DOCTORS, that's who!

The Los Angeles County Medical Association (LACMA) announced that its Board of Directors voted to oppose Proposition 86 because it would exempt hospitals from state and federal antitrust laws aimed at protecting patients.

Read the full press release.

LACMA is joined by the Association of California Neurologists and six other specialty medical associations in California. In addition, more than 50 individual physicians are opposing Prop. 86 due to the antitrust exemptions written into the ballot measure.

See the complete list of healthcare advocates opposed to Prop 86..

And Even More...

The number of organizations and individuals opposed to Prop. 86 has nearly doubled in the last month. The coalition, including law enforcement, taxpayer, medical and business organizations is now over 370 strong. Below are just some of the newest groups against 86:

League of Placer County Taxpayers
Placer County Deputy Sheriff's Association
Regional Hispanic Chamber of Commerce
Turlock Unified School District
UNITE HERE International Union

See the full opposition list.

Taxpayer, law enforcement, medical, small business and community groups held news conferences recently to talk about why they oppose Prop. 86. The first was held in Sacramento and featured former Department of Finance director Donna Arduin, who has concluded that Prop. 86 will bring in $1.3 million LESS than supporters say.

“Given the unprecedented tax increase Prop. 86 represents, there is little doubt that consumers will look to lower-taxed venues from which to purchase cigarettes such as the Internet, bordering states with lower taxes and tribal lands. That behavior could result in as much as $1.3 billion less coming into the state’s coffers than the Legislative Analyst Office predicts,” said Arduin.

The second coalition event, held in San Diego, included law enforcement groups opposed to Prop. 86 due to its potential to significantly increase smuggling and black market activity. Nearly 30 law enforcement organizations across California OPPOSE Prop. 86.

Twenty-nine newspapers have urged their readers to vote NO on 86, including recent editorials from the Contra Costa Times, San Francisco Chronicle, and Los Angeles Daily News.

“Imagine trying to tax other bad habits, adding $2.60 onto every coffee, tea or cola purchased . . . Even more outrageous is that the money raised from Prop. 86 wouldn't go to help smokers quit or to discourage people from starting or even directly to cover medical costs associated with smoking illnesses.”
“Send Prop. 86 up in smoke” Contra Costa Times, October 8, 2006 (Read More)

"I support efforts to curb smoking, but Proposition 86 isn't really about that. Only 10% of the $2.1 billion in new taxes goes to anti-smoking programs. The rest goes to special interests promoting the measure and to state programs where there is little assurance the money won't be wasted. Now is not the time to saddle Californians with billions in new taxes." - Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger.

I couldn't have said it better myself Gov!

Dear friend,

We all want to improve our healthcare system, but Proposition 86 is the wrong solution. Prop. 86 is an unfair tax increase supported by special interests who are amending our Constitution and statutes to benefit themselves. Prop. 86’s proponents say it is about encouraging people not to smoke, but it isn't. It’s really a money grab by huge hospital corporations who will reap hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars each year! Here is why health care professionals and law enforcement, taxpayer and small business groups oppose Prop. 86:

Hospitals Write Their Own Rules

* Prop. 86 provides hospitals with a special exemption from antitrust laws, giving them legal protection to divvy up and limit many medical services. This would enable them to raise prices on those services without worrying about competition.

* Prop. 86 puts no limits on what hospitals can bill taxpayers for emergency services for the uninsured. Hospitals should not be allowed to charge taxpayers several times what they charge insurance companies for the same treatment.

Unfair Tax With No Accountability

* The largest share of the increase in tax revenue - nearly 40% - goes to hospitals, and less than 10% actually goes toward helping smokers quit or keeping kids from starting.

* HMOs will get millions each year from Prop. 86.

* The tax on cigars and pipe tobacco will increase to 135% from 46.76%, and cigarettes, $3.47 per pack from $0.87. This will raise in excess of $2 billion a year.

* Prop. 86 throws millions of dollars at new bureaucratic state programs without adequate legislative or governmental oversight. There are NO GUARANTEES how the money will actually be spent, or assurances the money will not be wasted. It will be nearly impossible for voters to know how the new taxes will be spent. Prop. 86 lists program after state program that gets a cut of the estimated $2.1 billion in new tax revenue.

Increases Our Deficit

* Prop. 86 contains 38 pages of spending mandates. But experts agree that the amount of money raised by this tobacco tax will decline over time. Declining revenues and demands to fund Prop. 86’s programs will only worsen our deficit. Other important programs like education, transportation and law enforcement might have to be cut, or taxes raised further.

* In-State taxable sales will fall because Prop. 86 increases tax on cigars and pipe tobacco by 189%, and cigarettes by almost 300%, which will create a major incentive for consumers to purchase through alternative channels such as the Internet, across state borders, through Native American territories and other illegal sales.

Increases Crime

* Increase crime and smuggling - Stolen and smuggled cigarettes are already a big source of money for gangs and organized crime. If Prop. 86 passes, a single truckload of stolen cigarettes could be worth over $2 million to criminals.

Shortchanges Our Schools

* Under California law approved by voters (Proposition 98), approximately 40% of any new taxes are dedicated to our schools. The huge hospital corporations don’t want to share with our schools and kids, so they included a CONSTITUTIONAL EXEMPTION (Section 15) so that NONE of these funds will go to our schools.

You can get more information from the No on 86 website, http://www.calliberty.org.

I sincerely hope you'll join me in voting "NO" on Proposition 86.

