Oregon Measure 108, Tobacco and E-Cigarette Tax Increase for Health Programs Measure (2020)

Oregon Measure 108
Election date November 3, 2020
Topic Taxes and Tobacco
Status a Approved
Type State statute	Origin State legislature
List of Oregon measuresOregon Measure 107Oregon Measure 108Oregon Measure 109Oregon Measure 110Submit

Oregon Measure 108, the Tobacco and E-Cigarette Tax Increase for Health Programs Measure, was on the ballot in Oregon as a legislatively referred state statute on November 3, 2020. It was approved.

A "yes" vote supported the measure to increase taxes on tobacco products and inhalant delivery systems (such as e-cigarettes) to fund the state's Medical Assistance Program and other healthcare-related programs.

A "no" vote opposed the measure to increase taxes on tobacco products and inhalant delivery systems (such as e-cigarettes) to fund the state's Medical Assistance Program and other healthcare-related programs.

Election results

Oregon Measure 108
Result		Votes	Percentage
Yes		1,535,866	66.34%
No		779,311	33.66%

Results are officially certified.

Source

Overview

What did Measure 108 do?

See also: Measure design

Measure 108 increased taxes on distributors of tobacco products and other nicotine delivery systems, such as e-cigarettes, at the following rates:

• cigarette tax at 16.65 cents per cigarette, which was an increase from $1.33 to $3.33 per 20-pack of cigarettes;
• e-cigarettes and other nicotine inhalants at a rate of 65% of the wholesale sales price; and
• cigar tax cap of 65% of the wholesale sales price, not to exceed $1.00 per cigar, an increase from $0.50.

Measure 108 allocated tax revenue to the administration and enforcement of the tax and the Oregon Health Authority for medical and healthcare-assistance programs, including mental health services, tribal health providers, including Urban Indian Health Program, and other programs concerning tobacco and nicotine health issues.

Taxes from this bill applied to such products on January 1, 2021.

How did Measure 108 get on the ballot?

See also: Path to the ballot

Measure 108 was introduced at the request of Governor Kate Brown (D). The measure was approved along party lines in a vote of 39-21 in the House and 18-8 in the Senate. One Democratic representative, Bradley Witt, crossed party lines to vote in opposition of the ballot measure. All Republicans in the legislature, except two (Cheri Helt and Greg Smith), opposed the ballot measure. The measure required a 60% vote in each chamber of the Oregon State Legislature. The measure did not require the governor's signature.

Have tobacco tax increases appeared on other statewide ballots?

See also: Tobacco tax increases on the ballot

From 2008 to 2018, nine measures to increase tobacco taxes appeared on statewide ballots. Revenues generated from the tobacco taxes were designed to be allocated for funding programs related to things such as healthcare, education, veterans' services, and transportation. All measures were defeated except for California Proposition 6 of 2016, which raised cigarette taxes by $2.00 per pack and dedicated revenues to health programs.

Measure design

Tax increases

Measure 108 taxed distributors of tobacco products. Under the measure, taxes on cigarettes increased from 6.65 to 16.65 cents per cigarette. Per 20-pack of cigarettes, this is an increase from $1.33 to $3.33. The measure also imposed a tax on inhalant delivery systems at a rate of 65% of the wholesale sales price. The tax cap on cigars also increased to 65 percent of the wholesale sales price, not to exceed $1.00 per cigar. The prior limit at the 65% threshold was $0.50.

In addition to the tax on distributors, the measure also imposed a tax on dealers of $0.10 per cigarette in their possession at 12:01 a.m. on January 1, 2021. Every dealer would file a report detailing the number of cigarettes in their possession at that time and the total amount of taxes owed.

Measure 108 defined "little cigars" as "cigarettes" and make it illegal to sell cigarettes in packages of less than the traditional amount of 20 cigarettes.

Inhalant delivery systems (e-cigarettes)

Measure 108 defined inhalant delivery systems as "a device that can be used to deliver nicotine in the form of a vapor or aerosol to a person inhaling from the device." Inhalant delivery system did not include products approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration sold solely for approved therapeutic purposes such as those used to help people quit smoking. The tax levied on inhalant delivery systems will not be levied on inhalant delivery systems that are (1) marketed and sold for the purpose of vaporizing or aerosolizing marijuana products or (2) purchased in a registered marijuana dispensary.

