Something that bugs me about Prop 56 (Tobacco/E-cigarette tax) (casinos, taxi)

[NoMoreSnowForMe]

Originally Posted by CA4Now

It wouldn't change how money is given to schools. It simply states that tax revenue from this proposition would not be included in the General Fund. (The General Fund revenues must be set aside and applied for the support of school districts, community college districts, and the direct elementary and secondary level instructional services of state agencies, as required by subdivision (b) of Section 8 of Article XVI of the California Constitution.)

"Proposition 56 would add a Section 23 to Article XVI of the California Constitution to read as follows:[3]

SEC. 23. The tax imposed by the California Healthcare, Research and Prevention Tobacco Tax Act of 2016 and the revenue derived therefrom, including investment interest, shall not be considered General Fund revenues for purposes of Section 8 and its implementing statutes, and shall not be considered “General Fund revenues,” “state revenues,” or “General Fund proceeds of taxes” for purposes of subdivisions (a) and (b) of Section 8 and its implementing statutes.[5]

Proposition 56 would add a Section 14 to Article XIII B of the California Constitution to read as follows:[3]

SEC. 14. “Appropriations subject to limitation” of each entity of government shall not include appropriations of revenue from the California Healthcare, Research and Prevention Tobacco Tax Act of 2016 Fund created by the California Healthcare, Research and Prevention Tobacco Tax Act of 2016. No adjustment in the appropriations limit of any entity of government shall be required pursuant to Section 3 as a result of revenue being deposited in or appropriated from the California Healthcare, Research and Prevention Tobacco Tax Act of 2016 Fund.[5]"
https://ballotpedia.org/California_P...Increase_(2016)

Well, now, isn't that just the most confusing bit of English you've ever read? i went to law school, and I just get a headache trying to figure out what the heck they're talking about.

But, the bottom line is - you made with my point. The language above makes it, if you have the stomach to try and decipher it.

It says the new tax does not to have to adhere to the state constitution laws that say they have to use a percentage of the new tax to fund schools, etc. It's written specifically to get out of having to share the money, like it's supposed to.

Saying it doesn't change the General Fund rules regarding how money is spent on schools, is an argument to use against someone who isn't paying attention. This proposition says that none of this tax money would be put into the General Fund. They are writing this prop to specifically avoid having to do so. And by avoiding doing so, they are avoiding having to donate any of it to where the school money should go.

Smoke and mirrors.

I wish more people had the time and stomach to read and try to comprehend the actual text of these propositions. And the fact that most people don't, is exactly what the writers of this bad prop are banking on. Very literally. If this passes, it will be a windfall to some very sneaky people. I would hate for them to get away with this.

[semispherical]

Originally Posted by NoMoreSnowForMe

Well, now, isn't that just the most confusing bit of English you've ever read? i went to law school, and I just get a headache trying to figure out what the heck they're talking about.

But, the bottom line is - you made with my point. The language above makes it, if you have the stomach to try and decipher it.

....

I wish more people had the time and stomach to read and try to comprehend the actual text of these propositions. And the fact that most people don't, is exactly what the writers of this bad prop are banking on. Very literally. If this passes, it will be a windfall to some very sneaky people. I would hate for them to get away with this.

I'm with you, NoMoreSnow! Many years ago, to preserve my sanity, I adopted Semi's Rule for voting on initiatives: For hotly contested/unclear ballot props, set a timer for five minutes. Then read the pro/con arguments, the AG's analysis, and if possible the actual text of the prop. If five minutes of reading this stuff doesn't clear up exactly what the initiative means and what it will do, I vote against it. The theory is that an honest ballot proposition doesn't require obfuscatory language and the proponents are trying to pull something over on the public.

[CA4Now]

Originally Posted by NoMoreSnowForMe

Well, now, isn't that just the most confusing bit of English you've ever read? i went to law school, and I just get a headache trying to figure out what the heck they're talking about.

You missed your calling as a litigator. You certainly appear to enjoy arguing.

This proposition says that none of this tax money would be put into the General Fund. They are writing this to specifically avoid having to do so.

That's a bizarre interpretation of the text of this proposition.

I wish more people had the time and stomach to read and try to comprehend the actual text of these propositions.

"Actual text"? "These propositions"....so now it's ALL propositions?

In the meantime, E-cigarette use continues to rise among teens:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BigfO9pK-mg

[majoun]

Originally Posted by CA4Now

In the meantime, E-cigarette use continues to rise among teens:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BigfO9pK-mg

If the state really wanted to get rid of smoking, they'd encourage e-cigs, rather than trying to ban them and restrict their use.

[janellen]

Snow is correct on the use of ecigs as a valid smoking cessation tool. It's been approved as such in the UK and is actually prescribed. Some studies have shown ecigs to be as, or more than as, effective as the gum or patches. Tests have shown them to be as much as 95% less harmful as regular cigarettes.

From the link:

In another note of progress in the war against tobacco-related disease, the United Kingdom’s National Health Service announced yesterday it has approved an e-cigarette to help people quit smoking.
This product, called Evoke, can now be dispensed by NHS physicians and clinics to help people quit smoking or cut down the amount of cigarettes smoked. The NHS has been promoting use of e-cigarettes for smoking cessation for more than a year, but use of an explicitly NHS-approved medication should enhance those efforts further.


[UK] NHS approves an e-cigarette for use in smoking cessation

I have a friend who has had a horrible time quitting so, as a birthday present, I bought her a couple of ecig batteries and several different flavors of cartridges to try out. She has now totally quit using real cigs and her blood pressure is back to normal. She claims she can now breathe fully, doesn't cough anymore, and feels 100% better all around.


