Proposition 31

Should California ban flavored tobacco products?

In 2020, the California Legislature banned the retail sale of all flavored tobacco products that one might smoke, vape or eat. However, hookah, premium cigars and loose-leaf tobacco were excluded. The tobacco industry is using this referendum to overturn that law (SB 793). A “yes” vote means flavored tobacco products will be banned. A “no” vote means flavored tobacco will stay on store shelves. Either way, flavored tobacco products can still be legally purchased online and local bans on flavored tobacco use would remain in place.

Yes Argument

Maintaining a ban on flavored tobacco products protects future generations. Flavored tobacco sales target people of color and minors, and adding fruit, mint or menthol to products is a shameless tactic to lure new users. Massive spending by Big Tobacco is why the use of e-cigarettes among youth has skyrocketed. The best way to prevent nicotine addiction is to keep flavored products out of retail stores. 

No Argument

The flavor ban unfairly blocks products preferred by millions of adults. The ban could also hurt convenience stores and lead to an underground market.

Key Supporters
This list represents notable organizations and officials who have taken a position on the ballot measure, or who are funding the campaigns in support or in opposition. This list is not exhaustive, and may be updated.
This list represents notable organizations and officials who have taken a position on the ballot measure, or who are funding the campaigns in support or in opposition. This list is not exhaustive, and may be updated.

Key Opponents
This list represents notable organizations and officials who have taken a position on the ballot measure, or who are funding the campaigns in support or in opposition. This list is not exhaustive, and may be updated.
This list represents notable organizations and officials who have taken a position on the ballot measure, or who are funding the campaigns in support or in opposition. This list is not exhaustive, and may be updated.

Fundraising
Campaign finance data comes from the California Secretary of State’s office and our partners at Voter’s Edge.
Campaign finance data comes from the California Secretary of State’s office and our partners at Voter’s Edge.

Updated at 5:30 PM PT on Oct 27, 2022
Source: California Secretary of State
In Support
$46.3mTotal
Michael R. Bloomberg
$44.2m
Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc. and the Hospitals
$1.1m
California Teachers Association
$250.0k
American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, Inc.
$137.5k
American Heart Association
$127.0k
In Opposition
$2.0mTotal
Philip Morris USA Inc. and its Affiliates
$1.2m
R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company and its Affiliates
$784.7k
JMG International, Inc
$5.3k
National Association of Tobacco Outlets
$250

 

More California Propositions

Proposition 1


Should California amend its constitution to include the right to reproductive freedom, including access to abortion and contraceptives?

Proposition 26


Should California legalize sports betting at tribal casinos and horse racetracks, and allow roulette and dice games at tribal casinos?

Proposition 27


Should California legalize online sports betting?

Proposition 28


Should California guarantee that 1% of the amount funded for public education be set aside for music and the arts in every K-12 public school?

Proposition 29


Should California add new regulations for kidney dialysis clinics?

Proposition 30


Should California raise the personal income tax of its wealthiest residents to pay for programs meant to fight climate change and air pollution?