Revenue allocations

Measure 110 required that tax revenue be allocated to cover the costs of enforcement. The funds allocated to cover enforcement were required to equal 60.61 percent of all expenses to enforce the provisions of this initiative and the other provisions of the Cigarette Tax Act already in effect.

Ninety percent (90%) of remaining tax revenues will be appropriated to the Oregon Health Authority "for the purpose of funding the maintenance and expansion of the number of persons eligible for medical assistance and funding the maintenance of benefits available under the medical assistance program, including mental health services." The remaining 10% of funds will be appropriated to the Oregon Health Authority for distribution to "tribal health providers, urban Indian health programs, regional health equity coalitions, culturally specific and community-specific health programs and state and local public health programs that address prevention and cessation of tobacco and nicotine use by youth and adults, tobacco-related health disparities and the prevention and management of chronic disease related to tobacco and nicotine."

According to the fiscal impact statement prepared by the Legislative Revenue Office, the $2.00/pack cigarette tax increase alone would result in about $160 million of additional revenue for the state each year.

Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot title for Measure 108 was as follows:

“

Increases cigarette and cigar taxes. Establishes tax on e-cigarettes and nicotine vaping devices. Funds health programs. Result of 'Yes' Vote: 'Yes' vote increases cigarette tax by $2 per pack. Increases cap on cigar taxes to $1 per cigar. Establishes tax on nicotine inhalant delivery systems, such as e-cigarettes and vaping products. Funds health programs. Approves other provisions. Result of 'NO' Vote: 'No' vote retains current law. Cigarettes are taxed at current rate of $1.33 per pack. Tax on cigars is capped at 50 cents per cigar. Nicotine inhalant delivery systems, such as e-cigarettes and vaping products, remain untaxed.

”

Ballot summary

The ballot summary for Measure 108 was as follows:

“

Under current law, a tax of $1.33 is imposed on each pack of 20 cigarettes, cigars are taxed at 65 percent of the wholesale price, up to a maximum of 50 cents per cigar, and nicotine inhalant delivery systems, such as e-cigarettes and vaping products, are not taxed. Measure increases the cigarette tax by $2 per pack and increases the maximum tax on cigars to $1 per cigar. Measure provides for smaller cigars (sold commonly as "cigarillos") to be taxed like cigarettes. Measure establishes tax on nicotine inhalant delivery systems, such as e-cigarettes and vaping products, at 65 percent of the wholesale price. Tax on nicotine inhalant delivery systems does not apply to approved tobacco cessation products or to marijuana inhalant delivery systems. Revenue from increased and new taxes will be used to fund health care coverage for low-income families, including mental health services, and to fund public health programs, including prevention and cessation programs, addressing tobacco- and nicotine-related diseases.

”

Full text

The full text of Measure 108 can be read below:

Fiscal impact statement

The fiscal impact statement was as follows:

“

This referral increases taxes on cigarettes and cigars and establishes a tax on e-cigarettes and vaping devices and dedicates the revenues to health programs at the Oregon Health Authority. The measure will increase net state revenues by $111.1 million in 2019-21 and $331.4 million in 2021-23. The measure dedicates 90 percent of the revenue from the increased cigarette tax and the e-cigarette and vaping device tax to support the Oregon Health Plan and other medical assistance programs and 10 percent to tobacco use prevention and cessation programs. Funds spent on the Oregon Health Plan are eligible for federal matching funds. The direct expenditure impact of the measure is the cost of administering the tax increases, estimated at $1.0 million in 2019-21 and $1.3 million in 2021-23. Local governments, the state’s General Fund, and mental health programs at the Oregon Health Authority could see a decline in revenue if the measure passes. The current cigarette tax and the proposed tax are dedicated to different purposes. Beyond the cost of administration, the impact of the revenue increases and decreases on state and local government expenditures is indeterminate and will depend on decisions made by the governing bodies of those governments.

