Pros and Cons on November Ballot Measures
Your paper is recommending a no vote on Prop. 134, the Nickel-a-Drink Initiative, because of what you consider flaws in the initiative. After waiting 53 years for the perfect language to increase the tax on wine, how much longer do you recommend voters wait?
If we wait, the defeat of Prop. 134 will mean that the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors will be forced to cut another $22 million from a mental health system already near collapse. The county trauma system, itself in hemorrhage, will be denied $54 million in critical funding and local law enforcement will lose $30 million. Obviously your quest for perfect legislation carries a high price.
Your concern about a pending recession and the impact of new taxes does not support your opposition to Prop. 134. The Nickel-a-Drink Initiative will create over 26,000 new jobs in law enforcement and health services, stimulate $1.66 billion in economic activity and generate $554 million in new personal income.
ROBERT I. REYNOLDS, Campaign Director, Yes on 134 Campaign
Get the L.A. Times Politics newsletter
Deeply reported insights into legislation, politics and policy from Sacramento, Washington and beyond. In your inbox three times per week.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
