Return to Smokescam Report

October 2007: The following summary, letter and additional information were faxed to the 31 U.S. Senators whose names appear at the front of Senate Bill 625/HR 1108, which is sponsored by U.S. Senator Edward M. Kennedy.

The others who received the information include:

Daniel K. Akaka, Jeff Bingaman, Sherrod Brown, Maria Cantwell, Thomas R. Carper, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Thad Cochran, Susan M. Collins, John Cornyn, Christopher J. Dodd, Pete V. Domenici, Richard Durbin, Dianne Feinstein, Tom Harkin, Herb Kohl, Patrick Leahy, Richard Lugar, Frank R. Lautenberg, John McCain, Barbara A. Mikulski, Lisa Murkowski, Patty Murray, Bill Nelson, Barack Obama, Jack Reed, Bernard Sanders, Gordon H. Smith, Olympia J. Snowe, Charles Schumer and Ted Stevens.

Summary: S.625/H.R. 1108: Warning: Don't do it.

This is a dangerous, anti-family, anti-freedom-of-choice anti-liberty bill. This letter outlines its benefits for the pharmaceutical industry, the health-care non-profits, the anti-smoking forces and the government, and its total lack of benefits for the American family. "The government must undertake the improvement of 'public health'." That statement comes from the 1920 platform of the Nazi Party. Hitler, who was influenced by American eugenics, was behind the first anti-smoking campaign of the 20th century. Don't be fooled. History can and does repeat itself. The Human Genome Project is headquartered where the American Eugenics Society once had its main offices. During the Reich's early years, American eugenicists viewed Hitler's plans as the logical accomplishment of their own decades of research and effort. California eugenicists republished Nazi propaganda for American readers and arranged for Nazi scientific exhibits, such as an August 1934 display at the L.A. County Museum, for the annual meeting of the American Public Health Association. Eugenics was a movement of the nation's elite thinkers and many of its most progressive reformers," writes Edwin Black in his book "War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America's Campaign to Create a Master Race." "As its ideology spread among the intelligentsia, eugenics cross infected many completely separate social reform and health care movements."

That infection still exists.

Dear Senator ......:

As individuals and as a nation, we are standing at a crossroads. Freedom of choice verses control and an inevitable health state as more and more so-called dangers to society are discovered by our health institutions. Meanwhile, the pharmaceutical industry and a number of anti-smoking specialists are laughing all the way to the bank.

Where does your loyalty lie? Do you believe in individual choice or government intervention?

What legacy do you want to leave your children and grandchildren? Do you want to leave them at choice or leave them a country that dictates their behavior at home, at work and during their leisure hours?

These are serious questions. The answers will define whether liberty and freedom and the pursuit of happiness survive the 21st century.

You are a sponsor of the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (S.625/H.R.1108): which states its intent is "to protect the public health by providing the Food and Drug Administration with certain authority to regulate tobacco products."

Have you really studied the nicotine issue? Are you aware there are potential positive uses for nicotine when it comes to Alzheimers, Parkinson's, Schizophrenia and heart disease? Did you know the pharmaceutical industry has everything to gain and nothing to lose from the bill you are sponsoring?

Families have nothing to grain and much to lose. I have nine (9) young grandchildren and am deeply concerned about the future that is being built for them.

Have you actually read S.625/H.R. 1108? I have. What is the source for the statistics under Section 2: Findings? They sound very much like statistics that I know are inaccurate because I traced them to their source when I was doing extensive research on secondhand smoke. I would think you would want to know that the statistics cited in a bill that has your name on it are accurate.

Section 2, Findings, No. 35: "Tobacco products have been used to facilitate and finance criminal activities both domestically and internationally. Illicit trade of tobacco products has been linked to organized crime and terrorist groups." What does this have to do with the Food and Drug Administration regulating nicotine in tobacco products?

This has occurred when the state raises the taxes on a package of cigarettes to more than $1 a pack making the illegal marketing of tobacco products profitable. Texas has recently done so. The sponsors of the bill that included the increase were made aware of the potential black market, and it did not concern them enough to change their minds.

In fact, Tom Craddock, Speaker of the Texas House, stated in his letter to me: "It is unfortunate that, according to the reports and information you sent, increased taxes create profits for smugglers and terrorists groups. As we have coursed through the myriad possibilities of raising revenue to fund our public schools, the increase on cigarettes is one of the options in HB3. Terrorists will go to any extreme for funding, whether it be illegal drugs, prostitution, cigarettes, or other innumerable avenues. They also receive extremely large donations from discordant and antagonistic governments and sympathizers."

Another question that S.625/H.R. 1108 raises is: Do you believe you and your family are responsible for raising your children and grandchildren or do you believe the government is responsible? This bill definitely supports the latter. That's not surprising when you know who ran the first anti-smoking campaign in the - the Nazis. They believed children belonged to the state and should report to said state any violations of behavior they saw in their families.

Hitler said: "The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation."

"Nazi eugenics would ultimately dictate who would be persecuted in a Reich-dominated Europe, how people would live, and how they would die," wrote Edwin Black in a 2003 article in the San Francisco Chronicle. "Nazi doctors would become the unseen generals in Hitler's war against those deemed inferior. Doctors would create the science, devise the eugenic formulas, and hand-select the victims for sterilization, euthanasia and mass extermination."

