Voting in California

Finally sent my ballot off today. What a fucking hassle.

Got the "Offical Voters Information Guide" a couple of weeks ago, but didn't read it until this past weekend. This document only covers the eighteen state propositions on the ballot. The three county measures and all candidates are covered in other documents. The "Guide" is 222 pages of 8x11 newsprint with 9-point sans-serif type on one point of lead. Not really easy to read.

One of the propositions is supported with lots of dollars from hospital corporations and insurance companies. It raises the tax on cigarettes by two dollars a pack. Of course, the insurance company advertisements supporting the proposition tell us that the money will go for anti-smoking campaigns and pay for the medical costs created by people who smoke. That doesn't sound too bad, but I have never voted for any tax measure that attacked one group of people, even when I agreed with the tax in question. I have always felt that every tax should be paid by the entire population, except possibly in some extreme case, which I have yet to see.

Now, I know that NoCo has posted that he thinks that all smokers should be killed (eventually they will be, by Mother Nature, but so will everyone else). I had to dig down into the guts of the proposition and found that it earmarked eighty-two percent of the income to increase the compensation that hospitals and insurance companies receive for the services they currently provide. It amounts to a one-billion-dollar-a-year raise for these corporations; it has nothing to do with people who smoke.

Looking further, I found two small paragraphs that amend the state constitution, because this law would be illegal under the California Constitution as written.

We have another proposal dealing with pharmaceuticals. It requires that any medicine which is paid for directly or indirectly by the state shall cost no more than what the VA pays for the same medicine. The pharmaceutical companies have spent more than one-hundred-million dollars fighting the proposition. They are - justifiably - afraid that if California does it, other states will follow. But the advertisements presented by pharma say that veterans will lose their medicine if the proposition passes. Bunch of assholes.

Ah, voting is such fun (and not frustrating at all).

Wow, I thought our 192-page voter's pamphlet was weighty.

We have state initiatives raising the minimum wage, reforming campaign finance, preventing firearms sale to the mentally ill, protecting seniors from identity theft, imposing carbon emission taxes, and an "advisory vote" that instructs our delegates to oppose Citizens United.  County initiatives preventing discrimination based on gender, color or orientation, whistleblower protections, and four that are highly technical (having to do with deadlines, meeting dates, appeals processes and appointment of Chief Executive Officers).  These last four had no statements submitted in the "against" argument.  

On top of these we had the national races, state races, county races and judicial races.  It was a full ballot with maybe 45 choices.  It took us a couple hours each... and we didn't agree on everything.

$2 a pack tobacco tax?  WA currently taxes $3.025 per pack PLUS 95% of the selling price.  Our smoking rates are at historic lows.

Quote :

What are the funds used for?
Cigarette tax collections are used to fund the state general fund.

Vaping is being folded into the same system, slowly.

NoCoPilot wrote:

$2 a pack tobacco tax?  WA currently taxes $3.025 per pack PLUS 95% of the selling price.  Our smoking rates are at historic lows.

Quote :

What are the funds used for?
Cigarette tax collections are used to fund the state general fund.

Vaping is being folded into the same system, slowly.

The 95% tax you mention is the tax on "other tobacco products", which is used in place of the per pack tax. It is not on top of the per pack tax on cigarettes.

The two dollars in the California proposition is an addition to the current taxes. I would have less opposition to it if the money was going into the general fund, but I strongly oppose earmarking 82% of it it for an increase in corporate profits; none of the money collected is going into the general fund.

If taxes are to be used as an incentive for healthier living, then how about a $4 per burger tax on Big Macs? Or maybe $2 per taco? Maybe a buck per donut?

"Sin taxes" aren't a new thing. Whether they change behaviors is debatable.

Yeah, sin taxes have been around forever. They have become more egregious with the voter-decided taxes such as the one I mentioned. It allows people to take a shot at groups they don't like while relieving the cowardly legislators from doing their jobs.

_Howard wrote:

The two dollars in the California proposition is an addition to the current taxes.

When it comes to tobacco taxes, California currently ranks 37th in the nation. New York, Connecticut and Rhode Island are #1, 2 & 3.  Washington is seventh.

Because of the high taxes, New York and New Jersey are big markets for bootleg cigarettes. Some of the cigarettes come from states with low taxes, while some of them come from China and Ukraine, sporting the packages of American brands.

They have a problem of Connecticut as well. Not that they are paranoid or dishonest, but Connecticut officials say, "Money from illegal cigarette sales also is used to fund terrorism." Christ on a crutch!

NoCoPilot wrote:

When it comes to tobacco taxes, California currently ranks 37th in the nation. New York, Connecticut and Rhode Island are #1, 2 & 3.  Washington is seventh.

I didn't know it was a contest. If the proposition passes, as I expect, California will be ninth.

It's not a contest. I was just pointing out that your taxes aren't that high, comparatively.

There are lots of better reasons not to smoke. You're not a smoker are you?

As I mentioned, my problem with this proposition is what the funds will used for. Well, that and the fact that I generally disagree with targeted taxes. When you have to amend the constitution to accommodate the way the taxes are distributed, you know there's something very wrong. As to whether our taxes "aren't that high," consider that I pay 10.3% (sometimes more) in state income tax.

Yeah, overall taxes in CA are high: 6.5% sales tax, 1.25% municipal taxes, 0.10% to 2.0% district taxes, income taxes up to 13.3%.

In my county we pay 9.8% sales tax on everything (with no state income tax -- yet. Every year some politician puts it on the ballot, and every year it gets voted down). You don't pay sales taxes on houses, you pay a "transfer tax" of $1.10 per $1000 of value, which is, what, 0.0011% or something.  We pay a 1.78% excise tax on real estate.