”

Explanatory statement

The explanatory statement was as follows:

Measure 108 Explanatory Statement Ballot Measure 108 increases the tax on the distribution of cigarettes. This rate increase applies to cigarette tax reporting periods beginning on or after January 1, 2021, and to existing inventories of cigarettes not yet acquired by consumers as of January 1, 2021. Ballot Measure 108 provides for smaller cigars, sold commonly as "cigarillos," to be taxed like cigarettes. Ballot Measure 108 includes nicotine inhalant delivery systems, such as e-cigarettes and vaping devices, in the definition of "tobacco products" for the purpose of imposition of the tobacco products tax. The measure exempts certain sales of approved tobacco cessation products and inhalant delivery systems sold for marijuana use from taxation. Ballot Measure 108 increases the limit on tax imposed upon higher-priced cigars. This increase applies to tobacco products tax reporting periods beginning on or after January 1, 2021. The measure prohibits the distribution or sale of cigarettes or certain cigars in packages containing fewer than 20. Ballot Measure 108 provides for the distribution of increased tax revenues to the Oregon Health Authority for health care coverage for low-income families, including mental health services, and for public health programs, including programs addressing tobacco- and nicotine-related disease. Ballot Measure 108 allows the Department of Revenue and the Oregon Health Authority to share otherwise confidential information obtained through the administration of tax statutes and public health statutes, for the purposes of enforcement and administration of the department's and the authority's respective statutes.

Readability score

See also: Ballot measure readability scores, 2020

Using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL and Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) formulas, Ballotpedia scored the readability of the ballot title and summary for this measure. Readability scores are designed to indicate the reading difficulty of text. The Flesch-Kincaid formulas account for the number of words, syllables, and sentences in a text; they do not account for the difficulty of the ideas in the text. The attorney general wrote the ballot language for this measure. The FKGL for the ballot title is grade level 8, and the FRE is 50. The word count for the ballot title is 97, and the estimated reading time is 25 seconds. The FKGL for the ballot summary is grade level 16, and the FRE is 26. The word count for the ballot summary is 157, and the estimated reading time is 41 seconds.

Support

Yes for a Healthy Future led the campaign in support of Measure 108.

Supporters

Officials

• Oregon Governor Kate Brown (D)
• Oregon State Representative Cheri Helt (R)
• Oregon State Representative Greg Smith (R)

Political Parties

• Democratic Party of Oregon

Arguments

• Oregon Representative Rob Nosse (D): "HB 2270 contains the final installment of funding we need to pay for Oregon's share of the Medicaid expansion. Keep in mind, if we don't pass this bill, we will have to reach into the General Fund for the remainder of the money we need for the Medicaid expansion. Passing this bill means we will have the money freed up from the general fund to help seniors, foster children, people with intellectual and developmental disabilities, and frankly the poor."
• Oregon Representative Rachel Prusak (D): "Ultimately, I'm tired of seeing my patients – too often the working poor who were targeted by big tobacco in their youth – die premature and painful deaths because of the impact of tobacco. This weighs on me every day. And it also ultimately weighs on the state – currently, the Oregon Health Plan spends roughly $374 million a year just treating tobacco-related illnesses."
• Oregon Governor Kate Brown (D): "HB 2270 will not only save lives and improve health by helping people quit smoking, it will ensure Oregonians can continue to access the health care they need to thrive. The long-term, sustainable funding provided by this bill, along with HB 2010, which passed earlier in the session, will help make our communities healthier for years to come."
• David Northfield, spokesman for Oregon Association of Hospitals & Health Care Systems: "There is broad support for Measure 108 from Oregon’s hospitals because it will improve community health in some important ways. The revenue raised will fund smoking cessation programs and address vaping, which is surging in popularity with kids. It will also help keep a solid financial foundation for Medicaid, which is more important than ever in the COVID era."

Opposition

No on 108 led the campaign in opposition to Measure 108.

Opponents

Officials

• Oregon State Representative Bradley Witt (D)

Political Parties

• Washington County Republican Party

Unions

• American Vaping Association
• Consumer Advocates for Smoke-Free Alternatives Association
• Vapor Technology Association

Organizations

• Americans for Tax Reform

Arguments

• Consumer Advocates for Smoke-Free Alternatives Association: "Taxes on traditional cigarettes are intended to discourage use. But, e-cigarettes and other smoke-free tobacco products are estimated to be 98 – 99% less harmful than smoking. Discouraging use of these low-risk products is counter to the goals of reducing smoking rates. ... Imposing a tax on these products will drive consumers to shop in neighboring states that do not have a similar tax. At the same time, consumers will be encouraged to shop online for better deals, sending even more money out of the community. Local businesses will not be able to compete, be forced to close their doors, and jobs will be lost. This is bad for the city/state and will result in less revenue, not more."

