Please log in, or sign up for a new account and purchase a subscription to continue reading.

Please log in, or sign up for a new account to continue reading.

Thank you for reading! We hope that you continue to enjoy our free content.

Clear skies. Low 67F. Winds NE at 5 to 10 mph..

Clear skies. Low 67F. Winds NE at 5 to 10 mph.

Proposition 28 would require an annual source of funding for K-12 public schools for arts and music education equal to 1% of the total state and local revenues that local education agencies receive under Proposition 98.

Proposition 29 would require dialysis clinics to have at least one physician, or advanced practice nurse practitioner or physician assistant on-site, while patients are being treated.

Proposition 30 would increase the personal income tax on people earning more than $2 million a year to pay for zero-emission vehicles and wildfire prevention.

Proposition 31 is a referendum on a law passed in 2020 that established a statewide ban on the sale of flavored cigarettes and e-cigarettes or vapes, including menthol-flavored. A YES vote leaves the ban in place. A NO vote overturns it.

Proposition 28 would require an annual source of funding for K-12 public schools for arts and music education equal to 1% of the total state and local revenues that local education agencies receive under Proposition 98.

Proposition 29 would require dialysis clinics to have at least one physician, or advanced practice nurse practitioner or physician assistant on-site, while patients are being treated.

Proposition 30 would increase the personal income tax on people earning more than $2 million a year to pay for zero-emission vehicles and wildfire prevention.

Proposition 31 is a referendum on a law passed in 2020 that established a statewide ban on the sale of flavored cigarettes and e-cigarettes or vapes, including menthol-flavored. A YES vote leaves the ban in place. A NO vote overturns it.

California voters will decide the fate of these four statewide propositions on the Nov. 8 general election ballot.

Proposition 28 would require an annual source of funding for K-12 public schools for arts and music education equal to 1 percent of the total state and local revenues that local education agencies receive under Proposition 98.

According to the Legislative Analyst’s Office, the ballot initiative would likely result in annual increased spending of $800 million to $1 billion.

There is no question that California students benefit from arts and music education. But this proposition is not the way to pay for it.

Special interests have tried this tactic before — and mostly failed. They have tried to convince voters to guarantee funding for programs and services in the state budget.

California’s state coffers may be flush today with tax revenues, but what happens when economic times change and funding disappears? In past elections, voters have rejected ballot-box budgeting. They should do so again.

What is it about NO that these folks just don’t understand? For the third general election in a row, California voters are being asked to pass a proposition mandating dialysis clinic staffing that has more to do with a union’s battle to organize workers than enhancing service.

Proposition 29 would require dialysis clinics to have on-site at least one physician, or advanced-practice nurse practitioner or physician assistant, while patients are being treated.

Nearly identical or related propositions backed by SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West were overwhelmingly rejected by voters in 2020 and 2018.

Proposition 29 is opposed by health care and patient advocacy organizations, including the California Medical Association, American Nurses Association-California, Minority Health Institute and Renal Physicians Association, as well as senior and veteran groups.

The fear is that the costs imposed on clinics by this proposition would likely put some out of business, especially in rural areas. The staffing requirements would be difficult to meet, as physicians, nurse practitioners and physician assistants are in short supply.

People with kidney failure, who need frequent dialysis to survive, would lack access to the critical medical service.

The union has a right to try to organize dialysis clinic workers. It does not have the right to use severely ill patients as pawns in the battle.

At first glance, Proposition 30 might sound quite attractive. Increase the personal income tax on people earning more than $2 million a year to pay for zero-emission vehicles and wildfire prevention. Who can’t love sticking it to the rich guy?

But California already has been doing that for years. By far, California’s 13.3 percent income tax rate is the highest in the nation. Compare it to Hawaii’s 11 percent, New Jersey’s 10.75 percent and Oregon’s 9.9 percent. To be fair, Oregon does not have a sales tax. Oh, yeah, California’s sales tax is among the highest in the nation, too.

So, just when will high-income people stop coming to California or staying in California because of these tax rates?

Good riddance, you say. Well, with funding of California public services and programs highly dependent on revenue from personal income taxes, you better hope these “rich guys” don’t hightail it out of town.

We also have seen California industries boom and bust — taking state income tax revenues with them. Consider the layoffs now claiming many high-paying jobs in California’s tech industry.

There is also a cynical side to this tax-the-rich proposition that is backed by Lyft, the ride-hailing company.

The Legislative Analyst’s Office estimates the tax increase would raise up to $5 billion a year, with 80 percent going to install charging stations and provide rebates to buy zero-emission vehicles.

That’s where Lyft, which has contributed nearly $16 million to pass Proposition 30, comes in. By 2030, state law requires Lyft and other ride-hailing companies to use zero-emission vehicles for 90 percent of their driven miles. These companies will financially benefit.

With the sale of gas-powered vehicles being banned in California by 2035, there is no doubt all Californians might benefit from replacement rebates. And having 20 percent of the money directed to wildfire protection is a good thing, too.

But hiking California’s income tax rate is not the way to pay for it.

Gov. Gavin Newsom, who included $10 billion in the state budget to help pay for his green agenda and conversion of vehicles to zero-emission, calls Proposition 30 a “cynical scheme” and “fiscally irresponsible.”

You gotta hand it to Big Tobacco. Win or loss at the ballot box with Proposition 31, it figured out a way to make millions of dollars in sales.

Proposition 31 is a referendum on a law passed in 2020 that established a statewide ban on the sale of flavored cigarettes and e-cigarettes or vapes, including menthol-flavored. A YES vote leaves the ban in place. A NO vote overturns it.

Big Tobacco blocked the ban from being enacted by qualifying Proposition 31 for the ballot. While the cost of the referendum effort is estimated to be about $22 million, during the two years the ban has been stalled, tobacco companies have raked in about $830 million from the sales of menthol cigarettes alone. Not a bad return on an investment.

California was the fifth state to pass a ban on the sale of flavored tobacco products. Others include Rhode Island, New Jersey, New York and Massachusetts. Across the nation, 345 communities have passed bans. In California, about 130 California municipalities have some restrictions on sales, with San Francisco, San Jose, Sacramento, Los Angeles and San Diego among major cities with bans.

But without a statewide ban, all it takes is crossing a street into an unregulated jurisdiction and banned products can easily be purchased.

The American Lung Association and other ban proponents held a news conference this summer to decry the predatory tactics Big Tobacco uses to market addictive flavored tobacco products to children and minority communities.

Ban opponents respond that it’s illegal to sell tobacco products to anyone under 21 years of age. However, children still are buying them.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported in 2020 that an estimated 4.5 million middle and high school students nationwide used tobacco products. About 75 percent of middle school students and 80 percent of high school students who use tobacco use a flavored product — most often “kid-friendly flavors,” such as berry, cherry, apple, cotton candy and bubble gum.

In the 1950s, only 5 percent of Black smokers used menthol cigarettes, but today the number is 85 percent. Credit the manufacturers’ marketing strategies, such as lowering costs and free giveaways of menthol cigarettes in minority communities.

Menthol is a cooling chemical that soothes the throat, masking the harsh taste of tobacco and allowing nicotine to be more deeply inhaled. Menthol cigarettes make it harder to quit smoking.

Voters should retain the statewide ban the Legislature passed in 2020.