Tobacco.org

• Global Voices Status Report 2009: Rebutting the tobacco industry: winning smokefree air (PDF) 

In mid 2009, more than 400 million people are protected by comprehensive smokefree laws. These are the strongest smokefree laws, which do not allow any designated smoking rooms and include only extremely limited exemptions. A further 500 million people are covered by strong smokefree laws. These laws protect most people, most of the time. Overall, close to a billion people in some 44 countries now have local or national regulations protecting them from secondhand smoke in most enclosed public places and workplaces. We expect to see continuing progress in the year ahead, as more and more countries prepare to take action.

Smokefree air for all

This rapid progress is delivering smokefree air to people in countries around the globe. Policies are being implemented successfully in a variety of places - in low income nations and more affluent ones, in small localities, major cities, and vast countries. Despite the wide variation in countries covered by smokefree laws, their experiences are very similar. In country after country:

• smokefree laws are good for health

• most people support smokefree laws

• with proper planning and resources, enforcement is straightforward

• hospitality sector profits and jobs remain safe

The message is clearer than ever: smokefree air policies work.

Focus on low and middle income countries

However, there is a long way to go. Despite the rapid progress, more than 85% of the world’s people remain without meaningful protection from secondhand smoke, many of them in the low and middle income countries that will bear the brunt of the global tobacco epidemic. Clear tobacco control policies are urgently needed. Without them, tobacco related illness, disability and death will cost low and middle income countries dearly. Smokefree air laws must be a priority for low and middle income countries. . . .

The tobacco industry’s dirty tricks

The biggest barrier to smokefree air is the multinational tobacco companies who stand to lose billions of dollars if smokefree laws are implemented.

From fake “science” to buying influence, and from scare stories to coverups, tobacco companies continue to devote their considerable wealth to stopping smokefree laws in every region of the world.

This report details the tobacco industry’s tactics to hold back legislation, alongside the positive impact of governments, organizations and individuals who are taking on Big Tobacco, and winning.

In late 2008, world governments agreed to a series of FCTC guidelines based on the recognition that tobacco company interests are fundamentally incompatible with health, welfare or “good causes.”2

These guidelines outline governments’ responsibilities under Article 5.3 of the FCTC on tobacco industry interference. They are expressly designed to stop Big Tobacco’s dirty tricks. The guidelines are essential to winning the battle for smokefree air.

Governments must continue to act, if they are to meet the goal of protecting everyone from secondhand smoke by 2012.

Jump to full article »

• Lobbyists open wallets to influence Pa. budget  

- When it became clear that the state budget was in crisis mode, three industries with much at stake in Harrisburg opened their wallets.

Gambling interests, natural-gas drillers, and tobacco companies have since January spent more than $4.5 million combined on lobbying efforts, according to expense reports filed last week with the state.

Those industries were among the few winners in a budget ravaged by the recession.

Casinos are poised to introduce poker and other newly legalized table games. Natural-gas drillers and tobacco companies fought off new taxes. . . .

Republican legislative leaders defeated the proposed cigar tax, along with one proposed for smokeless products such as chewing tobacco and snuff. Left standing was a new tax on little cigars - cigarillos.

In all, tobacco interests large and small spent nearly $1.5 million on lobbying from January through Sept. 30, records show.

Reynolds American Inc., whose subsidiary Conwood Co. is the nation's second-largest producer of smokeless tobacco products, devoted the most - $670,658.

Jump to full article »

• St. Louis County smoking ban campaign energizes in last weekend  

With the election four days away, energized supporters and opponents of the Proposition N smoking ban have stepped up their campaigns and picked up more money - with the anti-ban committee thus far outraising supporters but the pro-ban committee picking up endorsements.

And their tactics differ - with supporters relying on electronics, operating a get-out-the-vote telephone and email campaigns , and opponents counting on radio and newspaper advertisements. Both are using rallies to try to attract attention.

Proposition N would ban smoking in most indoor public places. Siginificant exemptions include casino gaming floors, smoking lounges at Lambert Field and small bars.

Opponents of the smoking ban debuted a new radio ad today on KMOX, says Tom Sullivan, spokesperson for the Citizens Against Proposition N. Ads against the ban will continue through Tuesday on KEZK and KSIV.