Campaign finance

The campaign finance information on this page reflects the most recent scheduled reports that Ballotpedia has processed, which covered through December 30, 2020.

See also: Campaign finance requirements for Oregon ballot measures

One committee was registered in support of Measure 108: Yes for a Healthy Future. The committee reported $13.7 million in cash and in-kind contributions. One committee was registered in opposition to Measure 108: No on 108. The committee reported $8,000 in contributions.

	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions	Cash Expenditures	Total Expenditures
Support	$13,633,304.00	$95,762.45	$13,729,066.45	$10,427,823.36	$10,523,585.81
Oppose	$6,000.00	$2,000.00	$8,000.00	$10,029.60	$12,029.60
Total	$13,639,304.00	$97,762.45	$13,737,066.45	$10,437,852.96	$10,535,615.41

Support

The following table includes contribution and expenditure totals for the committee in support of Measure 108.

Committees in support of Measure 108
Committee	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions	Cash Expenditures	Total Expenditures
Yes for a Healthy Future	$13,633,304.00	$95,762.45	$13,729,066.45	$10,427,823.36	$10,523,585.81
Total	$13,633,304.00	$95,762.45	$13,729,066.45	$10,427,823.36	$10,523,585.81

Top donors

The following chart lists the top five donors to the support campaign:

Donor	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions
Providence Health & Services	$2,338,172.10	$0.00	$2,338,172.10
Legacy Health System CPC, LLC	$1,228,356.14	$1,200.00	$1,229,556.14
Oregon Association of Hospitals & Health Systems	$709,192.90	$66,073.53	$775,266.43
PeaceHealth	$749,290.66	$1,677.62	$750,968.28
Kaiser Permanente - KP Financial Services	$652,392.22	$2,268.30	$654,660.52

Opposition

The following table includes contribution and expenditure totals for the committee in opposition to Measure 108.

Committees in opposition to Measure 108
Committee	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions	Cash Expenditures	Total Expenditures
No on 108	$6,000.00	$2,000.00	$8,000.00	$10,029.60	$12,029.60
Total	$6,000.00	$2,000.00	$8,000.00	$10,029.60	$12,029.60

Top donors

The following chart lists the top five donors to the opposition campaign:

Donor	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions
Amber Weber	$0.00	$2,000.00	$2,000.00
Oregon Vape Society	$2,000.00	$0.00	$2,000.00
Tribal Vape	$2,000.00	$0.00	$2,000.00
Vape Game	$1,000.00	$0.00	$1,000.00

Methodology

To read Ballotpedia's methodology for covering ballot measure campaign finance information, click here.

Media editorials

See also: 2020 ballot measure media endorsements

Ballotpedia identified the following media editorial boards as taking positions on the ballot measure. If you are aware of a media editorial board position that is not listed below, please email the editorial link to editor@ballotpedia.org.

Support

• The Oregonian Editorial Board: "Oregonians should vote yes. We already know smoking’s severe consequences on a person’s health and that tobacco-related illness costs Oregon’s health system about $1.5 billion a year, according to the state. Oregon has not significantly raised its cigarette tax in two decades – its rate of $1.33 a pack was the 32nd highest in the nation in 2019, according to the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids. Raising it by $2 will bring the price of cigarettes in Oregon close to prices in Washington and California."
• Willamette Week Editorial Board: "For far too long, the state—that means all of us—has borne the enormous costs of health care for Oregonians addicted to tobacco. This measure is a win-win: The higher prices would dampen consumption and bring the OHA badly needed revenue. Vote yes."
• Portland Mercury Editorial Board: "Measure 108 can help level the playing field. By increasing the tax Oregonians pay on cigarettes and other traditional tobacco products, and establishing a tax on vape products, this measure will generate an estimated $160 million in revenue, which the state plans to use to help fund those prevention and cessation programs—and establish other health resources for low-income people. ... Vote 'Yes' on 108."
• The Corvallis Advocate Editorial Board: "Yes on Measure 108 – vape tax & tobacco tax increase: Oregon gets hit with $1.5 billion a year in tobacco related healthcare costs. This bill offsets about $165 million of that with a 'sin' tax increase. 90% would go to the Oregon Health Authority, which administers healthcare coverage for lower income Oregonians. The other 10% would go to cessation programs. Cigarettes taxes would increase from $1.33 to $3.33 per pack, and vaping products would see a tax equaling 65% of their wholesale price."
• Mail Tribune Editorial Board: "Oregon’s existing tobacco taxes rank 32nd among all states and the District of Columbia, so there is plenty of room to increase them. If the measure passes, the state would rank sixth nationally. If the measure succeeds in reducing the number of Oregonians who use tobacco — and especially youths — it will benefit everyone. If the tax revenue declines over time, that’s not a drawback. We recommend a yes vote on Ballot Measure 108."

