OKPOLICY.ORG
By Express Newsline
Oklahoma Supreme Court justices considered arguments Tuesday that challenged the constitutionality of four bills passed during this year’s legislative session. That came after unsuccessful efforts to pass it at as a tax. It’s expected to generate $123 million. The fee is scheduled to take effect August 24.
Richardson’s attorney, Stan Ward, wrote State Question 640, passed by voters in 1992. Both measures were approved with a simple majority within the final five days of the legislative session.
Justices did not indicate when they will hand down a ruling.
Attorney Clyde Muchmore, representing the Oklahoma Automobile Dealers Association, argued against the bill.
“On the smoking cessation fee, there were some very tough questions for the solicitor general”, said David Blatt with the Oklahoma Policy Institute.
The weighted average daily membership, which can roughly be translated to the amount of money a district receives per student, will go up $36.80 per student for FY 2018. McCampbell says that lawmakers changed the old bill from a tax to a fee and used the money to plug the state’s almost $900 million budget hole.
Robert G. McCampbell, an attorney representing the tobacco companies, said nothing in the measure addresses compensating the state for treatment of tobacco-related illnesses. Justices’ decision could have a huge impact on the state. I don’t need to remind you, but last year because of state collections not meeting the mark, they were not able to meet their obligation last year and our district lost about $1.12 million during the year.
“If they are effectively the same, then the gas tax is a user fee as well”, said Justice Patrick Wyrick.
Gurich asked whether or not data supports the notion that increasing the cost will lower consumption.
“We can readily think of other unpopular products”, McCampbell said. At issue – three measures. “The problem is, it wouldn’t have happened until next year because it has to go to a vote of the people”.
Mansinghani said the bill only alters an existing exemption.
The fate of hundreds of millions of dollars in tax exemptions could also be affected by the court’s decisions. He detailed previous legislation introduced in May 2017 that raised a $1.50 tax on cigarettes.
Lawyers for the state responded that it would depend on whether the primary goal of a fuel tax increase is to raise revenue or maintain and regulate the state’s transportation network.
The main question on two of the challenged bills – the $1.50 fee on a pack of cigarettes and a $30 to $100 annual fee for electric or hybrid vehicles – comes down to the distinction between a fee and tax. And he argued legislators had another bill that would have achieved all of the state’s regulatory goals.
Ward said he could appreciate the dilemma faced by lawmakers, but it did not justify a violation of the state constitution.
While the rest of the state is turned to the capitol, Norman Public Schools administrators and board members discussed what the district has been told about their budget for the coming school year.
“I think the likelihood of a special session is high if the Supreme Court does rule these measures unconstitutional, which we believe they are”, Rep. Scott Inman said.
Among the items in the text that deal with reducing smoking rates are a smoking cessation program, a requirement that “No Smoking” signs be prominently placed inside buildings and not just at entrances, and a ban on the use of all tobacco projects on state property. It’s expected to generate nearly $258 million for the state, which the law says will be allocated to various health-related agencies and initiatives. Lawmakers, facing a almost $900 million budget shortfall, needed both bills in order to balance the state’s budget.
http://expressnewsline.com/2017/08/09/state-supreme-court-hears-arguments-on-constitutionality-of.html