The ads by Citizens against Proposition N so far have been paid for by Discount Smoke Shops and activist Bill Hannegan. . . .

Charles Gatton, chair of the County Citizens for Cleaner Air, said today that he expected that ExpressScripts to make a significant contribution to supporters of a ban. So far, the largest contribution to that committee has been $10,000 from BJC Healthcare.

With money in its pockets, the anti-ban group sent out a 240,000-piece mailing to voters this week and took out full-color page ads in all four Call newspapers, covering a large part of South County, Sullivan said. Another ad appeared in the St. Louis American.

Jump to full article »

• Govt denies involvement in missing tobacco article 

The government has denied any involvement in the striking off of a contentious sub-article on tobacco in the recently endorsed health law, deemed an effort to protect the country’s cigarette industry.

State Secretary Hatta Radjasa said Tuesday the law, passed by the House of Representatives last month, was already missing the sub-article when his office received it.

He said he had contacted the Health Ministry and the Justice and Human Rights Ministry to settle the problem, and that the State Secretariat now had a complete version of the law, including the missing sub-article, to be signed by the President.

“The House of Representatives’ secretariat is lying if it said it received the law without the sub-article from the State Secretariat. That’s not how we send bills to the House,” Hatta said at a press conference.

Jump to full article »

• Phillip Morris Fights Display Ban 

Philip Morris International (PMI) has hit back at groups advocating a total ban on the display of tobacco products in retail stores via a new website.

The cigarette giant supports effective regulation but opposes a total ban on the display of tobacco products in stores.

"A number of countries are investigating a ban on display of tobacco products in retail stores," said PMI's director of regulatory communications, Morgan Rees.

"There is limited information in the public domain that describes experiences from countries that have banned display and so we felt that it would be useful to create a website that provides information on the effectiveness of the ban, as well as to describe its impact on adult smokers, retailers, tobacco manufacturers and enforcement agencies."

To date four countries - Australia, Canada, Iceland and Ireland - have prohibited the display of tobacco products at point of sale. . . .

Meanwhile, Donegal newsagent and National Federation of Retail Newsagents member, Maurice Timony, last week lodged a High Court challenge to contest the Irish Governments ban on tobacco display.

Jump to full article »

• VIDEO: Kevin Grandia: The Philip Morris Theory of Global Warming 

The tobacco companies were sued by the US government for this behavior and I suspect such a suit will be filed someday against the companies (i.e. ExxonMobil), the organizations (i.e. the Competitive Enterprise Institute) and the individuals (i.e. Steve Milloy) who perpetrated the attack on climate science.

All this leads to a shameless plug.

Jim Hoggan, co-founder of the DeSmogBlog Project, which I have managed for the last four years has written a book that chronicles the history of PR spindoctors working to confuse the realities of climate change (and tobacco). It's called Climate Cover Up: the crusade to deny global warming and it comes out in hard copy in the US on Oct. 20th. You can get it now on Amazon and Barnes and Noble if you can't wait.

People who have read the book tell me that they're angry. And its time for everyone to get angry about this and start holding people like Milloy accountable for what they've done.

Jump to full article »

• DICKINSON: Echoes of Philip Morris and Hillarycare 

I touched on the Philip Morris campaign, briefly, in "The Lie Machine," but I've since uncovered a bumper crop of additional memos from the Legacy Tobacco Documents Library that offer a detailed picture of the cigarette maker's behind-the-scenes moves to defeat the Clinton health care reform in '94 -- and why the tobacco company was so motivated.

The costs of the Clinton health reform were to be covered, in part, by new tobacco taxes. As this memo from the company's Washington Relations Office reveals, Philip Morris' decided it would try beat back this threat by torpedoing health care reform altogether: . . .

• Third Party support is important. We provide assistance to Citizens for a Sound Economy, Center for Policy Analysis, Manhattan Institute and numerous other organizations. . . .

Citizens for a Sound Economy's effort bore a striking resemblance to the town-hall campaign waged this August by its offspring. This "Tobacco Strategy" memo describes CSE's program in full swing, replete with a mobilization of up-in-arms constituents at town halls . . .

Philip Morris tapped its own employees to play the part of concerned citizens . . .

