Poll: State Prop Would Add $1 To Cost Of Cigarettes

Not surprisingly, Prop 29 is opposed by the tobacco industry. What do you think?


California's June 5 Presidential Election Primary may be relatively moot for Millbrae voters, since it now appears presidential hopeful Mitt Romney has a lock on the Republican nomination, to face off against President Barack Obama in November.

However, two statewide measures will be included on the June ballot; one adds $1.00 to the cost of a pack of cigarettes, the other limits the term of new legislators heading to Sacramento to 12 years, down from the present 14.

Most controversial is the battle over Proposition 29, already being fought on television sets and radio channels around the state and here in San Mateo County.

It imposes an additional tax on cigarettes to fund additional cancer research.

"It's a do-good thing," says Gene Mullin, a public policy consultant. "You want to stop cancer, and you want to stop smoking, particularly with youngsters. By increasing the cost of cigarettes it's going to dissuade many youngsters from starting."

According to the California Secretary of State website, Prop 29:

"Imposes an additional five cent tax on each cigarette distributed ($1.00 per pack), and an equivalent tax increase on other tobacco products, to fund cancer research and other specified purposes. It would create a nine-member committee charged with administering the fund."

Where those tax funds - estimated by a legislative analyst to be about $855 million annually by 2011-12 - would ultimately end up is a source of contention for many. It's unclear how much, if any, of the nearly $1 trillion would stay in California. The analyst does believe there would be an increase in state and local sales taxes of about $32 million annually. The money would not, however, infuse the state's general fund.

As expected, large tobacco companies are already campaigning to defeat Prop 29, saying the measure is "a flawed and poorly drafted measure." A website funded primarily by Phillip Morris USA and the RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company, readforyourself.org, claims the measure "shortchanges schools, creates massive overhead, permits conflicts of interest, and has no accountability."

Californiansforacure.org, with major funding provided by the Lance Armstrong Foundation and the American Cancer Society of California, says large tobacco companies will "say, do, and spend anything to deceive Californians about Prop 29."

A link to the so-called "Seven Dwarves" testimony is included on their site. (That link is also provided within this story for you.) The YouTube video is recorded testimony given to Congress in April 1994 by seven major tobacco executives where each essentially proclaimed "I believe that nicotine is not addictive."

"It's a ballot box issue, and I just think increases like that should come out of the legislature, and be more broadly applied, as opposed to just 'carve-outs' for different issues," says Mullin, a retired state assemblyman. "I'll probably vote for it, since the benefits outweight the detriments, but it's a lousy way to run a railroad by doing all these initiatives for tax measures that are pretty complicated."

What do you think? Are you in favor of taxing cigarette smokers an additional $1 per pack to fund continued cancer research? Is this a poorly written proposition, as big tobacco contends, with monies collected most likely heading out of state? Vote in our poll below and let us know. And send us your comments.

For more news about Millbrae and surrounding areas, follow us on Twitter and "like" us on Facebook. Get Patched in daily - for free - by signing up for our newsletter. 

Want to blog for us? Simply click here.

lori bremner May 03, 2012 at 04:03 PM
The California Legislature has proven 27 out of 28 times that they won't do the right thing and raise the tobacco tax. The one time they did, it was 2 cents for breast cancer. California has one of the lowest tobacco taxes in the nation making our state one of the cheapest places to buy cigarettes. A ballot initiative is unfortunately the only way to fix that. I'm voting Yes on 29 because it will discourage kids from smoking, save lives and just might lead us to a cure for cancer.
Kent Anderson May 04, 2012 at 05:38 AM
Raising the cost of tobacco products has proven to be the #1 way to save lives throughout the world. And this saves lives. Any effort to help get someone to quit and hopefully to keep young people from starting is worth it. Why not generate more funds for cancer research, and who cares where it pays for cancer research. WHy not create more financing for smoking cessation and smoking prevention programs. As an ex-smoker who had 10% of my lung removed last year and has significant emphysema, I support proposition 29. I wouldnt want anyone go through the pain and loss that smoking causes.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something