of excise taxes. In 2007 the state of Texas increased the excise tax on cigarettes by $1.00 per pack. This study sought to determine if there was a significant effect on smoking prevalence in the state by examining Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) data for two years leading up to the tax increase-2005 and 2006- and two years post tax increase -2007 and 2008. Results were compared against a chi square distribution and three multiple logistic regression models were created to adjust for race/ethnicity, age, education and income. Results from this study show that there was not a significant decrease in smoking prevalence for most of the groups stratified by age, income and ethnicity. There was not a significant decrease in the younger adults aged 18-34 by income, ethnicity, or education. Smoking prevalence increased for some groups, e.g., Hispanic females. In the regression models, the tax effect was not significant. While overall prevalence decreased by 9%, there were not significant reductions among non-White or Hispanic survey participants. Taxed sales dropped by approximately 17% according to the Texas Comptroller. Without BRFSS data measuring daily cigarette consumption among current smokers, now not assessed, it is impossible to determine whether the discrepancy in reported prevalence and taxes sales is attributable to consumption of fewer cigarettes among smokers or tax avoidance.^

An analysis of the revenue policy -making process of the Texas Legislature

The purpose of this dissertation was to develop a conceptual framework which can be used to account for policy decisions made by the House Ways and Means Committee (HW&MC) of the Texas House of Representatives. This analysis will examine the actions of the committee over a ten-year period with the goal of explaining and predicting the success of failure of certain efforts to raise revenue.^ The basis framework for modelling the revenue decision-making process includes three major components--the decision alternatives, the external factors and two competing contingency theories. The decision alternatives encompass the particular options available to increase tax revenue. The options were classified as non-innovative or innovative. The non-innovative options included the sales, franchise, property and severance taxes. The innovative options were principally the personal and corporate income taxes.^ The external factors included political and economic constraints that affected the actions of the HW&MC. Several key political constraints on committee decision-making were addressed--including public attitudes, interest groups, political party strength and tradition and precedents. The economic constraints that affected revenue decisions included court mandates, federal mandates and the fiscal condition of the nation and the state.^ The third component of the revenue decision-making framework included two alternative contingency theories. The first alternative theory postulated that the committee structure, including the individual member roles and the overall committee style, resulted in distinctive revenue decisions. This theory will be favored if evidence points to the committee acting autonomously with less concern for the policies of the Speaker of the House. The Speaker assignment theory, postulated that the assignment of committee members shaped or changed the course of committee decision-making. This theory will be favored if there was evidence that the committee was strictly a vehicle for the Speaker to institute his preferred tax policies.^ The ultimate goal of this analysis is to develop an explanation for legislative decision-making about tax policy. This explanation will be based on the linkages across various tax options, political and economic constraints, member roles and committee style and the patterns of committee assignment. ^