PROPOSITION 29 REJECTED BY VOTERS!!!
Original post made by Jim Neal, Old Mountain View, on Jun 22, 2012
The measure was supported by such luminaries as New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg who donated $500,000 to the YES on 29 campaign, and Lance Armstrong. Bloomberg recently garnered nationwide headlines for his controversial plan to eliminate sodas greater than 16 ounces and Armstrong is currently involved in a blood doping scandal that could see him stripped of his 7 Tour De France victories.
Many people blame the tobacco companies for the failure of the proposition to pass, and while Big Tobacco did spend a lot of money on the NO side, the real reason the Proposition failed is COMMON SENSE!
Tax and Spend Propositions always promise that "If we just pass them, everything will be great!" They promise to provide better education, balance the budget, cure cancer, etc, etc, etc. And yet they never live up to the grandiose promises. They always try to find a minority that people can hate such as the rich or smokers and whip people into a frenzy by exhorting them to punish these people by ever higher taxes. Greece found out the hard way that the State cannot tax its people into prosperity.
Anyone remember Proposition 71? You know, the one that promised all sorts of miracle cures from taxes for stem cell research? Christopher Reeve was going to walk again! Well, almost 3 BILLION DOLLARS has been spent and there is still NOTHING TO SHOW FOR IT! More taxpayer money down the drain! Now, the people running this operation are talking about becoming a non-profit organization. They should have done that to begin with! If you don't believe me, read it for yourself here:
By the slimmest of margins, common sense has prevailed! People are starting to see through the lies and empty promises of these tax and spend propositions that are little more than slush funds for special interest groups! Tell me, if one of the purposes of this Proposition was to get people to stop smoking, where would the money come from? The tax only applied to tobacco products, so if no one is smoking, THERE WOULD BE NO MONEY FOR RESEARCH!
Why doesn't the state just ban tobacco altogether? Because THEY MAKE TOO MUCH MONEY FROM IT! The fact is, the state wants to have it both ways, they say they want people to stop smoking and yet they gladly take the money smokers pay in extra taxes and restrict their freedom of choice! So much for the equal protection clause of the Constitution.
If the state really wants to get rid of the budget deficit, they should encourage more people to smoke. If everyone in the state smoked, they would get rid of the current deficit practically overnight, but then again, I am sure they would just see that as an excuse to spend even more money and create an even larger deficit.
Old Mountain View