PROP 29 - 5 June 2012

For political discussions

Moderators: MKA, Caudawg

User avatar
Posts: 4333
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2005 8:04 pm
Location: Delta

PROP 29 - 5 June 2012

Postby Marty » Thu May 24, 2012 2:12 pm

Imposes additional $1.00 per pack tax on cigarettes and an equivalent tax increase on other tobacco products. Revenues fund research for cancer and tobacco-related diseases. Fiscal Impact: Net increase in cigarette excise tax revenues of about $735 million annually by 2013–14 for certain research and tobacco prevention and cessation programs. Other state and local revenue increases amounting to tens of millions of dollars annually.


A YES vote on this measure means: State excise taxes on cigarettes would increase by $1 per pack to a total of $1.87 per pack. These additional revenues would be dedicated to fund cancer and tobacco-related disease research and tobacco prevention and cessation programs

A NO vote on this measure means: State excise taxes on cigarettes would remain at the current level of 87 cents per pack and would continue to be used for existing purposes, including childhood development programs and various health and tobacco prevention and cessation programs.


The American Cancer Society, American Heart Association and American Lung Association wrote Prop. 29 to save lives, stop kids from smoking, and fund cancer research. Big Tobacco opposes Prop. 29 because they know it will reduce smoking in California. Prop. 29 saves lives, but only with a YES vote.

Everyone supports cancer research, but Prop. 29 is flawed: $735 million annually in new taxes but doesn’t require revenue be spent in California to create jobs or fund schools. Creates new government spending bureaucracy with political appointees, duplicating existing programs. More waste, no accountability to taxpayers. No on 29.

No on Proposition 29
Stop the $735 Million Tax Hike!

A career politician is pushing Proposition 29, a new $735 million annual tax and spending mandate. Prop. 29, the so-called California Cancer Research Act, is a flawed and poorly drafted measure that would create a new unaccountable state bureaucracy filled with political appointees. The measure will be voted on at the June 2012 election.

We all believe cancer research is important, but California can’t afford to start a new billion-dollar spending program when we have a $10+ billion budget deficit and can’t pay for critically-needed existing programs like education and health care.

Here’s why a growing coalition of California taxpayers, law enforcement, labor and small businesses have come together to oppose this poorly drafted, flawed measure:

• Billions in New Taxes, but Nothing to Fix the State Budget: Raises taxes by $735 million annually without allocating any money to pay down our $10+ billion budget deficit or fund existing critical programs like education or public safety.

• Allows California’s Tax Dollars to be Spent in Other States and Countries: Does not require any of the new tax revenue to be spent on research in California, or even the United States. Tax money raised from Californians should be spent in California to create jobs.

• More Wasteful Spending: Allows a new, unaccountable board to spend up to $110 million every year buying buildings and real estate for huge for-profit companies. Nothing requires those buildings to be built in California – they could be out of the state or even out of the country.

• Permits Conflicts of Interest: Allows organizations represented by Commissioners to receive taxpayer funding from the new Commission.

• Circumvents Voter-Approved Protections for School Funding: Voters approved a constitutional amendment requiring 40% of new tax revenue go to schools, but the career politician behind this measure is using a loophole to get around this requirement.

Now is not the time for a huge new spending program.

Posts: 5422
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 12:37 pm
Location: Clear Lake

Re: PROP 29 - 5 June 2012

Postby Greg_Cornish » Sat May 26, 2012 7:55 pm

So how high will cigarettes need to be priced before it pays to go to Reno and buy them then sell them here? I wonder does this affects how much the Indian Reservations/Casinos charge?

Anyone in here still smoke? I quit 4 years ago. 4 months after, I got bladder cancer. I have Transitional Cell Carcinoma. I think 14?% of people smoke now. Isn't that great? I think it used to be 50%. Of all the people who get Transitional Cell Carcinoma 85% smoked.

No judging, just FYI.

I will have my bladder, prostate and part of my colon removed next month. Then no more chance of that particular cancer.
"The trouble with quotes on the Internet, is that you can never know if they are genuine." - Abraham Lincoln

Posts: 546
Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 9:35 am
Location: Third Rock also known as CA

Re: PROP 29 - 5 June 2012

Postby Grumpy » Sun May 27, 2012 9:40 am

Funny, people have still not figured this ploy out. Its always tax yourself for some noble reason or emergency and then some or all of that money ends up in the general fund and spent on things totally unrelated. Oldest trick in the book for politicians, play on emotions to keep the spigot of money wide open. If govt. had to spend every penny as if it were their last, you would see some positive changes.

Return to “Political”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests