Follow the Daily Bruin's coverage of Skirball fire. 

Sunday, December 10

Submission: Support of new bill would reduce tobacco-related diseases



The original version of this article incorrectly stated the tax increase proposed by SB 591. The bill would raise the tobacco tax by $2, not to $2.

On Feb. 26, Senator Richard Pan (D-Sacramento) and Assemblyman Rob Bonta (D-Oakland) introduced Senate Bill 591 in the California State Legislature. The main provision of SB 591, also known as the California Tobacco Tax Act of 2015, is to raise the current tax on tobacco products of 87 cents per pack by $2. The UCLA community should encourage the legislature and Gov. Brown to approve this bill in order to reinforce tobacco control and reduce the burden of tobacco-related disease in California.

Tobacco continues to pose a serious public threat to Californians. About 10.5 percent of high school students are smokers, which is about a 49 percent decrease from 21.6 percent in 2000. However, not only do about 40,000 Californian adults die each year from smoking, but also 441,000 young people alive today will eventually die from tobacco-related illnesses. Furthermore, the state spends $13.3 billion every year on direct health care expenditures and loses another $10.4 billion in productivity from smoking.

According to the World Health Organization, taxation is an evidence-based approach to reduce tobacco consumption of smoke and smokeless products, reduce human and financial costs of tobacco and raise money for treating and studying tobacco-related diseases. Even the tobacco industry recognized 25 years ago that tobacco taxes keep young people away from tobacco products. In spite of this overwhelming evidence, California’s tobacco tax is ranked 33rd in the country and has not changed since 1998. Seven proposals have tried and failed to increase California’s tobacco tax since 2002. The most recent, Proposition 29, lost narrowly in 2012 after the tobacco industry raised $47 million to defeat it.

SB 591 is expected to improve public health and offset the substantial costs from tobacco in California. Funds from this bill will go toward increasing medical coverage for Medi-Cal patients suffering from tobacco-related diseases, reinforcing youth tobacco prevention programs, stopping illegal tobacco sales and researching tobacco-related diseases. Save Lives California, a coalition of nine organizations, including: the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, the California Medical Association and the Service Employees International Union, initiated this campaign in November. Analysis from Save Lives California projects that the tax will save more than 100,000 lives per year, prevent more than 150,000 young people a year from starting to smoke and save billions of dollars in healthcare costs and costs from lost productivity.

With respect to tobacco control, California has lost its foothold as a leading progressive state. California pioneered tobacco control in 1988 when the landmark Proposition 99 more than tripled the tobacco tax and created funds for research, treatment and prevention. However, last December, the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids, a coalition member of Save Lives California, issued a report ranking California 26th for tobacco control and prevention. This fiscal year, the state will collect about $1.6 billion from taxes and from the 1998 Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement, which fined the tobacco industry $206 billion over 25 years for tobacco-related damages. However, the report found that California only plans to spend $58.9 million or 16.9 percent of the $347.9 million that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends we spend on tobacco control. In contrast, the campaign reports that tobacco companies will spend about $583.4 million marketing in the state this year. Finally, another report from UC San Francisco last October found that between 2007 and 2013 the tobacco industry spent nearly $64.5 million on lobbying in California.

Hopefully, SB 591 will be first of several significant tobacco control bills to pass this year as California reclaims its place at the forefront of tobacco control. Other lawmakers have proposed to raise the minimum tobacco sales age from 18 to 21 (SB 151; Hernandez, D-West Covina) and prohibit tobacco use at all baseball venues (AB 768; Thurmond, D-Richmond). In addition, lawmakers have proposed to regulate e-cigarettes like tobacco products, and SB 140 (Leno, D-San Francisco) would restrict e-cigarettes from many public places.

Implementing evidence-based tobacco control measures is crucial to averting the global forecast of one billion tobacco-related deaths this century. The tobacco-free policy that both UCLA and the other UC campuses have adopted in the past two years represents our commitment to fighting tobacco and promoting health. Now we should pledge our support for a new tobacco tax in California starting this year and tell our state lawmakers to vote in favor of SB 591.