Opposition

Ballotpedia had not identified media editorial boards in opposition to the ballot measure.

Background

Oregon Health Authority

Under Measure 108, revenues generated from the new and increased taxes was dedicated to the Oregon Health Authority (OHA) for medical and healthcare-related programs such as the state's Medical Assistance Program, mental health programs, and other programs concerning tobacco and nicotine health issues. OHA is a government agency established in 2009 to oversee Oregon's health-related programs. OHA is overseen by the Oregon Health Policy Board, which consists of nine members who are nominated by the governor and confirmed by the senate.

Cigarette tax rates by state

Cigarette tax rates vary from state to state and, sometimes, between localities within a state. Cigarettes are also subject to a federal excise tax of approximately $1.00 per pack. The information in this section details state-levied cigarette taxes as of January 2019.

Highlights:

• As of January 2019, Washington, D.C. had the highest cigarette tax rate of $4.50 per pack.
• Missouri levied the lowest state-imposed cigarette tax of $0.17 per pack.
• 13 states levied a tax rate less than $1.00 per pack (ranging from $0.17 to $0.84).
• 18 states including Oregon levied a tax rate ranging from $1.00 to $1.98 per pack.
• 11 states levied a tax rate between $2.00 and $2.87 per pack.
• The remaining eight states levied a tax rate between $3.03 and $4.35 per pack of cigarettes.

E-cigaratte (vapor) tax rates by state

E-cigarette (vapor) taxes may be levied by state or local governments and vary by method. Some authorities tax a percentage of the wholesale value, while others tax per unit or milliliter of e-liquid. The following chart shows how different states tax vapor products. A total of 18 states have enacted a tax on vapor products. States not listed (including Oregon) have not enacted a tax on vapor products.

If you are aware of a vapor tax not shown below, please email editor@ballotpedia.org.

Tax rates on vapor products, 2019
State	Tax rate
Washington, D.C.	96% of wholesale price
Maryland	30% of wholesale price
Alaska	45% of wholesale price (Juneau, NW Arctic Borough, Petersburg); 55% of wholesale price (Mat-Su Valley)
California	62.78% of wholesale price
Pennsylvania	40% of wholesale price
Nevada	30% of wholesale price
Vermont	92% of wholesale price
New York	20% retail tax
Kansas	$0.05/ml
Louisiana	$0.05/ml
North Carolina	$0.05/ml
West Virginia	$0.08/ml
Illinois	Statewide: 15% of wholesale price; $1.20/ml (Chicago); $0.20/ml (Cook County) +$1.50 per unit (Chicago & Cook County)
Delaware	$0.05/ml
New Jersey	$0.10/ml
Connecticut	10% of wholesale price (open-system); $.040/ml (closed-system)
New Mexico	12.5% of wholesale price (open-system), $0.50 per closed cartridge or pods less than 5ml
Washington	$0.09/ml (open-system); $0.27/ml (closed-system)

The main difference between open- and closed- system e-cigarettes is the way the e-liquid is delivered to the heating mechanism of the device. Open-system e-cigarettes have a clearomizer which is filled with e-liquid manually, whereas closed-system e-cigarettes use ready-filled tanks or pods of e-liquid that screw directly onto the e-cig battery. Open-system e-cigarettes also have a removable mouthpiece, whereas the mouthpiece on closed-system e-cigarettes is built into the e-cigarette tank. JUUL, a popular brand of e-cigarette, is a closed-system device.