By the way Snow, congrats on quitting. That is no small feat..............I know.

[2sleepy]

Originally Posted by CA4Now

In the meantime, E-cigarette use continues to rise among teens:

True, but what you don't see in all the scary stuff being put out about kids using e-cigs is this:

Two thirds of students vaping for the flavoring
Only 22 percent of 12th graders reported vaping nicotine, the researchers found, as well as 20 percent of 10th graders and 13 percent of 8th graders.

[janellen]

Yes, my friend says that after using the peppermint flavor, she can't stand the taste of a tobacco cigarette. The ecigs come in varying degrees of nicotine content. She started out with the 24mg and went down to the 18mg, then the 12mg, and now she's on a 6mg one. She says her next order will be the 0mg ones. Then maybe she'll be able to give up the ecigs. If not, at least she won't be taking in any nicotine, although I read somewhere that nicotine helps prevent Alzheimers. Don't know if that's true. I did the cold turkey thing years back. I wish they had the ecigs back then. Cold turkey is AWFUL!!!!

[2sleepy]

Originally Posted by janellen

Yes, my friend says that after using the peppermint flavor, she can't stand the taste of a tobacco cigarette. The ecigs come in varying degrees of nicotine content. She started out with the 24mg and went down to the 18mg, then the 12mg, and now she's on a 6mg one. She says her next order will be the 0mg ones. Then maybe she'll be able to give up the ecigs. If not, at least she won't be taking in any nicotine, although I read somewhere that nicotine helps prevent Alzheimers. Don't know if that's true. I did the cold turkey thing years back. I wish they had the ecigs back then. Cold turkey is AWFUL!!!!

same thing happened to my neighbor in Reno, she was a hard core smoker, the type who wouldn't leave her house with out her cigarettes. I was getting worried about her because she was developing a nasty cough, Her daughter bought her an e-cig and over the course of about 3 months she got down to zero nicotine and quit completely, her doctor told her he was going to start recommending them to all of his patients who smoke. It shouldn't be that hard to keep e-cigs away from kids if that really is a problem but to tax them like cigarettes is just absolutely insane.

[NoMoreSnowForMe]

Originally Posted by CA4Now

You missed your calling as a litigator. You certainly appear to enjoy arguing.



That's a bizarre interpretation of the text of this proposition.



"Actual text"? "These propositions"....so now it's ALL propositions?

In the meantime, E-cigarette use continues to rise among teens:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BigfO9pK-mg

Well, I enjoy research, and debating I suppose.

But, I don't think my interpretation of the text is bizarre at all. I think that your saying that the fact the prop doesn't affect how General Funds are spent, is ridiculously misleading. The prop specifically says that the funds are not to be put into the General Fund, and because of that, the tax collected doesn't have to follow any of the rules related to the distribution under the General Fund.

Translation: If this little section was removed from this proposition, the new tax would have to follow the current law that says all new taxes must contribute to the General Fund. And once that money is in the General Fund, it must be distributed according to the constitution, which includes funding our schools.

You're not fooling me.

And yes, my comment about having the stomach to read through propositions to uncover this type of nonsense relates to all propositions, because we have to check them all out to see if they are trying to pull a fast one on us.

I think it's clear that you don't have a strong defense regarding my interpretation of the text of this prop.

Heck, maybe if they actually wouldn't have gotten so greedy and didn't try to rip off the schools, there would have been money for the schools to educate the kids on the dangers of vaping.

But, none of this tax money would go to doing that.

So, how exactly would this new tax prevent kids from vaping? While funding only the doctors and hospitals with a better reimbursement for Medi-Cal patients, and giving millions of dollars to the UC medical programs?

No, really. How would this new tax stop kids from vaping? Exactly?

[janellen]

Originally Posted by janellen

Yes, my friend says that after using the peppermint flavor, she can't stand the taste of a tobacco cigarette. The ecigs come in varying degrees of nicotine content. She started out with the 24mg and went down to the 18mg, then the 12mg, and now she's on a 6mg one. She says her next order will be the 0mg ones. Then maybe she'll be able to give up the ecigs. If not, at least she won't be taking in any nicotine, although I read somewhere that nicotine helps prevent Alzheimers. Don't know if that's true. I did the cold turkey thing years back. I wish they had the ecigs back then. Cold turkey is AWFUL!!!!

Aha! I knew I had seen something about the benefits of pure nicotine before. Apparently it helps with several cognitive disorders such as Alzheimers, Parkinsons, ADHD, and general age related "brain fog." It's not the nicotine that's bad for you; it's the tar and rat poison in a tobacco cig that's harmful. Interesting studies here:


Nicotine, the Wonder Drug? | DiscoverMagazine.com

Nicotine, the Wonder Drug? This notorious stimulant may enhance learning and help treat Parkinson's, schizophrenia and other neurological diseases.
discovermagazine.com/2014/march/13-nicotine-fix


Study finds nicotine safe, helps in Alzheimer's, Parkinson's ...

Smoking, of course, damages the lungs and blood vessels, and contributes to an array of health problems, but nicotine — the calming chemical that ...
tampabay.com/news/health/study-finds-nicotine-safe-hel...




The health benefits of nicotine | Health24

A 2012 study published in Neurology Today highlighted the cognitive benefits of nicotine which included memory, attention and psychomotor speed.