OT:Tobacco Tax

[Guest guest]

Sorry!  Here's the Open Secrets link to O's campaign sources: http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/summary.php?cid=N00009638 Sears, DCNW PDX On Dec 7, 2008, at 10:21 PM, rongrice01 wrote:Dr. Desiena. You said "Tobacco should not be a Republican or a Democratic issue". Fine, then quit making it one and look at your facts first. According to OpenSecrets.org, in 2008 the ratio of Tobacco lobbying money was $1,213,724 for Democrats and $1,843,908 for Republicans, hardly 15%-85%. Also your death rates are way off according to the CDC, where they estimate 450,000 tobacco related deaths per year, rather than your stated 5 million.I don't want to get in a pissing match with anyone, but if you were to place this same logic on the Automobile industry, we would find that the majority of the autoworker's special interest lobbying money goes to Democrats, a reported $70 million spent in 2008 alone. Again, according to OpenSecrets.org, this is given at a ratio of over 6:1 to Democrats. Would you then place the blame of automobile deaths on the Democrats and their addiction to autoworker union money? I didn't think so.I don't defend tobacco companies, I grew up with a smoking parent and hated it. I don't like having to deal with this even today. However; people smoke voluntarily in the same way that people get into cars and drive, voluntarily. We could make the same argument about protecting children from riding in cars as we do for second hand smoke. Neither are really done by their choice, but we don't make a stink about keeping them out of cars. Taking one issue and placing the public risk produced by one industry upon one party is not intellectually honest. It furthers the disdain each party has toward the other, and it doesn't further any real solution for the risk being discussed, and stagnates any real progress in Congress. In much the same way Regan's campaign of "Just Say No" made great strides in the reduction of youth drug use in the 1980's, smoking cessation education is making great strides today. If we could stop the glamorization of smoking in movies and tv programs, we would greatly reduce the number of young smokers. That is only one solution, and there are undoubtedly more that would work. As I said in my previous post, if you live in a glass house, you really shouldn't cast stones. Grice, DCAlbany, OR

[Guest guest]

Dr Grice,

The 5 million deaths this year from tobacco related causes is a WHO (World Healh Organization) number. BTW, WHO says the number will rise to 10 million in a few years if we do not get a handel on the situation.

The 85%-15% was the number regularly used by the press during the Clinton-Dole Presidential campaign.

The Oregon numbers you object to stated in Kari Chisholmare's article that I copied are a matter of public record and can be obtained at ORESTAR.

It is interesting that you mention protecting children riding in cars from secondhand smoke because over 17 states are currently are looking into the issues. Australia and Canada are also looking into the issue.

DeSiena

From: rongrice01 <rongrice@...> Sent: Sunday, December 7, 2008 10:21:39 PMSubject: OT:Tobacco Tax

Dr. Desiena. You said "Tobacco should not be a Republican or a Democratic issue". Fine, then quit making it one and look at your facts first. According to OpenSecrets. org, in 2008 the ratio of Tobacco lobbying money was $1,213,724 for Democrats and $1,843,908 for Republicans, hardly 15%-85%. Also your death rates are way off according to the CDC, where they estimate 450,000 tobacco related deaths per year, rather than your stated 5 million.I don't want to get in a pissing match with anyone, but if you were to place this same logic on the Automobile industry, we would find that the majority of the autoworker's special interest lobbying money goes to Democrats, a reported $70 million spent in 2008 alone. Again, according to OpenSecrets. org, this is given at a ratio of over 6:1 to Democrats. Would you then place the blame of automobile deaths on the Democrats and their addiction to

autoworker union money? I didn't think so.I don't defend tobacco companies, I grew up with a smoking parent and hated it. I don't like having to deal with this even today. However; people smoke voluntarily in the same way that people get into cars and drive, voluntarily. We could make the same argument about protecting children from riding in cars as we do for second hand smoke. Neither are really done by their choice, but we don't make a stink about keeping them out of cars. Taking one issue and placing the public risk produced by one industry upon one party is not intellectually honest. It furthers the disdain each party has toward the other, and it doesn't further any real solution for the risk being discussed, and stagnates any real progress in Congress. In much the same way Regan's campaign of "Just Say No" made great strides in the reduction of youth drug use in the 1980's,

smoking cessation education is making great strides today. If we could stop the glamorization of smoking in movies and tv programs, we would greatly reduce the number of young smokers. That is only one solution, and there are undoubtedly more that would work. As I said in my previous post, if you live in a glass house, you really shouldn't cast stones. Grice, DCAlbany, OR