Yes On 56 Commercial Analysis

Company, with a Coalition of Taxpayers, Educators, Healthcare Professionals, Law… raised $66.26 million of that. California Citizens Against Special Interests and Wasteful Taxes, No on Prop. 56 raised $27k and Protect Small Business and Smoke Free Alternatives, No on 56; Sponsored by Smoke-Free Alternatives Trade Association raise $3.6k. Tobacco companies alone spent over twice as much as all the committees supporting Yes on 56 combined. Both sides also have various commercials promoting their side of the argument. I have watched commercials from both sides and came to the conclusion that the Yes on 56 did a far better job of putting together their commercials. In watching the No on 56 ones I felt that they were more repetitive and did not really convince me to vote their way. Their commercials really only had one problem with saying yes on proposition 56, and that was, that it is a tax money grab by insurance companies and special interests and not where they believe the money should go. This was repeated over and over and they failed to acknowledge that there’s anything wrong with smoking, which I found …show more content…
Smoking can kill, the No on 56 side just won’t say it out loud. Another reason is that I have a little brother, and seeing that e-cigs and other advertisements are geared towards kids and teens, the last thing I’d want for him is for him to start smoking and potentially ruin his life. I also just don’t think it’s fair that tobacco companies can get away with so much and pay so little for it, like lying about whether or not smoking is bad for you, not caring that smoking ruins lives. In my elementary and middle schools, we had programs that taught us about the dangers of smoking, this also influences my decision to vote