By JIM BARON

PROVIDENCE — Smoke ’em if you’ve got ’em — the proposed $1 per pack hike in the cigarette tax has been scuttled at least temporarily in a political squabble pitting the governor and the tiny House Republican caucus against the Democratic majority in the House of Representatives.

A visibly peeved Steven Costantino, chairman of the House Finance Committee called for the legislation which he introduced, and was scheduled for passage by the full House on Wednesday, to instead be pulled and sent back to his committee because Gov. Donald Carcieri — who proposed the cigarette tax hike and other revenue raising measures in the bill as part of his supplemental budget — no longer supports it.
The quarrel over the cigarette tax is only one of the immediate problems with the governor's supplemental budget. An actuary’s report shows that pension changes contained in the governor’s proposal would save only $46 million, the administration had booked $96 million in revenue to bring the budget into balance. That $50 million miscalculation is added to another $20 million in other shortfalls that have materialized since the budget was submitted last month.
The House Finance Committee has scheduled a staff presentation this afternoon to brief members on the budget situation as it now stands.
Costantino told reporters after the cigarette tax bill was sent back to his committee that he thought he had an agreement with the governor's staff to deal with the revenue items separately so they could be passed in time for the taxes to take effect in time to realize the income they are expected to generate, and that the remainder of the supplemental budget would be dealt with later.
The cigarette tax hike, for example, was scheduled to kick in on Feb. 17 and the $13.1 million the tax was supposed to generate in the current fiscal year relied on that date.
“His staff and our staff worked very closely, I thought we were on board with this,” Costantino explained. “We knew we had to pull this out of the budget, you couldn't do the budget as a whole because they had early dates on these items.
“I am very, very upset that when you are working in a spirit of cooperation that something like this can happen,” Costantino said. “I put my name, I put committee members' names on this bill, which was really the governor's proposal, it came out of his budget. It is very disappointing.”
Appearances mean a great deal in politics and it would have been awkward for Costantino and other Democrats to sponsor a bill that raises taxes that the governor asked to be raised, only to have the governor veto it.
Costantino said he “got word,” he declined to say if it was from the governor or a member of his staff, that Carcieri would not support it about an hour before the House session convened. He also refused to say whether the word veto was used. He said no explanation was given for the governor's decision. I don't know the reason for the governor's withdrawal.”
“I thought we were working in the spirit of cooperation,” the finance chair stated.
Not according to Carcieri spokeswoman Amy Kempe.
“The governor wanted to see the House move forward on the whole supplemental, on more structural reforms and not just keep one piece of the supplemental out,” Kempe said.
“There were some dates attached to pieces of the supplemental budget and they will have to go back and rework some of that in the budget office,” Kempe acknowledged, “and they are working on that now.”
“The governor put it in as part of the overall budget to counterbalance the deficit (but) it doesn't address the structural reforms, it doesn't address any of the other issues the governor wanted to see the House and the General Assembly move forward on,” she said.
House Minority Leader Robert Watson made it clear in a separate gathering with reporters that he sought a meeting with Carcieri Wednesday morning where he and other House Republicans asked the governor to repudiate the bill.
“The House Republicans were forceful in their opposition to this particular item,” Watson said during an impromptu press conference. “It really became odious when it was taken out of a supplemental budget that also had some cost saving initiatives and became a stand-alone item.
“I think the public would have been incensed if the first ,thing we did this year was start raising taxes before we had done anything about reining in spending,” Watson said. “I disagree that the governor or General Assembly needs this particular revenue. We don't need to be raising taxes, we need to rein in state spending. We have a spending problem, not a revenue problem. This particular initiative was raising taxes before we took on any of the hard challenges that lay ahead.
“I left that meeting knowing that the governor was intending to veto this bill because he objects to the piecemeal approach,” Watson said.
Asked if the veto was the governor's idea or if the House GOP members changed his mind, Watson said, “I think we shared a meeting of the minds on this issue.”
The Senate Finance Committee had scheduled a special hearing this afternoon in anticipation of the tax bill being passed by the House. That meeting is now canceled. The full Senate was also ready to vote on the bill today in order to meet the deadline for the tax to take effect next Tuesday, when the legislature is on vacation for the week but that vote will now also be postponed.