Who were those allies? This March 22, 1994, "Tobacco Strategy Review" marked "confidential" lists Philip Morris' friends in the foxhole, including, notably, the Manhattan Institute, where one Betsy McCaughey was a fellow: . . .

To influence swing Democrats in the House, PM quietly paid CSE to gin up a "grassroots" anti-tax rebellion, as detailed in this memo . . .

• PM COMPANIES INC. AND RJR HAVE FORMED THE PM/RJR TOBACCO TASK FORCE TO COORDINATE ACTIONS ON… FET.

This “Task Force” was star-studded. Indeed, it was anchored by a former top George H.W. Bush consultant who would go on to found FoxNews:

• TASK FORCE MEMBERS INCLUDE:

…

Roger Ailes, public affairs strategist

Jump to full article »

• SULLIVAN: Betsy McCaughey And Big Tobacco  

I certainly had no idea about any of this at the time. I take responsibility for publishing the piece, and feel that airing some of the internal fight over it would violate confidences. But at no point was I aware of a three-part series, claimed by the tobacco lobbyist. But I did not commission the piece as the Manhattan Institute notes.

Jump to full article »

I certainly had no idea about any of this at the time. I take responsibility for publishing the piece, and feel that airing some of the internal fight over it would violate confidences.
Then-New Republic editor Andrew Sullivan, on publishing "No Exit," the 1994 Betsey McCaughey item on Clinton's Health Care plan.

• Tobacco giant makes its mark on D.C. smoking legislation 

The largest tobacco manufacturer in the United States is supporting a D.C. Council proposal that would limit the sale of some tobacco products and regulate where people can smoke.

Representatives from Altria Group Inc., owner of tobacco giant Philip Morris, testified at a council hearing Tuesday that they were backing a bill that contained a slew of provisions.

In fact, Altria lobbyist Mary Eva Candon drafted the majority of the legislation, at-large Councilman Phil Mendelson told The Examiner. And the day he introduced the bill, Mendelson received a $500 campaign contribution from Candon.

"That's the problem when you work with friends and they have suggestions," Mendelson said. "It all gets into the mix."

Among its 10 provisions, the bill would:

-- ban the sale of single cigars, except in tobacco shops;

-- set weight-based requirements for the number of cigars per package;

-- and require all tobacco products be sold from behind the counter.

But the head of the Cigar Association of America said Altria would benefit while those provisions would leave the rest of the cigar industry suffering.

Altria's Black and Mild are the nation's top-selling cigars and control almost a quarter of the market. Because they're sold in five-packs, CAA President Norman Sharp said the ban on single cigars would boost Black and Mild sales.

Jump to full article »

• Serial misinformer McCaughey exposed as Big Tobacco shill during 1994 health care debate 

Philip Morris budgeted $25,000 for McCaughey employer Manhattan Institute in 1995. As Media Matters Senior Fellow Jamison Foser documented, Philip Morris budgeted $25,000 for The Manhattan Institute for 1995 -- the think tank that employed McCaughey when she authored her hit piece in 1994.

Neither The New Republic nor McCaughey disclosed her reported conflict of interest

TNR presented McCaughey as an impartial expert.

In McCaughey's February 7, 1994 article, "No Exit," and February 28, 1994, article, "She's BAAACK!," The New Republic only identified her as the "John M. Olin Fellow at the Manhattan Institute" (articles retrieved from the Nexis database). . . .

McCaughey's Clinton-era claims have been widely debunked -- repeatedly so in TNR

Media cite bill Section 1003 explicitly providing "protection of consumer choice." Rebutting McCaughey's claims, many media accounts have cited Section 1003, which, contrary to McCaughey's claims, makes clear that individuals can "go outside the system to buy basic health coverage" and that individuals can pay doctors out-of-pocket. This section is often referenced as "page 15" or "page 16" of the bill, the pages on which it appears. . . .

Weinstein points to George Will to explain how McCaughey's "misrepresentations ... spread quickly." In his February 6, 1994, New York Times opinion piece, Weinstein wrote that "Conservatives, ranging from Senator Bob Dole to the columnist George Will, have embraced her broadside as gospel." He added that "[h]er misrepresentations have spread quickly . . .

Despite her past conflicts of interest and falsehoods, media treat McCaughey as if she's credible

McCaughey is a serial misinformer who has perpetuated numerous falsehoods about health care reform. . . .

