Email
Password
(Forgot Password?)
The resounding defeat of Proposition 28 was a relief to health and child welfare groups, who backed the voter-approved, 50-cent-per-pack tax in 1998 to raise money for early childhood development programs and fought hard to preserve it in this election. . . But Ned Roscoe, president of Cigarettes Cheaper! and author of the repeal measure, vowed to continue fighting a war of attrition against the tax.
``From what we learned this time, we could do something similar again for less money,'' he said.
Jump to full article »
Reiner returned to the political theater to oppose the measure that would have repealed the 50-cent-a-pack cigarette tax he campaigned for in 1998. With 14 percent of precincts reporting, the measure had 966,711 no votes, or 71 percent, and just 402,039 yes votes, or 29 percent.
Tobacco giant Philip Morris put millions into trying to stop Californians from hiking cigarette taxes, but the company says it won't spend a penny trying to repeal the increase.
"Our position is that it has become less of a smokers' rights issue and more of a question over childcare development and that is not something that we think we should be involved in," company spokesman Tom Ryan said Wednesday. . . In ads running in California newspapers this week, Philip Morris sought to squelch that speculation, saying the nature of the Proposition 28 campaign has switched the debate from smokers' rights to the role of the state of California in child care. "This is a matter for Californians to decide; therefore we are not part of the debate," reads the ad. . . he pointed out the ad devotes several paragraphs restating the company's opposition to Proposition 10 as a "grossly unfair" tax.
"I guess it does not come as too much of a surprise that Philip Morris said one thing and did another," Pfeiffer said.
Philip Morris USA placed ads in California newspapers today stating that the company is not funding or supporting Proposition 28 and providing the public with more information about its position. The ads are part of a series and are meant to inform the public about the company's practices, programs and positions.
``There has been a lot of speculation as to whether Philip Morris USA is behind this initiative and is providing support to fund it,'' said Ellen Merlo, Senior Vice President, Corporate Affairs, Philip Morris USA. ``We think it is important to set the record straight and let the public know that we are not funding or supporting Proposition 28.''
Our opposition to Proposition 10 was based on our belief that it is grossly unfair to tax one group - smokers - for a program benefiting all Californians. . . We continue to think we were right in our opposition and our belief that adult smokers should not be discriminated against through unfair taxes. . . Nevertheless, it was passed. The voters have spoken and we respect their decision.Whatever you may think about Philip Morris' California newspaper ads, PM is NOT funding or supporting Prop. 28, according to Ellen Merlo. Quoted in <i>Philip Morris USA Ad Provides Company Position on Proposition 28</i>
The No on Prop 28 campaign today announced the launch of its Internet advertising campaign. This is believed to be the largest Internet advertising presence to date by a statewide campaign in California. . . Starting today, No on Prop 28 internet banner ads will begin appearing on more than 20 California websites, including www.latimes.com, www.sfgate.com, and www.mercurycenter.com.
Actor-director Rob Reiner launched his TV campaign to defend new tobacco taxes, using an ad showing three doe-eyed youngsters using cigarette packs as building blocks.
The ad, which began running Thursday statewide, is aimed at defeating Proposition 28. That measure on the March 7 ballot would repeal the new taxes passed as Proposition 10 in November 1998.
The ad pulls no punches, accusing the pro-28 camp of making money off kids through cigarette sales and taking money from them by eliminating the new taxes. The tax revenue pays for development programs for young children. . . Proposition 28 proponent Ned Roscoe said the ad ``borders on slander.''
Maybe that's the way anti-smoking zealots want it.
But it is hardly fair to single out smoking for punitive taxation while ignoring other, more popular vices -- like alcohol consumption or gambling, which the state actually encourages through the lottery.
California's nonsmoking population may not sympathize with the smoking minority. Nevertheless, it should trouble all Californians when a select minority of taxpayers is singled out for a punitive tax hike. Proposition 28 deserves a Yes vote.
Reiner said he hopes there is a time when smoking declines to the point that the tax revenue drops to zero, and that elected officials recognize the value of early-childhood programs and fund them sufficiently.
California remains a long way from either of those goals. Proposition 28 would move the state in the wrong direction on each.
The Fight Crime: Invest in Kids child-advocacy group trotted out blue-suited law officers, a criminal-justice researcher and one of California's most famous crime victims during a news conference at the Sacramento Montessori school last week. Their message was simple: Repeal the tax and more squealing cherubs such as those playing blissfully behind them will grow up to become rapists, thieves and murderers.
Opponents of the repeal say the tobacco tax will fund badly needed social programs that will get children on the right path during the crucial early years of development. . . Cigarette-tax supporters are basing their case on evidence from academic studies that show low-income children who were enrolled in quality day-care programs or benefited from programs such as home visits by social workers were less likely to commit crimes or receive welfare benefits as adults. Peter W. Greenwood, a senior researcher for the Rand Corp. think tank in Southern California, said the extra money collected from smokers will pay off many-fold in the long run through reduced crime and welfare programs.
California voters did the right thing in approving Proposition 10. They should reaffirm that vote by turning down Proposition 28.
We know that you’re spending millions of dollars on ads telling us that the people of Philip Morris are “working to make a difference.” . . If Philip Morris really cares about kids, we urge you to publicly pledge that Philip Morris will not help fund Prop 28, an initiative that would hurt California’s children. Don’t say “we’re thinking about it.” Don’t say “we haven’t contributed yet.” Just pledge that you won’t support Prop 28 – not now, not later, not directly, and not indirectly.
The people of California – and the country – are waiting for your answer.
We know that you’re spending millions of dollars on ads telling us that the people of Philip Morris are “working to make a difference.” . . If Philip Morris really cares about kids, we urge you to publicly pledge that Philip Morris will not help fund Prop 28 . . . Don’t say “we’re thinking about it.” . . Just pledge that you won’t support Prop 28 – not now, not later, not directly, and not indirectly. 16 Children's groups' open letter to PM, which ran Wed. in major California dailies. Quoted in <i>An Open Letter to Philip Morris</i>