Tag(s): , Add Tags
Add to My Group(s)

View Ratings | Rate It

Permalink
View Article Stats      (6 comments)

Shameful! Big Tobacco Swiftboats Healthcare for Children

Add this Page to Facebook!
Submit to Twitter
Submit to Reddit
Submit to Stumble Upon

Tell A Friend

Become a Fan
Get Embed HTML Code
By (about the author)

Become a Fan Become a Fan  (176 fans)   -- Page 1 of 1 page(s)

opednews.com

The Wall Street Journal reports that tobacco companies spent over $12 million swiftboating a bill that would have funded a child health care program. This was similar to the program that a bi-partisan congress passed, which Bush vetoed.

While it was obvious that the congressional legislation used a tax on cigarettes to pay for the national program to fund the SCHIP program, this Oregon ballot measure makes it seem obvious that it is very likely that behind the scenes, tobacco lobbyists were leaning on southern legislators, in particular, to block the overturn of the veto.

Somehow this should be made much more visible. Shame on the tobacco companies for blocking healthcare for children.

The WSJ article reported, "Oregonians Against the Blank Check Committee, which was funded by Reynolds," as the group that ran the campaign. Sounds like swiftboating to me. A front group attacking an item on the ballot.

The article stated,
Supporters of the Oregon measure charge that the companies misrepresented the purpose of the tax. "They know that cigarette taxes are popular with the voters," said William V. Corr, executive director of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, "and what they have done is change the subject to anything but raising tobacco taxes to fund health insurance for children or to fund tobacco prevention."

Let's face it, tobacco IS a dwindling industry. It represents a huge "tax" on the nation's healthcare system. The people who smoke disproportionately "tax" the money spent on diseases caused by smoking.  Every pack of cigarettes that is sold costs taxpayers $7 in health care subsidies.

It's not fair that an industry can spend millions of tax-exempt dollars to oppose vote initiatives that are good for the people, while 501(c)3 non-profits are restricted from lobbying for healthy initiatives.

 

Rob Kall is executive editor, publisher and site architect of OpEdNews.com, Host of the Rob Kall Bottom Up Radio Show (WNJC 1360 AM), President of Futurehealth, Inc, more...)
 

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

Follow Me on Twitter

 

Share this page: (what's this?)                   Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend

Add this Page to Facebook!      Submit to Stumble Upon      Submit to Reddit      Add This Page to Mr Wong!           NEWSVINE      DEl.ICIO.US      Looksmart Furl      My Web      Blink List     (More...)

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
6 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)

Oregon's Measure 50 by Diane Cadonau on Thursday, Nov 8, 2007 at 4:15:04 PM
Sorry, but I gotta disagree, Rob by Jim Freeman on Thursday, Nov 8, 2007 at 5:52:17 PM
No free rides Jim by Andris on Thursday, Nov 8, 2007 at 10:37:55 PM
You find it 'morally weak' by Jim Freeman on Friday, Nov 9, 2007 at 10:09:40 AM
I agree by Andris on Friday, Nov 9, 2007 at 10:31:15 PM
Poor fiscal planning by Jon Kiparsky on Friday, Nov 9, 2007 at 9:41:25 PM