Meyers is a graduate student in the Department of Epidemiology in the Fielding School of Public Health and a volunteer legislative ambassador with the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network.

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterEmail this to someoneShare on Google+Share on Reddit

Comments are supposed to create a forum for thoughtful, respectful community discussion. Please be nice. View our full comments policy here.

  • Elena

    I am so utterly shocked to learn that California is projected to spend only 17% of the CDC’s recommended budget on tobacco control. This is legislation would not only save lives, but save the state billions in health-related damages. It is time we mobilize the community to advocate for future generations to live healthier lives. Fantastic article, and information every single Californian should know!

  • Stephen H. Smith

    Neither the ACS or CDC or any other ACS California Anti-tobacco Health clone group has ever had their statistics or claims audited by any reporter or scientific group.

    They are industry pawns who derive funding from legislated taxes acquired thru fraud imposed on the public to cover up industry carcinogens sold for home and manufacturing use. Dust from milling, mining, tires, brusfires, fumes from cleaning supplies to beauty products, from satins to rubber to plastics. Mercury, aluminum, PVC to Asbestos, lead, titanium, steel and tin.

    A single California brushfire burns more acres than the 2-3 million smokers consume in a year. That is somehow supposed to explain away the increase in health issues of 35,000,000 California’s even though the rates of Californians smoking has gone from over 20,000,000 down to about the 2,000,000 mark.

    You glady agree to take from your neighbours to give to groups that combined already take 5-10 % more of our income than yours. For what? Reports and TV ads that are nothing more than tobacco ads. Ink, radio and TV spots filled with 20-100 trigger words after trigger word to smoke or teach your kids that tobacco products exist. Smoke, Smoke, Smoke over and over. Buyy, Buy, By, tobacco, nicotine, tobacco, nicotine, SMOKE, pay tax, give to Tobacco Free, American Cancer, Lung Assoc. Look at a few of their reports.

    They own their own ad and marketing groups – they pay themselves to sell you data they can prove or quantify. Never one audit of their claims or numbers. They sell 400,000 lung cancer deaths but in US less than 150,000. Of that 90+% are over 65. When is it old age. Less than 3000 under 25. There are more than 3000 kids dying per year from drowning, from guns, from vacccines, from flu propably contracted at school. 3000+ from each group.

    The ACS makes $500,000.00 per year. They want more to buy more Harvard Pedeatricans to fill more ACS, CDC, ALA, Tobacco Free posts because Oncologists aren’t going to sell you nonsense.

    If you think your dad died from smoking -what about his military career, his auto,paint or modeling hobbies, his job history, his contact with asbestos, PVC solder, ammonia, paint, flooring, metal work. Oh the doctor says smoking but does he even know 1-2 years of his work history. Trucker, construction factory worker.

    Ask the folks who died in Simi Vally when their nuclear accident occured poisoning their community. A well known ACS 30+ year spokesman, blowing smoke from her throat, grew up in that community. She smaked a year or so.

    Fireman get cancer. They were also covered in asbestos fibered fire gear, mostly made in the same Southern US mills that made most of our clothes until we conveniently closed their toxic buildings. Like steel, iron, lead, car parts, etc. All conveniently outsourced as products like asbestos, lead, merrcur, etc. we’re found to kill our neighbors. Some smoked.

    Lost Life insurance awards, higher health insurance, fired from jobs, taxed to death and Drs don’t bother with work histories – just whether we ever smoked. Now they cand deny us and blame Nicitinoids in our blood while they’ve been dosing our homes, yards, food and water with pesticides of Nicitinoids.

    Your next: sugar products, salt, oil, white flour, gas, etc. Soon they’ll triple tax donuts – after all oil fried sugar, salt, white floor using gas ovens – all owned by your neighbors.

    Seriously the 2 of the states using Tobacco as the villain are still the largest asbestos mining states and NY has several reasons to tax tobacco. Bloomberg was mayor, Bloomberg owns Media and Advertising. Tobacco taxes pay for more controversy, more taxes, more media – more media production more taxes. All the while Tobacco sells don’t really decline because population increases. There is a limit to cigarette volume per acre. They don’t need more smokers just static sales.. Free bad ads.