OPINIONS
MONITOR OCTOBER 27, 2016
State propositions: PROS & CONS The number one leading cause of preventable death is tobacco— killing 40,000 Californians annually. Increasing the tax on tobacco products serves as a user fee. As a result, the tax revenue earned will be used to help pay for tobacco related health care costs. Additionally, the new tax is expected to instigate users to quit smoking and deter youth from starting an early addiction of tobacco products.
PRO
Drug companies are receiving huge amounts of revenue by immorally price gouging. The California Drug Relief Act would ensure drug prices are regulated and Californians who otherwise wouldn’t be able to afford life-saving drugs for their illnesses would now be able to purchase appropriate medication for 20 to 4o percent less, due to the Department of Veterans Affairs negotiating the prices.aren’t being taxed.
PRO
Legalizing the adult use of marijuana would regulate the market of this highly popular product and bring in an estimated $1 billion annually through new tax revenue. Legally commercializing marijuana into a system with strict packaging, labeling and advertising standards would protect its consumers. Additionally, California would create mandatory environmental, enforcement and restoration regulations to safeguard the state’s natural resources, and eliminating penalties for marijuana-related offenses reduces the harmful impacts of discriminatory criminalization.
PRO
Voting yes on this proposition will continue California’s success in phasing out the use of plastic bags- which will only further perpetuate the state’s reduction of litter, protect our oceans and wildlife, and reduce “clean-up” costs.
PRO
The death penalty is costly and promises the risk of unfairly executing an innocent individual. Since 1978, California’s death penalty system has caused taxpayers to spend more than $5 billion to carry out 13 executions- a whopping $384 million per death. Repealing the death penalty will replace this system with a strict life sentence and zero parole- ensuring criminals who are convicted of the worst crimes are never to be released and be kept with other maximum security inmates rather than be in their own private cells- an expensive form of incarceration, now avoided. Furthermore, in addition to undergoing decade long appeals, which are constitutionally guaranteed to criminals, they would now have to work and pay restitution to their victims families for their crime(s).
PRO
Prop 56 Tobacco Tax
Increases cigarette tax by $2 per pack, with equivalent increase on other tobacco products and electronic cigarettes. Fiscal Impact: Additional net state revenue of $1 billion to $1.4 billion, with potentially lower revenues in future years.
Prop 61 Drug price
7
California would be unfairly imposing a direct tax on poor people. In a recent census, 36 percent of adults from lower income backgrounds in California used tobacco products- specifically cigarettes. The usage of tobacco products is risky, but so is the consumption of alcohol—subjecting one group of abusers to punitive taxes is definitely unfair. Tobacco indulgence may be a health risk for a wide array of Californians, but so is the binging of other materials which aren’t being taxed.
CON
CON
Prohibits state from buying any prescription drug from a drug manufacturer at price over lowest price paid for the drug by United States Department of Veterans Affairs. Exempts managed care programs funded through Medi-Cal. Fiscal Impact:
Prop 64 Marijuana Legalizes marijuana under state law, for use by adults 21 or older. Imposes state taxes on sales and cultivation. Provides for industry licensing and establishes standards for marijuana products. Allows local regulation and taxation. Fiscal Impact: Additional tax revenues ranging from high hundreds of millions of dollars to over $1 billion annually, mostly dedicated to specific purposes. Reduced criminal justice costs of tens of millions of dollars annually.
Prop 67 Plastic bag A statute that prohibits grocery and other stores from providing customers single-use plastic or paper carryout bags but permits sale of recycled paper bags and reusable bags. Fiscal Impact: Relatively small fiscal effects on state and local governments, including a minor increase in state administrative costs and possible minor local government savings from reduced litter and waste management costs.
Prop 62 Death penalty Repeals death penalty and replaces it with life imprisonment without possibility of parole. Applies retroactively to existing death sentences. Increases the portion of life inmates? wages that may be applied to victim restitution. Fiscal Impact: Net ongoing reduction in state and county criminal justice costs of around $150 million annually within a few years, although the impact could vary by tens of millions of dollars depending on various factors.
No on Prop 64 would block legalization of recreational marijuana usage by people over the age of 21. Major arguments against Proposition 64 include the possibility of increased highway fatalities, the airing of marijuana advertisements, and the possibility of commercial marijuana growth near schools and parks. The proposition disallows for the sale of marijuana within 600 feet of schools, day cares or youth centers, but does not address the same parameters for commercial marijuana growth. Should Proposition 64 be allowed to pass, marijuana could be grown in homes or yards near to schools and youth centers, overturning current local controls. Similar to cigarette and vape commercials, Proposition 64 would allow for marijuana advertisements to be aired on public television, tempting minors and other non-smokers to pick up the habit. Finally, although Proposition 64 allots nearly $3 million annually to the California Highway Patrol for research, it does not add legislation to restrict marijuana users from driving under the influence.
CON
The proposition to ban single-use plastic bags in California is spearheaded by the American Progressive Bag Alliance Company (APBA), and is supported by U.S. Representative Tom McClintock and the Libertarian party. The bag ban would essentially remove a free, 100 percent recyclable product from the grocery stores while instituting a fee for other recyclable bags of other materials. “It’s all orchestrated as a cash grab by members of the California Grocers Association to scam California consumers out of billions of dollars in bag fees, none of which goes to a public purpose,” said the APBA in an interview with the San Francisco Chronicle. Opposition for prop 67 claims that the required bag fees imposed would profit grocers and special interest parties instead of funding environmental protection.
CON
No on Prop 62 argues to “mend, not end” the death penalty. Many believe that a repeal of the death penalty would place financial responsibility on criminals serving life sentences, but would fall upon taxpayers. As the death penalty is only applied in the case of heinous crimes (rape, torture, murder, and serial offenses), abolishing the death penalty would essentially protect the worst criminal offenders by providing them with free health care, education, food, and housing. Abolishing death sentencing would rob victims and their families of their rights. With the death penalty abolished, all criminals sentenced to death would serve life-long sentences, further impacting prisons nationwide. Without amending the regulations that surround the death penalty, convicted criminals would be held indefinitely, without hope for parole or rehabilitation. Included in the list of opposition for prop 62 are organizations such as Justice for Homicide Victims, California State Sheriffs’ Association, and the California Taxpayer Protection Committee. No on Prop 62 presses instead for voters to pass proposition 66 instead, to amend the death penalty process.
CON