Your property taxes are 1% per year.  Ours are 1.098%.

You are a bit off on some things. Sales tax varies throughout the state, from 8% to 10%. Ours is currently at 8.5%, probably going to 9% the first of the year.
Municipal and district taxes vary widely, and it's possible to pay taxes to a dozen or more districts.
On the sale date, property taxes are set at one percent of the purchase price of the home, plus any local property tax increases that have been voted in, plus any district taxes that are collected from property tax. The one percent is good for one year because the basic property tax increases slightly every year. My property taxes are fifty percent more than the initial amount.

Taxes never go down.

We had a couple of gas taxes approved to pay for various bridges or road improvements or stadiums. Once those projects were completed, the taxes never were repealed -- they were just repurposed to something else.

Been there, done that had that done to me.

We have the "Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act" to vote on this year.

In the past, such measures have failed. It looks like we have a really good chance to get this one passed. There were twenty-two million dollars donated by the supporters of the act, and less than two million by its opponents - one million from a crazy woman in Pennsylvania who believes marijuana leads to mass murders. Go figure.

Some of those who have come out in support of the law are the California Democratic Party, our Lt. Governor, and Bernie Sanders. There are even a few Republican Representatives who support it. Naturally the California Republican Party opposes it.

Lest one get the idea that I am a pot head, I haven't smoked any weed in at least forty years. Even in my youth I smoke very little pot (I found other drugs that were much better).  I am very interested in the medical benefits that have been reported. My personal physician would not write me a recommendation for it, and the only doctor within twenty miles who would do so  is a bit sketchy. Add to that the fact that the city in which I live does not allow medical cannabis dispensaries, making the hoops I would have to jump through just to try the stuff ridiculous.

Of course, the new law allows local laws to prohibit dope shops, and I expect this tacky little city to pass such a restriction. But the new law specifically denies local entities from prohibiting the sale, possession, use, delivery, or cultivation of marijuana (but they can restrict the growth to inside: I have plenty of room for that).

If this law passes in California, I think it may be the tipping point for the country. As much as many people love to hate California, the state is still a bellwether for a great many things.

Five states are voting on recreational pot and four more on medical marijuana. They would join three states (+ DC) who have already adopted recreational and about twenty who approved medical.

California may be a bellwether state but it's not the pioneer.  

That would be 32 states out of 50 (what's that, 64%?) if everybody votes yes. President Clinton may make it federal.

California has had medical marijuana for twenty years. It was the first state to pass such a law back in 1996. I believe that California was the first state to have a ballot initiative or legislative votes on allowing recreational marijuana. All of those have failed, unfortunately.
Whether or not California was the first to legalize Marijuana, a lot of states follow California on various measures.

There's no way Clinton can change the federal law. And you know that the fucking Republicans in the House won't allow it.

Wow, you're right, California was the first with medical marijuana. I stand corrected. Who was governor in 1996?

Pete "The Asshole" Wilson was governor in 1996. The legislature passed a medical marijuana bill and Pete vetoed it. So the issue was put on the ballot and was passed by referendum. Take that, Pete, you asshole!

Wilson also signed the state's helmet law, after previous governors - including Reagan - had consistently vetoed them. Yes, there are now 37% fewer motorcycle fatalities in the state; there are also 40% fewer motorcycle riders.

The first marijuana legalization initiative in the country was on the ballot in California in 1972.

It's funny -- funny strange, not funny ha-ha -- that libertarian small government conservatives are also the same people who want The Gub'mint is every bedroom and living room in America. And helmet laws.

That's for sure. Dick Floyd was guy who pushed the helmet bill through the legislature.

California Political Almanac in 1990 wrote:

"Floyd is easily the loudest, most profane member of the Legislature -- and proud of it. Not a last-night-of-the-session has gone by without Floyd bellowing a profanity at one of his Republican colleagues. During Gov. George Deukmejian's state of the state addresses, Floyd can usually be spotted tossing paper airplanes and making comments to anyone within earshot."

I saw Floyd on the tube talking about the bill and he was almost rabid. He was raving so much that he was actually spitting. Wondering why he was so set on this bill, I called his office in LA. Floyd wasn't in, but one of his aides talked to me quite candidly for nearly an hour. The aide told me that Floyd was an aerobatics pilot and he refused to wear a helmet while flying, even though it was required by the FAA. According to the aide, Floyd's reason for pushing the bill was simply that he did not like motorcycle riders.

What an asshole.

The marijuana proposition passed. Thank god - we need it now more than ever!

The cigarette tax also passed. Here's the description of the proposition: "Increases taxes on tobacco and e-cigarettes to increase funding for health care for low-income Californians." That is bullshit. Eighty-two percent of the funds are earmarked for corporations - hospitals and insurance companies - for providing the same services they currently provide. It's just a one-billion dollar per year increase in their profits. There are no additional services or expansion of services mentioned in the bill.

Elimination of the death penalty was rejected.

A bill to establish the price for drugs paid by the VA to be the upper limit of price for all drugs paid for by the state. Went down in flames. Big Pharma wins again.

Stupid, stupid Californians. Well, sometimes. You know, except for the weed thing. Only took forty-four years to get it passed.

Just out of curiosity, you understand, I checked to see when weed would be legal in California after the voters finally got it right.

It's legal now! The law made it legal the day after the election. No waiting period. That's a first. Of course, there is still nowhere one can legally purchase it without a medical card. But you can carry it around and give the stink eye to the local gestapo.

Jeff Sessions may change that.

Fuck Jeff Sessions. He can kiss my narrow white ass.