Jump to full article »

• TOBACCO STRATEGY (dtv34e00) (PDF) 

Document Date: 19940300/E . . .

TOBACCO STRATEGY

• Acton Institute for the Study of Religion and Liberty . . .

Acton is presently preparing, with our assistance, a monograph for the Detroit News detailing arguments against "sin" taxes. I win be contacting them this week to elicit their assistance in rebutting the just-released University of Michigan report that attacks industry projections of economic dislocation caused by prohibitive excise tax hikes.

• Alexis de Tocqueville Institution (AdTI) . . .

• American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research (AEI) . . .

• Americans for Tax Reform (ATR)

A staunch ally of PM for a number of years in many tax battles, ATR has sponsored print ads against the use of excise taxes to fund health cam as well as VNRs on the subject, most recently one detailing the impacts of prohibitive cigarette excises in Canada on the economy and on crime .... which had a profound influence on the eventual decision to rollback the tax. ATR is very close to proponents of alternative health care plans, has good access in the dungeons of Washington as well as with its many state-level contacts throughout the country, and could be mobilized for lobbying or other grassroots tactics either in Washington or in key legislative districts. . . .

• Cato Institute

An Associate Broadcaster of NET, Cato is in discussions with us re promotion on their show ("Cato Policy Forum") of the issues contained in the Regulation magazine article by Dr. Gary Huber, "Smoke and Mirrors: The EPA's Flawed Study of Environmental Tobacco Smoke". As Regulation is a Cato product we are optimistic that such a forum will be provided. Cato is also the "co-sponsor" of the John Goodman/NCPA/Phil Gramm health care alternative---which contains no excise taxes--and hence we should consider working with them in any way possible to promote this as a better alternative to the Clinton plan. This could include any of the spate of policy group activities, ranging from conferences and panel discussions to op-eds and ads, and, of course, including maximum promotion on NET.

• Center for the Study of American Business (CSAB)

Directed by Murray Weidenbaum, former Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors, CSAB is perhaps the leading American think tank on regulatory issues. We have worked with them on numerous aspects of the regulatory burden imposed on the tobacco industry, and their work has, gotten tremendous airplay. . . .

• Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America

As we all know, the Chamber has been all over the map, including on the wrong side, on this debate. However, we have been intensely lobbying them behind the scenes to "bring them in line" consistent with the other major business organizations, especially on FET, but also on employer mandates. . . .

We are funding a major (400K) grassroots initiative in the districts of House Energy & Commerce members to educate and mobilize consumers, through town hall meetings, radio and print ads, direct mail, patch-through calls to the Capitol switchboard, editorial board visits, polling data, meetings with Members and staff and the release of studies and other educational pieces. The goal of this effort is to show the Clinton plan as a government-run health, care system replete with higher taxes and government spending, massive job losses, less choice, rationing of care and extensive bureaucracies. CSE is taking aim at the heart of the plan --- employer mandates, new entitlements, price controls, mandatory health alliances, heavy load of new taxes and global budgets--and, with the program well underway, is by all accounts getting rave reviews in the respective districts.

• Citizens for Tax Justice (CTJ)/Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy(ITEP)

As a leading labor-backed organization, CTRJ/ITEP and we have worked closely to highlight the regressive nature of tobacco excise taxes, and, in particular, how the problem would be exacerbated by passage of the Clinton plan. As this group has a strong voice in the labor movement, we plan to reinforce this message through the mobilization of this important constituency.

• The Claremont Institute for the Study of Statesmanship and Political Philosophy

Worked with this think tank in the development of a major policy paper entitled "The Clinton Health Plan: Bad Medicine for California". Bruce Herschensohn and other Claremont spokesmen are doing a media blitz to disseminate the findings . . .

• Consumer Alert

The antithesis of the Nader/Citizen Action brand of "consumer defense", Consumer Alert has worked with us in the promotion of the concept that the Clinton plan is anti-consumer, both in toto and because of the regressive excise taxes contained therein. . . .

• Grocery Manufacturers of America (GMA)

Worked with GMA in the formulation of a resolution on health care reform mirroring that of the BRT. We currently chair the GMA Tax Committee and hence can ensure that no wayward positioning on excises ensues.

