Posted on 02/18/2006 5:25:55 AM PST by SheLion
SACRAMENTO, Calif.--Hundreds of volunteers throughout the state will hit shopping malls and grocery stores Saturday at 9 a.m. as they kickoff efforts to gather nearly one million signatures needed to place an initiative on the November 2006 ballot that would provide critical funding to reduce smoking, keep emergency rooms open, fund health insurance for children and expand nursing education.
"This initiative will save lives, by raising the tobacco tax and funding urgently needed community emergency and related health care services," said Paul Knepprath of the American Heart Association of California. "This is the broadest coalition that's ever come together to reduce smoking, the number one cause of death in California."
The initiative, which is being sponsored by the Coalition for a Healthy California, would raise the state's tobacco tax by $2.60 per pack of cigarettes, providing approximately $2.1 billion annually for emergency room care, nursing education, children's health insurance, tobacco use prevention programs, and disease research and treatment efforts.
The Coalition for a Healthy California includes the American Cancer Society, American Lung Association of California, American Heart Association, The Children's Partnership, the California Hospital Association, the California Chapter of the American College of Emergency Physicians, California Emergency Nurses Association, PICO California, Children Now, California Primary Care Association, Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids, Association of California Nurse Leaders, Emergency and Acute Care Medical Corporation, and the California Association of Physician Groups.
Formal signature-gathering events will be held on Saturday, February 18 at 9 a.m. in San Francisco, San Diego, Visalia, Santa Clara, Sacramento, Fresno, Bakersfield and Los Angeles.
Coalition For A Healthy California -- A coalition of health organizations promoting disease research, tobacco control, emergency care and children's health services, with major funding provided by California Hospital Committee on Issues, the American Cancer Society, California Division Inc., American Heart Association and the American Lung Association of California, ID# 1278256 555 Capitol Mall #1425, Sacramento, CA 95814
It's not about health issues, children or any of that. The government has found a somewhat "undesirable" group that it can extort money out of for it's coffers. As another poster stated, smokers are becoming an unpopular lot, due mainly to propoganda.
If they were really concerned about "health cost issues", homosexuality would have been banned or taxed long ago. Women's healthcare costs tend to exceed those of men. Why no extra tax on them? Additionally, I would be interested to see exacly what extra health care costs smokers incur. I've been smoking for 20 years and it never made me sick. I've known 3 people who died of lung cancer in my life and only one was a smoker. I understand there is SOME risk involved but compared to other activities, the risk of sickness or injury is small.
It's just about the money they can get from the "undesirables".
Wow! You are lucky. Maine just doubled their taxes to $2.00 a PACK. A carton of Doral's now cost $45 dollars. For Dorals. I don't even want to know what premiums run in this state now. Thank God for rolling my own!
Anyone here remember when America appealed to the best in human nature, rather than the worst?
This is down right sickening, Madame Dufarge! What an outrage.
See how they lie? They ban smokers. They control smokers. They tout they want smoke free everything. Yet, if people did quit smoking, just what on earth would they do for all their stupid arze pet programs? I'm sick of it.
Sounds great to me! How can we get that passed???
I'm glad someone from California responded. Print out the information I gave you up above and start asking serious questions about where all those cigarette tax dollars have been GOING over the years! They have plenty enough. But of course, we know that money is going to pay for the exact same health groups that are banning and controlling smokers.
But print the information out so you can show anyone and ask hard questions. This is way over the top!
I clicked on your link and got the above. Pity. I could have used that link.
The four legislative leaders today sent a joint letter to the California Hospital Assn. expressing concern that a proposed ballot measure to increase the tobacco tax could put the state in violation of an agreement that settled nationwide litigation against the industry. That would lead to the forfeit of California's share of the settlement money from that lawsuit and force the state's general fund to repay bonds floated during the Davis Administration that essentially mortgaged that 25-year revenue stream to help bridge the state's budget deficit.
Wow! SOMEONE is on the ball! Thanks for giving us heads up. I can't believe for the life of me that California can actually raise cigarette taxes again, when as you can clearly see, smokers are contributing a LOT to the state economy!
Which site is that?
It would be useful to have in the car in case I run into some of these useful idiots waving petitions around. Of course, they wouldn't last too long where I live.
Well, I am sure you heard about the forced smoking ban coming to DC? And guess where the smoking ban will be exempt???? You got it! The Halls of CONGRESS!
So smokers can't be TOO much of a undesirable group. Our own Congressmen smoke and they do not WANT a smoking ban. But yet, they force the ban on the rest of us.
I hate double standards.
Thank you! I love, in California, that there are no smokers in restaurants. But I will definitely refuse to sign the petition to get this on the ballot, will vote against it, may even WORK against it. Where does the money go? hellO.
This really is pitiful BS. :(
I live in California and have been ordering cigs a mnth at a time via the net. I save $130 per mnth. That is nothing but pure California taxes.
Gotta go the jackbbooted thugs are kicking in my front door now.............................................
The site you linked to. I'm interested in buying tobacco and rolling my own. Cheapo cartons go for almost 30 bucks here.
Yes it is pitiful. There are so many people out of work here, they take jobs sitting in front of grocery stores cajoling shoppers into signing petitions. This is an example of an initiative that will not be popular in some areas. People are sick of being run over.
I wonder how much a carton costs in say, New Mexico? I have friends there.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1563271/posts
Healthy People 2010
The following is Google's text only cache version of http://www.sacbee.com/static/weblogs/insider/.
(I couldn't get into the website at sacbee.com without having to register.)
A Weblog by Sacramento Bee Columnist Daniel Weintraub
(916) 321-1914
February 16, 2006
Uh-oh
The four legislative leaders today sent a joint letter to the California Hospital Assn. expressing concern that a proposed ballot measure to increase the tobacco tax could put the state in violation of an agreement that settled nationwide litigation against the industry. That would lead to the forfeit of California's share of the settlement money from that lawsuit and force the state's general fund to repay bonds floated during the Davis Administration that essentially mortgaged that 25-year revenue stream to help bridge the state's budget deficit.
Posted by dweintraub at 04:26 PM<
And that's all it said. No hint at all who the "four legislative leaders" are.
I'm really sad. I don't know how to express myself better. The taxes are now taxes to the UN and WHO.
All these new health care coverages are taxes to pay for Healthy People 2010. Taxes to the World Health Organization. This has nothing to do with Federal or State. California state pretty much eminent domained themselves to the UN.
Thank Maurice Strong for that.
SacBee 02/17/06
It is a UN tax. It is to pay for Healthy People 2010 which is an NGO program.
The grant monies that come with the Healthy People 2010 have ownership clauses to the NGOs which is funded by multinational corporations.
Ever hear of IG Farben? It was a German conglomerate of companies. The theory was, government and business should be the same.
The World Business Council has been creating the same concept and have been reaching into the US through the NGO grant monies.
I have no idea what Clinton signed before he left office but he allowed the NGOs to merge with our governmental offices.
I know this also has something to do with the EU/WTO trade agreement. But I don't understand it all.
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.