|
|
|
Uploaded: Monday, July 5, 2010, 12:42 PM
Cigarette tax initative could be on 2012 ballot
|
Backers of a state initiative that would increase cigarette taxes by $1 a pack to provide more than $500 million a year to prevent, detect and treat cancer said today that they have gathered enough signatures to put it on the ballot in 2012.
When former state Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata and other backers announced their plans for the initiative late last year, they said they hoped to get enough signatures to put it before voters this fall.
But they missed that deadline and now want to place it on the ballot in November 2012. They said they gathered 634,722 signatures, well above the total that's needed. The signatures need to be verified by the California Secretary of State's office.
In addition to Perata, who is running for mayor of Oakland in the November election, the measure is sponsored by the American Cancer Society, the American Cancer Action Network, the American Lung Association, the American Heart Association and the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids.
At a news conference at the Children's Hospital Oakland Research Institute on Wednesday, supporters said Livestrong, bicyclist Lance Armstrong's anti-cancer foundation, also backs the measure.
David Veneziano, the chief executive of the California division of the American Cancer Society, said it's expected that the measure will raise more than $500 million a year to help the state's research community make advances in the prevention, detection and treatment of cancer, heart disease, stroke, emphysema and other smoking-related illnesses.
The money would go into a trust fund, and 60 percent would go toward research.
Twenty percent would fund smoking cessation efforts and campaigns to prevent tobacco use, 15 percent would pay for facilities and equipment to support research and 3 percent would help police enforce anti-tobacco laws and stop tobacco smuggling. No more than 2 percent would be spent on administrative costs.
A nine-member oversight committee made up of cancer researchers and health advocates would decide how the funds would be distributed.— Bay City News Service Are you receiving Express, our free daily e-mail edition? See a sample and sign-up for Express.
|
|
| Comments
|
Posted by Mary1978, a resident of the San Ramon neighborhood, on Jul 5, 2010 at 1:31 pm A good alternative to smoking might be the Electronic cigarette. This high tech device feels just like a cigarette and yet only contains 16 chemicals, contrary to the 4000 chemicals in regular cigarettes.
Nevertheless, it's much much cheaper. I gave it to my father on his birthday and since then he saves around a hundred Dollars each month. He tells me its great that he can decide on his own how much nicotine he inhales (the cartridges come in 0-16 mg nic.).
My mum also loves it, because the "smoke" is mainly composed of water-vapor, so now she doesent need to send my dad outside each time he wants to smoke, haha. You can check them out on www.greensmoke.com/disc10-18621 , this link contains a 10% discount.
There is an upfront cost for the starters kit, but the cartridges are more than 50% cheaper than cigarettes, so in the end you'll only save money. Try it, I cant see how you'll be disappointed. Furthermore, they offer every customer a 30 day money back guarantee, meaning if you dont like it you can return it without having to pay any cost.
|
|
Posted by jdinca, a resident of another community, on Jul 6, 2010 at 9:00 am The problem with programs funded by initiatives like this is that their very survival depends on people continuing to smoke. Other tobacco tax funded programs are hollering for money from the General Fund because fewer people are smoking.
|
|
Posted by George, a resident of the Alamo neighborhood, on Jul 6, 2010 at 9:08 am What a surprise... another lefty sponsored tax. Tax tax tax tax. Next time you get your PG&E bill, water bill, cable bill, phone bill, and cellular bill just check out the "hidden" taxes and fees you're already paying. Enough already. See you at the polls.
|
|
Posted by Lynda, a resident of the Danville neighborhood, on Jul 6, 2010 at 3:31 pm @Mary: More than a year ago, I quit my pack-a-day cigarette habit using an electronic cigarette. I'd been a smoker for 34 years, and I can't even begin to tell you how much healthier I feel. My mom managed to quit THREE packs a day using the e-cig. But SURPRISE, some states have already banned the electronic cigarette and others are considering bans because of presumed "health risks" due to the fact that they're unregulated by the FDA. Health risks? Really? Compared to tobacco cigarettes?
If anyone is interested in reading up on the electronic cigarette, I recommend www.e-cigarette-forum.com as a wonderful user-based resource for information.
|
|
Posted by OldHenry, a member of the Montair Elementary School community, on Jul 6, 2010 at 5:12 pm Well, Well! Where do you thing smokers will get their cigaretts after the dollar tax? Not from California!
OldHenry
|
|
|
| |
|
Send this story
Print this story
