Who Am I?

My photo

I served in the US Navy from 2002-08; four of those years were as a Nuclear Propulsion Operator aboard an aircraft carrier. I engage in political activism in various Democratic circles when I am able to. I have a cat, and I am an uncle.

All opinions that I express are my own and do not reflect the views of any organization that I represent.

Saturday, October 29, 2016

CLEARING THE SMOKE (COLORADO AMENDMENT 72)


Political ads on television are commonplace at this time every two years in Colorado.

One ad I have noticed talks with ranchers about this constitutional amendment that would create these new taxes, and they are not fans of it.

I also noticed a “No on 72” sign on the door of a gas station’s Kwik-e-Mart one day.

So I pulled out my phone to see what Amendment 72 is exactly.


It is actually a plan to tax cigarettes and other tobacco products and use those taxes to fund medical research, tobacco prevention, veterans’ and youth behavioral health services, and other programs.

I have never smoked a cigarette in my life nor have dipped chewing tobacco. I personally find such things a filthy, disgusting habit. I knew guys while I was on active duty that dipped and would carry Coke bottles filled with dip spit.

Again, disgusting

The reason why I don’t smoke is because I like to run. Now, this election season combined with me working nights has put a serious dent in my running. I do stay active at work though as I am on my feet for almost the entire time I am on shift. I look forward to resuming my running activities sometime after Election Day. Smoking would certainly hinder my efforts.

The United States has been engaged in an effort to try to eradicate tobacco usage, specifically among youths. We are familiar with the large text of SURGEON GENERAL’S WARNING on cigarettes.

Overseas, it is a different story.


That’s from Singapore. They get to the point about the long-term effects of tobacco usage.

Basically there seems to be some confusion about what 72 would do based on the tactics being utilized by the opposition and their campaign strategy they are using.

If the opponents of 72 were interested in defeating this measure they should try a different approach by citing that it is an unfair tax that once again shifts the burden to the economically disadvantaged instead of featuring cowboys just bitching about taxes.

I do agree with that observation of shifting the tax burden and certainly there needs to be serious reforms to our tax code that does not rely so much on so-called “sin taxes.”

But I am in favor of putting our taxes to some good as stipulated by this amendment.

I encourage a YES vote on Amendment 72.


Post a Comment