Amendment 35? Yes? No?

[politicat]

I don't smoke, though I did. So I know that it's really a physical addiction that's hard to quit and most health and quit-help groups don't provide proper medication or real help much of the time. I also know that smokers tend to be poorer and have less access to good help quitting.

I don't like funding anything on the backs of the people who are least able to pay for it, (I'm not a fan of sales taxes for this reason...) and I don't like funding a program that is supposed to help children on something that has a solid potential to lose revenue every year. (i.e. if the program encourages people to quit, then the children's health program will be chronically underfunded.) I further think that everyone has the right to go to hell in their own way and that adults have the right to pick their own vices.

ON THE OTHER HAND.... I really would like to see people quit smoking. I don't like encountering the clouds of smoke outside the various businesses and such. I can't be around heavy smokers much anymore because the smell makes me slightly ill. We need better sources of funding to children's health and for health care in general.

I suppose I would be more likely to favor this proposal if a portion of the money was set aside for real, effective stop-smoking programs (not QA, but medicated, physician supervised, long-term adult health programs.) And I suppose I'm very, very tired of children getting all of the benefits in this state and adults ignored. Sure, kids are at the mercy of their parents, but their parents are at the mercy of corporations, luck, and about a hundred other things outside of their control.

Whatcha think? For? Against?

Pcat

[serryjw]

1. I voted for it....and

I'm a smoker...anything that makes it more expensive will motivate people to quit! I bought 5 packs of Basics today for $1.69! If they were $4.00 I would have bought two packs. IMHO!

[donheld]

2. I voted for it

and i won't appologize. Hopefully this will also keep some kids from starting.

[politicat]

5. I don't expect you to apologize for it - just give me good reasons why

it should pass. I've outlined several reasons why I'm concerned about it. Change my mind before I manage to vote. (which is getting put off until Tuesday at this point because I can't spare the 1.5 hours to wait in line tomorrow because I need to be working ot get my precinct motivated.... Sigh,,,)

Pcat

[CO Liberal]

3. I Voted For It - AND I Collected Signatures For It

The money raised by Amendment is dedicated to health programs - it cannot be diverted to anything else. One of the programs to be funded is asthma screening and treatment; there are far too many kids in Colorado with asthma.

[politicat]

4. Not to be contrary, but I'm still trying to understand this one fully.

1) What happens to the program when people do the logical thing and quit smoking? This program is going to be underfunded because people will quit smoking. I really worry about this; we have problems with funding the roads for a very similar reason. (As cars have gotten more efficient, we collect less in gas tax and therefore have less for roads.) Sure, the program is fully funded now, but what happens in ten years with inflation and the natural decrease in the tax base? Is this addressed anywhere? It can't be diverted, but the revenues will fall.

2) Asthma... Asthma is on the rise everywhere, and pollution is one cause. Obesity is also indicated. Phoenix has the highest asthma rates in children in the country due to the inversion effect and the fact that kids can't play outside for a decent part of the year. However, I do know that asthma is far more common at high altitude (as is fetal distress and neonatal breathing problems) than at sea level or near sea level. Is this bill trying to draw a parallel between childhood asthma and adult smoking? The bigger causes of asthma are the altitude and the rising pollution (that nasty brown cloud)... Should we not ten raise taxes on gasoline for the same reason?

3) I believe I'm correct in seeing that there's no funding in this for adult health programs. It bothers me that this is taxation without any benefit to the taxed. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Pcat

[El Supremo]

6. It will not make many quit smoking.

It will just take more money from poor people who can't quit.

And who knows what our shifty Governor will take from the fund to pay for basic budget shortfalls?