Replies to post #511564 on Zeev's Turnips Patch-No Politics (ZEEV)

[madrose1]

Don't think big tobacco wants to see calif prop 86 passed <g
http://www.smartvoter.org/2006/11/07/ca/state/prop/86/
( also includes an add on that firemen & policemen would be not allowed to strike)

Should the state impose an additional tax of $2.60 per cigarette pack to fund new and expanded health services, health insurance for children, and expand tobacco use prevention programs?

Summary Prepared by the State Attorney General:
Imposes additional $2.60 per pack excise tax on cigarettes and indireclty increases taxes on other tobacco products. Provides funding for various health programs, children's health coverage, and tobacco-related programs. Put on the Ballot by Petition Signatures

Fiscal Impact from the Legislative Analyst:
Increase in excise tax revenues of about $2.1 billion annually in 2007-08 spent for the specified purposes outlined above. Other potentially significant costs and savings for state and local governments due to program changes.



Meaning of Voting Yes/No

A YES vote on this measure means:
The existing state excise tax on cigarettes and other tobacco products would increase by $2.60 per pack to support new or expanded programs for health services, children's health coverage, and tobacco-related activities. Other existing programs supported with tobacco excise taxes would continue.

A NO vote on this measure means:
State excise taxes on cigarettes and other tobacco products 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-related programs.

Official Sources of Information

Official WWW Site
Full Text
Impartial Analysis from Legislative Analyst's Office
Arguments Submitted


Summary of Arguments FOR Proposition 86:
Proposition 86 reduces smoking and saves lives. A study by the California Department of Health Services says Proposition 86 will keep 700,000 kids from becoming adult smokers and prevent 300,000 smoking-related deaths. The same study says Proposition 86 will save over $16 BILLION in health care costs. Yes on 86.
Full Text of Argument In Favor, Rebuttal


Summary of Arguments AGAINST Proposition 86:
Proposition 86 is really about hospitals using our Constitution and laws to pocket millions for themselves and HMOs through a $2.1 billion tax hike. Section 9 even gives hospitals an exemption to antitrust laws! It's another lottery mess--and no guarantees on how the money will be spent. No on 86.