Thank you for visiting Voter's Edge, your source for unbiased, nonpartisan election information! We reached more than 1.1 million people in 2014 and are currently working on making the site an even better resource for voters in 2016.
Prop. 29:Cigarette TaxImposes additional tax on cigarettes for cancer research.
Institutes a $1.00 per pack increase in the price of cigarettes (and equivalent increase on other tobacco products) to fund research into cancer and tobacco-related diseases as well as prevention and education programs. Would be administered by a nine-member committee.
what your vote means
State cigarette taxes would increase by $1.00/pack (to $1.87); revenue earned would go to cancer research and prevention programs.
State cigarette taxes would remain at .$87/pack; no additional funds would go to research into tobacco-related diseases.
Net increase in cigarette excise tax revenues of about $735 million annually by 2013-14 for research into cancer and tobacco-related disease, and for tobacco prevention and cessation programs. These revenues would decline slightly each year thereafter. Increase in excise tax revenues on other tobacco products of about $50 million annually, going mainly to existing health and tobacco prevention and cessation programs. Net increase in state and local sales tax revenues of about $10 million to $20 million annually. Unknown net impact on other long-term state and local government health care costs.
No increase in funds for health research and tobacco-related programs, no increase in excise tax revenues, and no net increase in state and local sales tax revenues.
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. ReadForYourself.org
|1||AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY||$8,630,653|
|2||LANCE ARMSTRONG FOUNDATION||$1,500,000|
|3||HOPE 2012 (cash on hand as of 1/1/2009)||$605,265|
|4||AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION||$570,952|
|5||MICHAEL R. BLOOMBERG||$500,000|
|1||PHILIP MORRIS (ALTRIA)||$28,307,295|
|2||R.J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO COMPANY (REYNOLDS AMERICAN INC.)||$11,169,995|
|3||U.S. SMOKELESS TOBACCO (ALTRIA)||$3,124,988|
|4||AMERICAN SNUFF COMPANY (REYNOLDS AMERICAN INC.)||$1,750,000|
|5||SANTA FE NATURAL TOBACCO COMPANY (REYNOLDS AMERICAN INC.)||$1,148,000|