• The Heartland Institute

As a member of the Board, I am working with Heartland in several areas: . . . Through all these efforts runs Heartland's 1994 top priority: to inform policymakers, reporters and opinion leaders of the true nature of the Clinton Administration's health care reform legislation . . .

• The Heritage Foundation

Worked with Heritage in the development of alternative policy prescriptions to the Clinton plan, and articles and opeds espousing such positioning. Our efforts have resulted in several major policy papers, including one on the massive economic dislocation that would result from the implementation of the Clinton plan (including drastically less cigarette tax revenue than is currently envisioned), one on the implications of a prohibitive cigarette excise hike on the CPI, government transfer payments and net revenue, one on the misapplication of science in the EPA/ETS debate, and, possibly, one on the Surgeon General's broadside against tobacco advertising combined with a commercial speecb/First Amendment perspective.

• Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace

Have worked with them on several pieces focused on the Clinton program for universal health care coverage, which, combined with insurance coverage for mental health and reduced prescription costs, bound together with a fuzzy plan to finance the program, would be a recipe for disaster that will result in reduced employment in the international economy, continued unequal access to medical services and additions to the federal deficit.

• Institute for Research on the Economics of Taxation (IRET)

Led by Norm Ture, former Undersecretary of the Treasury for Tax and Economic Affairs, and a long time friend of PM, IRET has been perhaps the leading policy group exponent of the evils of selective excise taxation. Via conferences, policy forums, articles, op-eds and the like, IRET has emphasized the point that excises are inefficient and unfair, and has beefed up these efforts since the introduction of the Clinton plan. . . .

• Mackinac Center for Public Policy

Have worked closely with this Michigan-based group in their policy study opposing the President's health care reform proposal, including its funding mechanism. . . .

• Manhattan Institute

Worked off-the-record with Manhattan and writer Betsy McCaughey as part of the input to the three-part expose in The New Republic on what the Clinton plan means to you. . . .

• National Association of Manufacturers (NAM)

Similar to the BRT, but even more strongly, NAM (with our support) came out in opposition to the Clinton health care plan. Simultaneously, we have been working with the NAM Taxation Committee to ensure that regardless of what plan eventually materializes, no selective excise taxes of any kind will be used to fund it. . . .

• National Empowerment Television (NET)

Through a major financial grant (200K) we have signed on as an Associate Broadcaster of this 24-hour-a-day cable/satellite network with potential viewership of nearly 25 million people. We are meeting Friday with producers and staff to plan the miniseries on health care .... which will focus on debunking the myths of the Clinton plan and the use of excises to fund such a plan, and to investigate more market-driven alternatives. . . .

• National Journalism Center

This group was developed to train budding journalists in free market political and economic principles. As a direct result of our support we have been able to work with alumni of this program .... about 15 years worth of journalists at print and visual media throughout the country .... to get across our side of the story .... which has resulted in numerous pieces consistent with our point of view. We also co-sponsored in December a policy minibriefing on health care for a broad cross-section of the Center's Alumni Council, and are now working with the Journalism Center in the development a major health care reform policy conference (tentatively scheduled for late April/early May) that will debunk the myths of the Clinton plan . . .

• National Policy Forum . . .

As a member of the Board, I have worked closely with PRI in the development of policy pieces and op-eds, particularly for major Western markets, in opposition to the Clinton plan and in support of free market alternatives. As a Canadian, the president of PRI has first-hand experience of the evils of government-run health care . . .

• Philanthropy Roundtable . . .

• Pioneer Institute for Public Policy Research . . .

• Tax Foundation

Heavily involved in analyses of the impacts of the Clinton plan on a state-by-state basis. PM is a major supporter of this group, and we have extremely close ties. . . .

• The Texas Republic

Working with the editor of this free market monthly, funded by PM, on an analytic piece debunking the Clinton plan . . .

• Washington Legal Foundation (WLF)

A close ally of PM for many years, WLF has been involved in numerous aspects of the tobacco industry debate. They have filed amicus briefs against the EPA

Jump to full article »

• State's tobacco industry helped avert new Pa. tax  

Pennsylvania is poised to maintain a long-standing tax exemption on the sales of cigars and smokeless tobacco, despite two attempts by Gov. Ed Rendell over the past three years to remove it.