Montana I-185 (2018)

See also: Montana I-185, Extend Medicaid Expansion and Increase Tobacco Taxes Initiative

A similar measure was on the Montana ballot in 2018 where it was defeated in a vote of 52.70% to 47.30%. I-185 was designed to increase taxes on cigarettes by $2.00 per pack, bringing the total taxes on a pack of cigarettes in Montana up to $3.70, and increase taxes for all other tobacco products (including electronic cigarettes and all vaping products) by 33 percent of the wholesale price. Under I-185, revenue generated from the taxes would have been used to extend and fund expanded eligibility of Medicaid coverage under the Affordable Care Act in Montana and other health-related programs. Campaigns supporting I-185 raised $9.83 million while the opposition campaign raised $17.53 million.

Tobacco on the ballot in 2020

• Oklahoma State Question 814, the Decrease Tobacco Settlement Endowment Trust Fund Payments and Fund Medicaid Program Amendment, was on the ballot in Oklahoma as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment on November 3, 2020. The measure was designed to decrease the percentage of money (from 75% to 25%) that is deposited to the Tobacco Settlement Endowment Trust (TSET) Fund from funds the state receives from tobacco settlements and directing the state legislature to appropriate funds to secure federal matching funds for the state's Medicaid program.
• Colorado Tobacco and E-Cigarette Tax Increase for Health and Education Programs Measure was on the ballot in Colorado as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment on November 3, 2020. This measure would incrementally increase cigarette and tobacco product taxes and create a new tax on nicotine products such as e-cigarettes.

Tobacco tax increases on the ballot

From 2008 to 2018, nine measures to increase tobacco taxes appeared on statewide ballots. Revenues generated from the tobacco taxes were designed to be allocated for funding programs related to things such as healthcare, education, veterans' services, and transportation. All measures were defeated except for California Proposition 56 of 2016, which raised cigarette taxes by $2.00 per pack and dedicated revenues to health programs.

Tobacco tax increases on the ballot, 2008-2018
Measure	Year	Revenue allocation	Yes votes (%)	No votes (%)	Result
Montana I-185	2018	Health programs	47.30%	52.70%	Defeated
South Dakota IM-25	2018	Technical institutes, education	44.89%	55.11%	Defeated
California Proposition 56	2016	Health programs	64.43%	35.57%	Approved
Colorado Amendment 72	2016	Health programs, education, veteran employment, homelessness prevention	46.94%	53.06%	Defeated
Missouri Proposition A	2016	Transportation	44.81%	55.19%	Defeated
Missouri Amendment 3	2016	Health programs, early childhood education	40.45%	59.55%	Defeated
North Dakota IM-4	2016	Health programs, veterans' programs	38.35%	61.65%	Defeated
California Proposition 29	2012	Health programs, cancer research	49.80%	50.20%	Defeated
Missouri Proposition B	2012	Education	49.20%	50.80%	Defeated

Tax policies on the ballot in 2020

See also: Taxes on the ballot

In 2020, voters in 14 states voted on 21 ballot measures addressing tax-related policies. Ten of the measures addressed taxes on properties, three were related to income tax rates, two addressed tobacco taxes, one addressed business-related taxes, one addressed sales tax rates, one addressed fees and surcharges, and one was related to tax-increment financing (TIF).

Click Show to read details about the tax-related measures on statewide ballots in 2020.

