Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Cali cigarette tax vote too close to call
CNN ^ | 6/6/12

Posted on 06/06/2012 3:25:53 AM PDT by SoFloFreeper

The fate of California's controversial Proposition 29, a proposed tax on cigarettes, was still unclear early Wednesday.

By 3 a.m. (6 a.m. ET), 98.6% of the precincts had reported. The vote tally stood at 49.2% in favor and 50.8% against the proposed law that would raise taxes on every pack of cigarettes by $1, yielding an estimated $735 million a year for the state, election officials said.

About three-quarters of money raised would go to cancer research.

(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: California
KEYWORDS: prop29; proposition29; salestax; smoking; taxes
About three-quarters of money raised would go to cancer research.

RIIIIIGHT.

1 posted on 06/06/2012 3:26:00 AM PDT by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

It’s ok to raise taxes on people you don’t like.


2 posted on 06/06/2012 3:29:03 AM PDT by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

About 100% of the money raised would go to further building the nanny state.


3 posted on 06/06/2012 3:38:20 AM PDT by C210N ("ask not what the candidate can do for you, ask what you can do for the candidate" (Breitbart, 2012))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper
About three-quarters of money raised would go to cancer research.

Of course it would, just like the BILLIONS that the Tobacco Industry has paid the States in the Masters Settlement Agreement has gone to "Smoking Cessation" programs and to pay for the additional health care costs that smokers burden said states with....

...EXCEPT, that is NOT the case in ANY State; the majority of those funds have been co-mingled with General Funds never to see the light of day again other than to pay for ever more Social Programs which the States are saddled with.

4 posted on 06/06/2012 4:01:16 AM PDT by Conservative Vermont Vet (l)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: samtheman

“Thou Shall Not Steal.”

Except by majority vote? No doubt about it, the level of nuttery in this country doesn’t bode well.


5 posted on 06/06/2012 4:13:59 AM PDT by Freedom4US
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

I’m not understanding why this is too close to call. The tally so far is 50.8-49.2, which is a 1.6% margin. There are 1.4% of the precincts to count. What is the chance that the result will change? I realize that the probability is not zero, but it has to be very small. Maybe I could calculate it with a few more cups of coffee in me.


6 posted on 06/06/2012 4:30:56 AM PDT by thesharkboy (posting without reading the article since 1998)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Freedom4US
The level of nuttery in your contention sales tax on cigarettes is stealing doesn't bode well either.

No property is taken without permission. It's all done by free choice as part of purchasing the cigarettes. There is nothing necessary about obtaining them to live and your addiction would be your own damn fault.

7 posted on 06/06/2012 4:34:22 AM PDT by newzjunkey (I advocate separation of school and sport)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: thesharkboy

You’re likely right in an election with so many votes cast as this. It’s just an abundance of caution. Someone might find a box of ballots in a trunk. /s


8 posted on 06/06/2012 4:36:30 AM PDT by newzjunkey (I advocate separation of school and sport)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper
"...the proposed law that would raise taxes on every pack of cigarettes by $1, yielding an estimated $735 million a year for the state, election officials said."

You just can't make this shit up. I'm sure the estimated revenue doesn't take into account the thousands who will finally quit, or buy their cigs elsewhere (neighboring states or online) to avoid the tax.

Cancer research won't see a dime of the money of course.

9 posted on 06/06/2012 4:36:42 AM PDT by Mich Patriot (Today if you invent a better mousetrap, the government comes along with a better mouse. RReagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey

Dont tax you, dont tax me, tax that fella behind that tree.


10 posted on 06/06/2012 4:41:20 AM PDT by quimby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: samtheman
It’s ok to raise taxes on people you don’t like.

It's a sales tax. Want a 100% tax cut? Stop buying cigarettes. What a 50% tax cut? Buy half as often.

A sales tax is among the most freeing of the taxes because the consumer decides what to pay as part of their buying choices.

11 posted on 06/06/2012 4:43:40 AM PDT by newzjunkey (I advocate separation of school and sport)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey

Want a soda, buy two.


12 posted on 06/06/2012 4:48:29 AM PDT by quimby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey; Freedom4US
"No property is taken without permission. It's all done by free choice as part of purchasing the cigarettes. There is nothing necessary about obtaining them to live and your addiction would be your own damn fault."

