California Proposition 86, Cigarette Taxes (2006)
| I • II • III • IV • V • VI|
VII • VIII • IX • X • XA
XB • XI • XII • XIII • XIII A
XIII B • XIII C • XIII D • XIV • XV • XVI • XVIII • XIX • XIX A • XIX B • XIX C
XX • XXI • XXII
XXXIV • XXXV
|Voting on Tobacco|
|Not on ballot|
Objectives of the Proposal
The objectives of the proposal were to
- Impose additional 13 cent tax on each cigarette distributed ($2.60 per pack), and indirectly increases tax on other tobacco products.
- Provide funding to qualified hospitals for emergency services, nursing education and health insurance to eligible children.
- Revenue also allocated to specified purposes including tobacco-use-prevention programs, enforcement of tobacco-related laws, and research, prevention, treatment of various conditions including cancers (breast, cervical, prostate, colorectal), heart disease, stroke, asthma and obesity.
- Exempt recipient hospitals from antitrust laws in certain circumstances.
- Revenue excluded from appropriation limits and minimum education funding (Proposition 98) calculations. 
Arguments for the initiative
- Will prevent teen smoking
- Will lower amount of cigarettes consumed each year
- Will provide health insurance for children
- Is endorsed by major anti-smoking groups
Main proponent: Carolyn Rhee Chair American Cancer Society, California Division
Arguments against the initiative
- 40% of money goes to hospitals while less than 10% goes to anti smoking programs
- Tax increase excessive and unfair
- Will encourage smuggling of cigarettes, an already large source of income for gangs
Main opponents: Larry McCarthy; President California Taxpayers’ Association, James G Knight MD; Past President San Diego County Medical Society 
- Text of the initiative
- Legislative Analysis
- League of Women Voters Analysis
- An editorial against the proposal
- An editorial supporting the position
- High tobacco taxes won't make the problem go away