Tax-related policy ballot measures in 2020

Income Tax a/ot Arizona Proposition 208: The campaign Invest in Education proposed the ballot initiative to enact a 3.50% income tax, in addition to the existing income tax (4.50% in 2020), on income above $250,000 (single filing) or $500,000 (joint filing). Proposition 208 was designed to distribute the revenue from the 3.50% income tax to teacher and classroom support staff salaries, retention programs, and career and technical education programs. a Colorado Proposition 116: In 1987, the state's income tax was changed from graduated rates to a flat rate. Going into 2020, that flat rate was 4.63%. The ballot initiative reduced the rate from 4.63% to 4.55%. d Illinois Allow for Graduated Income Tax Amendment: The Illinois State Legislature proposed this constitutional amendment to allow the state to enact legislation for a graduated income tax. Going into 2020, the state constitution required that the state personal income tax be a flat rate. Gov. J.B. Pritzker (D), who advocated for a graduated income tax during his gubernatorial campaign, was providing funds to the campaign backing the amendment. Business-Related Taxes d Alaska Ballot Measure 1: The campaign Vote Yes for Alaska's Fair Share proposed the ballot initiative to increase taxes on oil production fields located in Alaska's North Slope that exceeded certain output minimums. According to Robin Brena, chairperson of Vote Yes for Alaska's Fair Share, three oil production fields—Alpine, Kuparuk, and Prudhoe Bay—met those criteria. BP, Conoco Phillips, ExxonMobil, and Hilcorp Energy funded the campaign to defeat Measure 1. a Nebraska Initiative 431: The initiative was designed to impose an annual tax of 20% on gross gambling revenue of licensed gaming operators; distributing 2.5% of tax revenue to the Compulsive Gamblers Assistance Fund, 2.5% to the General Fund, 70% to the Property Tax Credit Cash Fund, and 25% to the counties where gambling is authorized at licensed racetracks. The initiative was one of three initiatives that together were designed to authorize, regulate, and tax gambling at racetracks in Nebraska. Property-Related Taxes d California Proposition 15: The ballot initiative would have amended Proposition 13 (1978), which required that residential, commercial, and industrial properties are taxed based on their purchase price, with an annual adjustment based on inflation or 2%, whichever was lower. Proposition 15 would have required commercial and industrial properties, except those zoned as commercial agriculture, to be taxed based on their market value. In California, the proposal to assess taxes on commercial and industrial properties at market value, while continuing to assess taxes on residential properties based on the purchase price, is known as split roll. The state fiscal analyst estimated that Proposition 15 would generate between $6.5 billion and $11.5 billion. Proposition 15 would have required that the revenue be allocated to local governments and schools. a California Proposition 19: The state Legislature proposed the constitutional amendment as a compromise with the California Association of Realtors, which had qualified a different ballot initiative. Proposition 19 was designed to allow tax assessments to be transferred from someone's old home to their new home anywhere in the state and increased the number of times that tax assessments can be transferred from one to three for persons over 55 years old or with severe disabilities. Proposition 19 was also designed to require that inherited homes that are not used as principal residences, such as second homes or rentals, be reassessed at market value when transferred. a Colorado Amendment B: The constitutional amendment repealed the Gallagher Amendment (1982), which required a 45%-55% ratio between residential assessment rates and non-residential assessment rates regarding tax revenue. Therefore, Amendment B permitted the Colorado Legislature to define tax assessment limits without reference to the 45%-55% ratio requirement. In Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, New Jersey, and Virginia, voters also decided eight ballot measures related to exemptions, adjustments, and payments: Florida Amendment 5, Florida Amendment 6, Referendum A, Louisiana Amendment 2, Louisiana Amendment 5, Louisiana Amendment 6, New Jersey Question 2, and Virginia Question 2. Sales Tax a Arkansas Issue 1: The ballot measure continued an existing a 0.5% sales tax, with revenue dedicated to roads, highways, and bridges. Going into 2020, the tax was set to expire in 2023. Issue 1 had the support of Gov. Asa Hutchinson (R), and the campaign behind Issue 1 received financial support from Alice and Jim Walton. Tobacco a Colorado Proposition EE: The ballot measure increased the tax rate on cigarettes from 84 cents per pack to $2.64 per pack and the tax rate on tobacco products from 40% of the manufacturer's list price to 62% of the manufacturer's list price. The ballot measure created a tax on nicotine products, such as e-cigarettes, with scheduled increases over seven years to 62% of the manufacturer's list price. Revenue from the tax increases was dedicated to preschool, education, housing, and the General Fund. a Oregon Measure 108: The ballot measure increased the cigarette tax from $1.33 to $3.33 per pack. The ballot measure also taxed e-cigarettes and other nicotine inhalants at a rate of 65% of the wholesale sales price and cigars at 65% of the wholesale sales price (but not to exceed $1.00 per cigar). Measure 108 dedicated revenue from the tax increases to the Oregon Health Authority. Fees a Colorado Proposition 117: In 1992, the Colorado Taxpayer's Bill of Rights (TABOR) Amendment defined government-owned firms that provide goods or services for a fee as enterprises. Examples of enterprises include state nursing homes, state lotteries, Colorado Correctional Industries, and College Assist. The ballot measure was designed to require voter approval of laws that create new enterprises should the enterprise's projected or actual revenue from fees and surcharges exceed $100 million within the first five years. TIF a Nebraska Amendment 2: The constitutional amendment increased the repayment period for tax increment financing from 15 to 20 years for areas where more than one-half of properties are designated as extremely blighted.