Even though all other states tax the items, such a tax is not expected to appear in a nearly week-old budget agreement that is still being hammered into shape in the Capitol.

Earlier this year, Rendell proposed the tax to help wipe out the state's multibillion-dollar revenue shortfall. His attempt in 2007 would have helped underwrite an extension of state-subsidized health insurance to adults who lack coverage.

Resistance by Pennsylvania's legislators can be attributed to their desire to protect tobacco growers in southeastern Pennsylvania, cigar makers that employ hundreds and heavy use of snuff and chewing tobacco by miners and steelworkers in southwestern Pennsylvania.

"That would be a very unpopular tax in my communities," said Sen. Richard Kasunic, D-Fayette. "And I'd rather not have to vote on that."

In addition, Pennsylvania is home to four of the nation's eight leading cigar retailers. One, Cigars International of Bethlehem, would have to consider moving to Florida if Pennsylvania approved a tax on cigars, company president Keith Meier told the Senate Finance Committee at a February hearing on Rendell's proposal.

Jump to full article »

• Rolling Stone Finds A Smoking Gun: Betsy McCaughey Lied About Healthcare Reform For Tobacco Lobby  

McCaughey's lies were later debunked in a 1995 post-mortem in The Atlantic, and The New Republic recanted the piece in 2006. But what has not been reported until now is that McCaughey's writing was influenced by Phillip Morris, the world's largest tobacco company, as part of a secret campaign to scuttle Clinton's health care reform. (The measure would have been funded by a huge increase in tobacco taxes.) In an internal company memo from March 1994, the tobacco giant detailed its strategy to derail Hillarycare through an alliance with conservative think tanks, front groups and media outlets. Integral to the company's strategy, the memo observed, was an effort to "work on the development of favorable pieces" with "friendly contacts in the media." The memo, prepared by a Phillip Morris executive, mentions only one author by name:

"Worked off-the-record with Manhattan [Editor's note: At the time, McCaughey was a fellow at the Manhattan Institute] and writer Betsy McCaughey as part of the input to the three-part expose in The New Republic on what the Clinton plan means to you. The first part detailed specifics of the plan."

Jump to full article »

• Tobacco funds cause friction at University  

An anti-tobacco student group based in Toronto has called for an all-out boycott on involvement with the University of Alberta’s School of Public Health (SPH) because of a tobacco-industry-funded researcher and his attempt to affect the composition of Bill C-32, an act to amend the Tobacco Act.

The anti-tobacco group, called Education Bringing Youth Tobacco Truths (E-butt) identified a letter from SPH Associate Professor Carl Phillips to the House of Commons Health Committee on June 10, 2009, as unethical based on his failure to disclose his reception of funds totalling $1.5 million from U.S. Smokeless Tobacco Company, now owned by Philip Morris USA.

E-butt has demanded the SPH issue a statement distancing itself from Phillip’s comments, and condemning both his use of SPH letterhead and failure to disclose his associations with the tobacco industry.

Phillips wrote the letter asking the House of Commons to exempt what he calls “low-risk nicotine sources,” such as Snus, Skoal, and chewing tobacco, including flavoured tobacco products, from the effects of Bill C-32, which is primarily purposed to protect the health of Canadians and “protect young persons and others from inducements to use tobacco products.” . . .

“In academia, one normally discloses any potential conflicts of interest, and when Phillips sent his letter, he didn’t,” Soskolne said.

According to Ward, however, the concern over academic freedom should not be held in higher regard than concerns of public safety.

Also irking E-butt is the fact that Phillips sent his recommendation on SPH letterhead, which could, according to Ward, lead to the misconception that his suggestions were a public statement from the SPH.

Jump to full article »

• Altria spent more than $3.9M lobbying gov't in 2Q 

Altria Client Services Inc., on behalf of the nation's biggest cigarette maker, spent more than $3.9 million in the second quarter to lobby for a bill that gives the Food and Drug Administration the authority to regulate the industry and other issues, according to a recent disclosure form.

Altria ( MO ) also lobbied the federal government on legislation involving health care issues and cigarette trafficking in the April-June period, according to the report filed July 20 with the House clerk's office.

Jump to full article »