Keep Tobacco Tax: No on 28

The owner of a store chain called Cigarettes Cheaper! is the chief sponsor of Proposition 28, which would eliminate a 50-cent-a-pack tobacco tax approved by voters two years ago. That measure, Proposition 10, was intended to fund early childhood development programs; it is just beginning to show results and deserves a much fuller chance to succeed. Voters should reject Proposition 28.

Ned Roscoe, the cigarette chain owner, says he is motivated not by the tax on his product but by the conviction that taxpayer funds can’t buy love for children. He is right, but the county commissions now implementing Proposition 10 agree with him in saying that government can’t substitute for parents.

The commissions are parceling out revenues collected through the tobacco tax not to engineer some “brave new world,” as Roscoe claims, but rather to give parents the resources they need to raise their children as they see fit. Alameda County, for instance, has begun a home visitation program, sending nurses out to support young pregnant women. It is modeled on a 9-year-old Vermont program that has been credited with cutting child abuse and neglect, sharply reducing teenage pregnancy rates and improving kindergarten readiness.

Roscoe levels other fallacious charges against Proposition 10. He claims that “not one penny” of Proposition 10 revenues has been spent, but even the most sluggish of the commissions, Los Angeles County’s, adopted a strategic plan last month that allocates $75 million for home visitation, early literacy and child care programs. Roscoe says no state or county officials oversee the spending, but in fact county commissioners--all of them appointed by elected county supervisors who can fire them at any time--are required to publicly report their progress each year to state officials.

Finally, Roscoe says Proposition 28 hasn’t prevented teen smoking, when in fact smoking prevention authorities like the American Heart Assn. oppose Proposition 28 because they believe that the tobacco tax implemented by Proposition 10 is largely responsible for the 28.4% drop in tobacco sales in California since Proposition 10’s passage.

Proposition 10 commissions have worked hard to find and fund innovative programs that can help children thrive early in life. These programs are only now being established, so it’s unfair to declare them a failure, as Proposition 28 does. Proposition 10--like the children it could benefit--deserves a chance to succeed. Give it that chance by voting no on Proposition 28.