During California’s second month without a budget, the
assemblyman who will likely represent UCLA after November’s
election turned to a new strategy to raise revenue ““ upping
the tax on smokes to $3 a pack.
Assembly Speaker Herb Wesson, D-Culver City, whose district was
recently redrawn to include UCLA, has proposed increasing the
current 87 cents-per-pack tax on cigarettes by $2.13 ““ a
total of $3. The tax was proposed after Assembly Republicans
rejected an increase of the Vehicle License Fee.
Though the tobacco tax failed in the Assembly on Aug. 7,
Democrats continue to support Wesson’s plan as a way out of
the budget deadlock.
“(Wesson) is very committed to the cigarette tax
proposal,” said Wesson spokeswoman Patricia Soto. “This
is what (Wesson) hopes the members vote for.”
Members of the Democratically-controlled Assembly budget
committee is also “very committed to the tobacco tax,”
said Max Espinoza, a higher education consultant in the
committee.
The tax, which requires a two-thirds majority vote, failed Aug.
6 50-21 on a party line vote. The 10 members who did not vote were
Republican. For the bill to pass, four Republicans would need to
cross the aisle.
Though Wesson considers the tobacco tax a “win-win”
for both parties, GOP leaders insist budget cuts, not more taxes,
are the solution.
“My position is you don’t need to raise taxes, and
you shouldn’t,” said Sen. Dick Ackerman, R-Tustin.
If the budget is not cut further, California will face future
shortfalls and more tax hikes, he added.
“You’re going to have to make some cuts and do some
planning now,” Ackerman said.
For Democrats, more cuts are out of the question. They contend
further reductions in spending will dig in to critical state
services.
“(Republicans) want to ravage social programs …
(Democrats) cannot agree to that,” Espinoza said.
Democrats argue that higher taxes must be combined with the
spending cuts already in the budget.
“We can’t balance the budget and deal with the
deficit without raising taxes to raise revenue,” Espinoza
said.
“This budget includes some very deep spending cuts,”
he added.
Wesson is promoting the bill on two fronts. On one hand, taxing
only smokers will affect fewer Californians than the VLF, which
would have raised taxes on all car owners. He is also promoting the
bill as a public health measure to curb smoking by increasing the
consumer cost of cigarettes.
“Either people quit smoking … or their habits help us
balance the budget,” Wesson said in a statement.
Supporters argue that the measure will save money by preventing
health problems associated with smoking.
“It saves Californians a lot of money on tobacco related
health care problems,” said Krystal DeKleer, spokeswoman for
Jenny Oropeza, D-Long Beach.
Democrats base their claims on University of California, San
Francisco research that predicted higher tobacco taxes would
prevent 500 heart attacks, 250 strokes, and reduce health care
expenditures by $1.41 billion.
Republicans counter the tax is too high and is an ineffective
way to prevent smoking.
“There’s no rhyme or reason as to why (tobacco)
should be taxed at that level,” Ackerman said.
“You’re putting an additional burden on lower income
people,” he added.
Smokers will also find ways to avoid the tax, like buying
cigarettes on the Internet, he said.
Even if the tax does prevent smoking, it will not raise money
because less smokers will mean less tax revenue, Ackerman said.
Democrats respond the proposal’s goals are not in conflict
with each other.
A certain drop off of smokers is anticipated in the bill,
DeKleer said.
Whether or not an increased tax will discourage smoking, retail
sales of cigarettes are expected to go down.
“(The tax) will nearly eliminate sales,” said
Michael Durando, assistant manager at Breadstiks in Westwood.