Lobbyist as Governor????

medicineman

New Member
Former Tobacco Lobbyist Turned Governor Kills Statewide Anti-Smoking Program or Should an ex tobacco lobbyist be making changes to anti smoking programs?

December 04, 2006 1:40 PM
Anna Schecter Reports:
Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, a former tobacco industry lobbyist, won a long battle in court to withdraw all funding for Mississippi's highly successful anti-smoking program, and last week the last dollar ran out.
"This is truly a case of one man, a longtime tobacco industry lobbyist, using his power to destroy a program that was reducing tobacco use among Mississippi's kids," said Matthew Myers, President of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, a national nonprofit organization.
In a report to be issued Wednesday, the group documents what it calls Barbour's "relentless attack" on what it said was the nation's most successful anti-smoking program.
Barbour complained that the program received its funding directly from the courts and that it needed legislative approval, according to Myers. When the legislature passed a bill to continue the funding, Barbour vetoed it and went back to the courts to withdraw all remaining monies from the program.
Myers says he believes Barbour's motive was to protect his longtime clients in the tobacco industry. Barbour served as a lobbyist for tobacco clients from 1998 to 2002. His firm, Barbour, Griffin, & Rogers, was paid a total of $3.8 million by the tobacco companies, according to reports obtained by the United States Senate Office of Public Records.
Myers says Barbour's attack on the anti-smoking program is an "outrage" given the program's strong record of success in preventing teens and children from smoking.
Between 1999 and 2004, the program reduced smoking by 48 percent among public middle school students (from 23 percent to 12 percent) and by 32 percent among public high school students (from 32.5 percent to 22.1 percent), according to Sharon Garrison, Communications Director for the Partnership for a Healthy Mississippi, the organization that runs the program.
Barbour's office has said that his actions had nothing to do with his former lobbying clients' interests. According to his office, Barbour vetoed the legislation that passed to continue the program's funding because of the Partnership for a Healthy Mississippi's lack of accountability.
"The Partnership couldn't produce an audit that showed item by item, line by line, how the money was spent," said Barbour's spokesman.
Garrison says her organization's audits are made public every year. "These accusations are untrue and unfair."
Barbour has proposed a "Healthy Kids" Initiative, which would allocate the $20 million to expand the school nurse program, maintain anti-tobacco education and advertising, expand cancer research and fight against drugs. AlterNet: Home
 

ViRedd

New Member
"This is truly a case of one man, a longtime tobacco industry lobbyist, using his power to destroy a program that was reducing tobacco use among Mississippi's kids," said Matthew Myers, President of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, a national nonprofit organization.

But of course there is no mention of Matthew Myers' attack on free choice, is there?

Vi


 

medicineman

New Member
But of course there is no mention of Matthew Myers' attack on free choice, is there?

Are you a smoker, shame, shame, shame. Smokers free choice harm others in closed in areas. Smoking outside only polutes the air. Quite smoking, your killing your selves (an ex smoker who's seen the light). The thing is teens are very sucseptible to peer pressure and ads that make smoking appear to be glamorous all blamed on cigarrettes! They say her hair won't grow back from the brain radiation! She has 5 years to live, 10 on the outside and could be less than 5! Lung cancer is fatal, it never goes into remission, it just lies dormant and any anomaly could start it back up!
 

ViRedd

New Member
I used to smoke between 2 and 3 packs a day ... but quit in 1972. Now, its an occasional cigar ... and I enjoy the shit out of it.

Vi
 

medicineman

New Member
I used to smoke between 2 and 3 packs a day ... but quit in 1972. Now, its an occasional cigar ... and I enjoy the shit out of it.

Vi
Being of the addictive nature, the only way i can quit something is to force myself to hate it. It worked for Booze, speed, Cocaine and ciggarettes. I have no desire for either one of them, well maybe speed, but I refrain with a vengence!
 

Dankdude

Well-Known Member
Actually I still smoke cigarettes, but I beat Cocaine, Speed and heroin... I still homebrew but drink no more than 2-3 at a setting. The only thing I still crave is the heroin and I haven't touched the stuff since 1990.
 

ViRedd

New Member
I don't dare touch any other drugs because of my addictive personality. My vinyl collection is WAY out of hand, and that's like a heroin addiction without the needles. Well, in expense anyway.

Vi
 

DankyDank

Well-Known Member
I'm not a cigarette smoker, but "cheers" to anyone who is able to stop any sort of anti-tobacco funding. This country would not even exist if it weren't for tobacco. Our "representatives" are hipocritical fuckwads for turning on the tobacco industry.
I like the occasional cigar...and I fully support "Big Tobacco."
 

medicineman

New Member
Geeze you must work for them or some satellite co. Most Everyone hates tobacco if they are aware of what it does to the human Body. I realize that tobacco played a large part in our economy in the early years, and especially if you lived in the south, but that was before we knew the harmful attributes of tobacco. So enjoy your cigars as I'll not rant on you. Just be aware that your second hand smoke has been proven scientifically to cause cancer in animals, and Humans are, I believe, of the animal species!
 

