State Senator Tony Strickland has voted against a bill that would increase the state tax imposed on the sale of cigarettes as well as measures that would increase penalties on vendors who sold tobacco products to minors. Strickland, an ardent anti-tax Republican, rejected the tobacco tax — which would generate $1.2 billion a year — in keeping with his conservative anti-tax philosophy. In addition, the two measures making it tougher to sell tobacco to minors were blasted by the California Chamber of Commerce as job killers.
Strickland’s critics noted that the state senator has received $91,000 during the course of his political career from cigarette companies.
Double-clicking on any word or phrase in this story will open a reference window with definitions and links to other reference material.
Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
iPod friendly
Comments
Bookmark This
Previous Month


Comments
Discussion Guidelines
Strickland, and others, strict adherence to a philosophy driven by a thinly veiled disdain for their fellow human beings will eventually kill the state of California unless we act quickly to repeal the supermajority rule. Even on issues which make economic sense, such as supporting single-payer healthcare financing which would reduce and control healthcare costs for the state, political neanderthals like Strickland simply cannot see past their group mentality. But certainly he'll claim that all that tobacco money isn't clouding his thinking.
Readers say: Thumbs Up: 0 of 0 • Thumbs Down: 0 of 0
tegrat (anonymous profile)
June 26, 2009 at 1:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)
How did California get into this huge debt?
Readers say: Thumbs Up: 0 of 0 • Thumbs Down: 0 of 0
billclausen (anonymous profile)
June 26, 2009 at 2:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)
No, No , NO,
The best way to pay for healthcare is to impose a 10 cent per Tampon Tax!
Just think about it for realsies. Who's the biggest user of healthcare? Fertile or pregnant women. You know it's true. Prenatal care, multiple trips to the Docs office, C-sections at 10K a piece, post pregnancy complications, neo natal units, post partum depression treatments..Tax Credits for Breast Feeding???
Why should my healthcare payment rise 33% to pay for all that? Not to mention all the low income types who get the State to pay for all of it...
Readers say: Thumbs Up: 0 of 1 • Thumbs Down: 1 of 1
sa1 (anonymous profile)
June 26, 2009 at 2:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Cig taxes are blood money.
Readers say: Thumbs Up: 0 of 0 • Thumbs Down: 0 of 0
spyfly2 (anonymous profile)
June 26, 2009 at 4:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Discrimination. Why not tax health food? People who smoke know it's unhealthy. Why punish them more?
Readers say: Thumbs Up: 0 of 0 • Thumbs Down: 0 of 0
East_Fork (anonymous profile)
June 26, 2009 at 5:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I have to takes on this: At one end, if one is taking money from certain organizations, obviously they will likely be beholden to that contributor. (To wit, when Bob Dole managed to say--with a straight face--that he wasn't sure if cigarettes were addictive while taking money from tobacco industries)
The second point is that this taxing of cigarettes is a form of de facto prohibition. In the end, if you make them so expensive as to be unaffordable, they become Black Market items just as booze did under prohibition with all the attendant Black Market crime.
Readers say: Thumbs Up: 0 of 0 • Thumbs Down: 0 of 0
billclausen (anonymous profile)
June 27, 2009 at 3:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"I have *two* takes on this"
Readers say: Thumbs Up: 0 of 0 • Thumbs Down: 0 of 0
billclausen (anonymous profile)
June 28, 2009 at 2:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The biggest user of healthcare is most certainly NOT fertile or pregnant women. It is old, sick people. By sa1's logic, we ought to put a surtax on Depends.
Readers say: Thumbs Up: 0 of 0 • Thumbs Down: 0 of 0
SezMe (anonymous profile)
June 29, 2009 at 12:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Post a comment