Path to the ballot

Measure 108 required a 60 percent vote in each chamber of the Oregon State Legislature. The measure does not require the governor's signature.

Measure 108 was introduced as House Bill 2270 (HB 2270) at the request of Kate Brown (D). On June 20, 2019, the state House voted 39 to 21 to pass HB 2270. The measure passed along party lines with Democrats voting in favor and Republicans voting in opposition, except for Democratic representative Bradley Witt who voted against the bill, and two Republican representatives (Cheri Helt and Greg Smith) who voted in favor of the bill.

On June 30, 2019, the Senate passed the bill along party lines in a vote of 18-8 with four Republican senators absent or excused.

Vote in the Oregon House of Representatives June 20, 2019
Requirement: Simple majority vote in each chamber
Number of yes votes required: 36  a
	Yes	No	Not voting
Total	39	21	0
Total percent	65.00%	35.00%	0.00%
Democrat	37	1	0
Republican	2	20	0

Vote in the Oregon State Senate June 30, 2019
Requirement: Simple majority vote in each chamber
Number of yes votes required: 18  a
	Yes	No	Not voting
Total	18	8	4
Total percent	60.00%	26.66%	13.33%
Democrat	18	0	0
Republican	0	8	4

How to cast a vote

See also: Voting in Oregon

Click "Show" to learn more about voter registration, identification requirements, and poll times in Oregon.

How to cast a vote in Oregon

The information below covers regular voting policies in the state. Information may have not applied to the election on November 3, 2020, because of temporary changes in response to coronavirus. Click here to read about changes made for the 2020 elections. Poll times Oregon is an all-mail voting state. Each county provides privacy booths that voters can use to mark their ballot. County clerks' offices are open from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. local time on Election Day. Oregon is divided between the Mountain and Pacific time zones. Registration requirements Check your voter registration status here. To register to vote in Oregon, one must be a resident of Oregon, a United States citizen, and at least 16 years old. Voters must be at least 18 years old by the day of the election in order to receive a ballot. Potential voters can register online or by mailing in a voter registration form to your county election office. The deadline to register is 21 days before the election. Automatic registration Oregon implemented automatic voter registration in 2016. For more information, click here. Online registration See also: Online voter registration Oregon has implemented an online voter registration system. Residents can register to vote by visiting this website. Same-day registration Oregon does not allow same-day voter registration. Residency requirements To register to vote in Oregon, you must be a resident of the state. Verification of citizenship See also: Laws permitting noncitizens to vote in the United States Oregon does not require proof of citizenship for voter registration. An individual must attest that they are a U.S. citizen when registering to vote. According to the state's voter registration application, a voter who knowingly falsely registers "can be fined up to $125,000 and/or imprisoned for up to 5 years." All 49 states with voter registration systems require applicants to declare that they are U.S. citizens in order to register to vote in state and federal elections, under penalty of perjury or other punishment. Seven states — Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Kansas, Louisiana, New Hampshire, and Wyoming — have laws requiring verification of citizenship at the time of voter registration, whether in effect or not. In three states — California, Maryland, and Vermont — at least one local jurisdiction allows noncitizens to vote in some local elections. Noncitizens registering to vote in those elections must complete a voter registration application provided by the local jurisdiction and are not eligible to register as state or federal voters. Verifying your registration The Oregon Secretary of State’s Office allows residents to check their voter registration status online by visiting this website. Voter ID requirements Oregon is an all-mail voting state. When registering to vote, voters must provide their driver's license number or state ID card number. If voters can not provide this information, they can print and sign a online voter registration form and mail it to their county election office to complete their registration.

See also

2020 measures

• 2020 ballot measures
• Taxes on the ballot
• Tobacco on the ballot

Oregon

• Oregon ballot measures
• Oregon ballot measure laws

News and analysis

• Ballot measure lawsuits
• Ballot measure readability
• Ballot measure polls

External links

• Oregon HB 2270 full text (2019)
• House Bill 2270 (2019) overview
• Voter Guide

Support

• Yes on 108 campaign website
• Yes on 108 Tomorrow Facebook page
• Yes on 108 Twitter page

Opposition

• No on 108 campaign website
• No on 108 Facebook page