Dankdude

Well-Known Member
Really, where are all the Control groups in the studies?
No where, there weren't none, thus the science is flawed.
 

ViRedd

New Member
Any substance can be proven to be harmful, even deadly, in lab experiments. Just give the rats mega doses of anything, even milk, and they will die.

Vi
 

medicineman

New Member
You're wrong, they had a control group of rats that didn't get the smoke and a group that did, the group that did had a much higher incidence of cancer. Why are you so adamant about the smoking and cancer thing. this is a proven old science thing, dating back to the '50's. Hey it's your body, put what you want into it, but please dont try and convince others that smoking ciggarettes is harmless. They put something like 30 different carcinogens into ciggarettes to make them more addictive, so smoke up. Only a blind fool would start smoking with all the statistics on smoking, or a gullible teen ager! when I smoked they didn't know all the scoop, and even after they came out with the findings, the habit hooked me for another 20 years!
I grew up in Winston-Salem, North Carolina, the home of RJ Reynolds tobacco company. RJR makes cigarettes - and lots of them - and has done so for many years. Ol' Richard Joshua Reynolds himself built half the town it seems over one hundred years ago. Because Mr. Reynolds added a bunch to the top line of the local economy, he was well-liked. When he died, I suspect the city mourned the death of the cigarette magnate, who most certainly smoked cigarettes himself, for some time. Even today, local tour guides defend RJR by specifically noting that he died of pancreatic cancer, not lung cancer. This point becomes a bit less defendable, though, when you understand that cigarette smoking increases the risk of pancreatic cancer many-fold. And as far as all the other bad things that cigarettes do to your body, that's just the tip of the iceberg.
Most people associate cigarette smoking with either nothing bad at all or with lung cancer. In fact, a recent article in a leading medical journal that showed that most smokers don't even think they're at increased risk for heart disease. But they are. And smoking also causes esophageal cancer, bladder cancer, and stomach cancer, not to mention emphysema. I've discussed cancers elsewhere, so emphysema deserves special note here. This is a disease characterized by difficulty breathing, which, by the way, is not a lot of fun. To try it, jump in a lake and breathe several times underwater. What you will experience is similar to that which you will observe in particular patients in a hospital pulmonary ward. I would argue that fewer people would smoke if they visited with emphysema patients. Gasping for breath and drowning in your own secretions is not a pretty sight.
The smoking habits of a patient, past or present, are an important part of the patient history. To flush out smokers who think that they don't smoke enough to qualify as smokers, doctors will usually ask questions such as, "How many packs of cigarettes do you smoke a day?", rather than, "Do you smoke?" In many cases, though, I already knew that a patient smoked. How? Smokers smell awful. Ever wonder why there are smoking and non-smoking rooms in hotels? Here's a hint: rooms where people have smoked smell awful. If preventing stroke, heart disease, and cancers along with the fact that you smell like sin when you smoke doesn't convince you to quit, then consider the fact that the FDA has now classified second hand smoke (what your friends, colleagues, loved ones, and total strangers are breathing around you) as a known carcinogen. This means that you are causing cancer in other people, too. Sounds pretty selfish, doesn't it? So have some respect for others, even if you don't care about yourself. Personally, I think smoking in public should be illegal, just as spraying Agent Orange in public should be illegal.
Cigarettes are bad actors, and they cause your physician to develop gray hair. The pathology of cigarettes extends well beyond lung cancer, which kills more people than any other cancer. Bladder, esophageal, pancreatic, and stomach cancers are also caused by smoking. Emphysema is a horrible disease that almost all chronic smokers develop. Quitting smoking begins with definitely deciding to quit. Your doctor may be able to help. There are few things, other than quitting smoking, that you could do for yourself that would make your doctor happier.
 

Dankdude

Well-Known Member
I never said that smoking cigarettes was harmless.
I said that the science that they base secondhand smoke on is flawed... Not one of the studies on secondhand smoke has a control group.
 

medicineman

New Member
I never said that smoking cigarettes was harmless.
I said that the science that they base secondhand smoke on is flawed... Not one of the studies on secondhand smoke has a control group.
Man Dank, you've sure got this thing for flawed science, yet you believe all the evolution stuff, now there's some flawed science, they've yet to prove the link between ape and man yet they are sure it's true. Just tell me the raw truth. Do you think there's a connection between cigarette smoking and cancer?
 

Dankdude

Well-Known Member
Certainly there is a connection between cigarette smoking and cancer, but I doubt that there is a connection between secondhand smoke and cancer.
 

medicineman

New Member
My point is why aren't they punishing the tobacco companies more instead of the smokers.
Have you forgotten how this government is run, by corporations like tobacco companies? The feds aren't doing squat outside the surgeon generals warning, It's the people in the states that are banning smokers. It was only a few years ago when non-smokers started outnumbering smokers, since then there has been a drive to ban smoking. There is nothing more anti-smoking than an ex-smoker. The money that Nevada got from the tobacco co.s settlement that was supposed to go for treating tobacco related illnesses was put into the general budget by the state legislature to cover the school budget shortfall, so smokers gained nothing from it, it was a joke!
 
Top