The point: you missed it. It's not about cig tax...it's about piling runaway government spending on the backs of consumers. I'm a non-smoker just like you, but don't kid yourself...they will get around to taxing something you DO care about. Gas, alcohol, pensions (here in MI), raising license fees, and on and on. They won't cut into welfare though...that beast is well fed. Glad to hear you're perfectly content paying for it.

13 posted on 06/06/2012 4:49:16 AM PDT by Mich Patriot (Today if you invent a better mousetrap, the government comes along with a better mouse. RReagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey

The larger point here, is that “democracy” is just two wolves and a sheep deciding what’s for dinner. There’s a reason why democracy is never mentioned in the constitution. The people who formed the government knew their history and specifically sought to preclude democracy.

The problem here taken to its logical extension - what would you think of a referendum where 51 per cent voted to take the other 49 per cent money and property and “redistribute” it?

See where I’m going with this? You’re way off base here.


14 posted on 06/06/2012 5:15:58 AM PDT by Freedom4US
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey
"...There is nothing necessary about obtaining them.."

Perhaps. This is lawed reasoning though, and particularly troubling because there is a seemingly inexhaustible supply of asshat control freaks who make it their hobby to decide for everyone else what we "need"; this has caused all sorts of nonsense.
15 posted on 06/06/2012 5:33:28 AM PDT by Freedom4US
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey
A sales tax is among the most freeing of the taxes because the consumer decides what to pay as part of their buying choices.

So CA could be really free if they just triple their sales tax rate.

16 posted on 06/06/2012 5:52:42 AM PDT by VeniVidiVici (Congrats to Ted Kennedy! He's been sober for two years now!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

>raise taxes on every pack of cigarettes by $1, yielding an estimated $735 million a year for the state, election officials said.

What “election officials?” and what does an “election official” know about economics at all?

These morons sound like they went to Berkley and never heard of the Laffer curve, or the elasticity of market effects.


17 posted on 06/06/2012 6:09:00 AM PDT by bill1952 (Choice is an illusion created between those with power - and those without)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey
t's a sales tax. Want a 100% tax cut? Stop buying cigarettes. What a 50% tax cut? Buy half as often. A sales tax is among the most freeing of the taxes because the consumer decides what to pay as part of their buying choices.

Oh, dude... LOL

18 posted on 06/06/2012 6:12:36 AM PDT by bill1952 (Choice is an illusion created between those with power - and those without)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper
The cigarette tax is insidious as it places a tax on the poorest, the least educated and those who can expect to have the lowest life expectancy.
19 posted on 06/06/2012 6:31:14 AM PDT by Uncle Slayton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

Proposition - 29-Cigarette Tax - Ballot Issue
June 06, 2012 - 09:28AM ET
California - 21993 of 21993 Precincts Reporting - 100%
Name Votes Vote %
No 1,958,047 51%
Yes 1,894,871 49%


20 posted on 06/06/2012 6:34:20 AM PDT by US_MilitaryRules (Unnngh! To many PDS people!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thesharkboy
Each Registrar of Voters still has to verify the signatures of the vote-by-mail ballots that were delievered Tuesday (more people will likely drop off a VBM at a local polling place than actually vote there). Then upon verification, those ballots will be processed.

Since my ballot was submitted Tuesday, mine probably hasn't been tallied yet, but should by sometime this week, today at the earliest.

Then after that, they go through the provisional ballots to see if they're legitimate.

21 posted on 06/06/2012 6:59:43 AM PDT by CounterCounterCulture
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey

I’m sure that there is something in life that brings you pleasure, and if the powers that be decide that it is a thing that needs to be taxed, please don’t complain here.


22 posted on 06/06/2012 7:06:54 AM PDT by Wingy (Don't blame me. I voted for the chick. I hope to do so again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey

I’m not going to get in an argument about it, but I’m just going to say I’m against targeted sales taxes like this one, with the contradicting dual goals of making a bunch of money off of “bad behavior” while at the same time supposedly trying to limit or stop the “bad behavior”.

These are nanny state idiots and I don’t really feel like I have to get into explaining that to you.

If you don’t see it that way, fine. We disagree.


23 posted on 06/06/2012 7:11:27 AM PDT by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson