Posted on 04/06/2012 4:02:20 PM PDT by Drango
Big Tobacco is going all in against Proposition 29, the June ballot measure that would hike cigarette taxes by $1 per pack.
On Thursday, the parent companies of Philip Morris USA and R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. reported nearly $9 million in contributions to the opposition campaign. That gives the tobacco companies a war chest of more than $23.5 million ...
~snip
Tobacco companies appear to be fighting public sentiment. A USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times poll last month found that 68% of California voters favored Proposition 29, compared with 29% who opposed it.
Still, the public has rejected a variety of tax increases in recent years, including tobacco levies. In 2006, voters spurned a proposal to increase cigarette taxes by $2.60 a pack to reimburse hospitals for treating uninsured patients and to expand health insurance coverage for children.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimesblogs.latimes.com ...
>>According to you, addicting them to a nanny state is. <<
Game, set and match.
Drango, you have been PWNED! Back to the DU netherworld for you!
Drango...you are a “nanny-stater” and that is the antithesis of conservative thought and belief. Mind your own business and quit trying to tax “sins” of others to control their behavior. It’s none of your business.
Doing nothing does not support something. You need basic logic 101.
You need to change your tagline...
Never will happen. Drango has been PWNED so much on this forum that he, she or it is immune from logic.
Civilization cannot survive with twelve-year-olds having babies, fifteen-year-olds shooting one another, seventeen-year-olds dying of AIDS, and eighteen-year-olds graduating with diplomas they cannot read.-Newt Gingrich (1997)
Newt didn't mention smoking but he should have. You need to stop enabling.
Isn’t a gun in a child’s hands more dangerous than a cigarette?
From your posts I would say you are definitely not a conservative.
Didn’t Drango have to quit smoking due to hypertension caused by morbid obesity?
Seems like I remember seeing that on a thread as to why he hates smoking.
I could be wrong but it sounds plausible.
Often the voices of addiction or death pimping try to shut out conservatives. Addicting children is not a conservative value.
But time and time again, with the privacy of the voting booth, conservatives had made their voices heard. Once aging will speak in California. see you on election day. When free people can freely vote. ! GASP!!!!
I think I remember a thread where Eaker was recruiting kids to addiction.
Smoking is a nasty habit besides the secondhand smoke.
The advertising propaganda to endear cigarettes as something appealing is a bit over the top.
And the only reason for overly taxing tobacco products is because that’s where taxation can hide behind discouragement at the same time.
Seems you took the cowards way out and skipped my other post there pudgy.
Liberals are sneaky bastards aren't they? Anyone who supports this tax is a liberal.
Are you obtuse? You sound like a parrot. The subject of voting rights isn’t even relevant to this thread.
Attempting to engage in meaningful discourse with you is pointless; however, discussion and an exchange of ideas is clearly not your purpose here.
Still a “Cafeteria Conservative”, I see. You friggin hypocrites slay me.
Isn’t a gun in a child’s hands more dangerous than a cigarette?
>>Often the voices of addiction or death pimping try to shut out conservatives. Addicting children is not a conservative value.<<
Repeating a failed argument is not a new argument.
As a FRiend, the least I can do is tell you when you are forensically vapid.
Please don’t do it a 3rd time. Your Nanny Undies are already showing — I am trying to keep you from looking like a total fool, instead of the partial fool of which your posts so far have made you.
As a FRiend it’s a FACT that conservatives from Washington to Florida marched into voting booths and voted to tax/or restrict cigarettes. Their legislature too.
Was it to protect children? Or to raise taxes? Or reduce consumption?? Can’t say. But conservatives by the thousands voted, and we will vote in the next California election.
>>And the only reason for overly taxing tobacco products is because that’s where taxation can hide behind discouragement at the same time.<<
Thanks for reminding me of the beautiful irony of the California War on Tobacco. I can get links if needed, but the summary is this:
* California had a potential income stream from the multi-billion dollar suit against Big Tobacco. California took a one time payment for pennies on the dollar (think 877 CASH NOW or whatever it is).
* The California Budget projected billions from tobacco sales taxes. But at damn near a buck a pack, the revenue DECREASED since people quit (good on them) or resorted to the black or gray market. The State may say their tactics worked, but, as usual for liberal misunderstanding of human nature, it blew back in California’s face.
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.