Please forward this e-mail to all of your colleagues, friends and family in your address book!
Paid for by California Association of Liberty and Choice, No on Prop. 86
http://www.calliberty.org
(California Fair Political Practices Commission Committee ID# 1289296)

Forward email

Here is a mailing that we've recently sent out to my approximately 1,500 customers in California:

Michael,

As the November General Elections are less than a month away, we want to take this opportunity to urge you to VOTE NO! on Prop. 86 on November 7!

Prop. 86 is more than just an excessive tax cigars and cigarettes that will go into effect if Prop. 86 is approved! Prop. 86 is about bad politics.

• It’s about the already money-rich hospitals becoming even richer.
• It’s about hospitals exempting themselves from the State Constitution!
• It’s about our small business being scuttled because of private bureaucrats who continue to demand a minority (cigar and tobacco consumers) to fund pet projects for the state.

Do not let special interest groups continue to control our great state we call home!

Please Vote NO! on Prop. 86 on November 7. We urge you to tell all your friends, family, co-workers—anyone who believes in fairness and freedom—to Vote No! on Prop. 86!

If you stop by our retail store (address below) on election day proudly displaying your “I’ve Voted” sticker, you’ll get a free cigar! Tell your friends…

Thanks from the gang at Tobacco Barn, PipeShop.com, MeerschaumPipes.com and Lighters Galore!

Note: Your are receiving this email since you, as a resident of California, have ordered from us in the past and given us your permission to receive such mailings or have joined our Members Only club at the Tobacco Barn retail outlet. If you no longer wish to receive these mailings in the future, please reply back to this message with STOP in the subject line of the message and we will remove email permissions from your account.

Email originally sent to: Michael Gibbs: xxxx @ domain.com

Tobacco Barn/PipeShop.com/MeerschaumPipes.com/LightersGalore
23532 El Toro Road, Suite 13
Lake Forest, CA, 92630
949.830.7110

Here's another piece from the visionaries at StogieGuys.com: Fighting for Survival!

The Stogie Guys blog has an interesting post in their Friday Sampler..

1) Only eight weeks after Colorado’s statewide smoking ban was thrust upon citizens by the state government, Denver’s ABC 7 reports many small bars have been devastated – losing up to 80 percent of their income. This crushing financial nightmare has triggered massive layoffs and sparked numerous brawls among patrons who are forced to go outside to smoke. Thankfully, a group of local bar owners – calling themselves the Coalition for Equal Rights – filed a lawsuit in federal court challenging the constitutionality of the ban. Good for them. There’s nothing constitutional about forcing your “high horse” agenda on private businesses and individuals.

While Prop 86 isn't about banning smoking in restaurants and bars (too late for that in CA), it does illustrate the ripple effect that these types of legislation has on the small business community. Prop 86's effect on small, mom and pop cigar and pipe shops will be devastating, perhaps even more so than that massive Prop 10 fiasco. Not only does this idiotic proposition not constrain itself to cigarettes, it doesn't provide a cap on the tax increase on other tobacco products.

It also has provisions for a floor tax on existing inventory that could amount to having to fork over 80% of the value of existing inventory to the state at the beginning of the year. Most small stores will not be able to afford this and will end up folding their tents instead. This is one of the reason why the small business groups through out the state are against this proposition.

The increase in cost for tobacco products will also decrease sales to small businesses as smokers are forced to turn to online sales from out of state vendors as well as to black markets. The increase in illegal sales (who's profits will benefit gangs and organized crime most likely) is why this bill is being opposed by Sheriff and Police organizations through out the state.

Vote NO on Prop 86!

Under California's Prop 86, approximately 85 percent of the new tax would pay for programs unrelated to smoking, but 100 percent of the tax is paid by the small percentage of people including cigar and pipe smokers. Why should one segment of society pay 100 percent of the taxes when the money goes to things like obesity control and health insurance premiums? If funding these programs is as important as proponents claim, all Californians should share the burden. It is unfair to single out one group of people to pay for programs that affect the entire population.
Voters have resisted recent attempts to tax one segment of the population to pay for unrelated state programs. In June 2006, voters rejected Prop. 82 to tax high-income earners to pay for universal preschool. In November 2005, voters rejected Prop. 67 to tax phone services to pay for emergency room services - a previous attempt by hospitals to generate money to benefit themselves.

-- from the CalLiberty website

Ok, this is a little off-topic but here goes... This month's Cigar Insider, a subscription PDF newsletter from the folks at Cigar Aficionado, reports on a story that I'd heard mention of already but really didn't take to heart until reading Gregory Mottola's article.

Appears that the anti-smoking Nazis across the pond, this time in the form of the UK watchdog group Office of Communications (not a government office BTW), have requested that Turner Broadcasting edit cartoons shown on the British children's TV channel called Boomerang.

It appears that these meddlers have taken offense to 2 (out of 2,000) episodes of "Tom and Jerry" that showed them smoking. The image shown at right is from "Tennis Chumps". The word is that the entire scenes will be cut or altered frame-by-frame to remove the "offending" material while no move has been made to remove the scenes of extreme violence that have a greater impact on child viewers...

The part that really got my dander up though was his questioning the effect on artwork if we allow revisionists to make art more socially acceptable based on the whims of today's "do-gooders". Imagine where we would be if someone started "slimming down" Ruben's figure studies 'cause looking at these larger beauties glamorized obesity? Or since plastic surgery is acceptable, image these self-appointed protectors deciding that we should give The Madonna implants or that David's sculpture should be "cut"...

Spare me... But of course, let me know what you think using the comments below!