Dare we imagine that could not happen here? Only at our own and our posterity's peril. The 20th century saw crimes committed against U.S. citizens by state governments and at the national level that most citizens today know little to nothing about.

"By the 1930s, most states had passed eugenical laws authorizing the sterilization of 'defectives' and in an infamous decision, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed such laws were constitutional, stated, a project of the Center for Media & Democracy. "Eugenical lobbying also contributed to the powerful anti-immigration movement of the 1910s and 1920s, using their scientific studies to support the claim that non-whites and immigrants were inferior to native-born white Americans in intelligence, physical condition and moral stature. Even though the meticulous studies of Franz Boas, H.S. Jennings and others amply demonstrated the failure of eugenical methodology and the falsity of their claims, the eugenical tide continued to swell."

As Paul Joseph Goebbles, the minister of propaganda in Nazi Germany said, "If repeated often enough, a lie will become the new truth."

Lies form the framework of your bill, beginning with its name. It's true intent is closer to the following: The Pharmaceutical Industry's Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act designed to put money in the pockets of the industry and the government. That's what it is and that's what it will do. It does not protect families. In fact it does the opposite by allowing the government to become even more invasive in the lives of private citizens.


Also included:

The Misinformation Age

Additional Information regarding the Nicotine Wars

Summary:S.625/H.R. 1108: Warning: Don't do it.

In 2005, I learned from spending weeks of hours on the Internet looking up, reading and printing out studies and articles from multiple sources regarding secondary smoke that the public has been misled. I have more than 1,000 pages of evidence to support that statement.

As a working journalist, I was shocked by what I discovered and, at my own expense, created w to inform others. Unfortunately, I suspect the rabbit hole is even much deeper. I learned how the pharmaceutical industry and the non-profit world are in bed together and how government plays their game.

For example, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, an avid participant in the anti-smoking campaign, receives most of its funding from its parent company, Johnson & Johnson, a company long involved in making a profit from smoking cessation products. In West Texas, we call this a conflict of interest.

I don't know if you have been bought and paid for by the pharmaceutical industry and its cronies, or if you have bought the party line without doing your own research. You can't trust the information from such non-profits as the American Cancer Society or the American Heart Association because they have too much to gain from their close ties to the anti-smoking forces.

Both sides refer to this as the tobacco wars. When I was taking international relations at Texas Tech University for my degree in government, the professor said there never has been and never will be a war fought on the face of the earth as long as man is alive that is about anything but money and marketplaces. He said wars have a stated cause that inspires citizens to fight for their country, but behind the cause is the reality of money and marketplaces (i.e. real estate). With this in mind, who has the most to gain in the tobacco wars? Not U.S. citizens whose choices are being selectively eliminated. Not the tobacco industry, whose product is being restricted and whose opinion has been discredited.

Then who? Money and worldwide marketplace winners include:

1. The pharmaceutical industry. This industry has "the largest lobby in Washington, D.C." said Marcia Angell, M.D., former editor-in-chief of the New England Journal of Medicine, in her book "The Truth About the Drug Companies: How They Deceive Us and What To Do About It " (ISBN: 0-375-508465/Random House hardback). Their employees have served on the decision-making entities of government agencies responsible for creating reports to the public and suggesting legislative action. \

2. A number of so-called charitable non profits. The pharmaceutical industry has funded programs of non-profits such as the American Cancer Society, The American Heart Association and the American Medical Association - need I name more? - that foster the idea that secondhand smoke is harmful to those exposed to it.

3. Anti-tobacco researchers. Studies in the field of secondhand smoke (a.k.a. environmental tobacco smoke/ETS) have been conducted by researchers paid by funding from the pharmaceutical industry, charitable non-profits and the federal government through the monies acquired from the tobacco settlement.

4. Big business. When smoking is banned in a city or state, it isn't the large restaurant chains that usually pay the price. It is the small businesses, the family restaurants, that lose. Many have closed. This pleases big business because it means less competition. Many waitresses, waiters and bartenders have reported lost revenue. Their tips have decreased.

This reminds me of the first gasoline crisis in the 1970s. Prior to the crisis, a number of service stations across the United States were owned by independents. Afterwards, the major oil companies controlled most of those stations. You might still see the same people working there, but those controlling the station behind-the-scenes had changed. That was true for my father-in-law, who worked for an independent operator in Irving, Texas, prior to the crises. He was still there afterwards, as was his former boss, who no longer owned controlling interest in what had been his service stations.

My research on the Internet took me to smokers sites, anti-smokers sites, PubMed and other medical sites, liberal and conservative watchdog sites, federal government sites, charitable non-profit sites, university sites, and news gathering sites, among others. I have spoken with individuals on both sides of the so-called \softline "health" issue. An attorney read the court cases to make sure I correctly understood the rulings. A medical doctor read the studies with the same goal in mind. Both saw more supportive evidence that the cases and studies had been misrepresented to the public than I did.

Conclusion: We, the public, have been and are being told a whopper. When it comes to second-hand smoke, this is the age of misinformation. The propaganda the public has been fed regarding second-hand smoke casts doubt on the so-called facts the public has been fed regarding smoking, nicotine, fat, etc.\

If you doubt what you read in this letter, do the research I have. Get on the Internet. Go to smokers sites and anti-smokers sites. Go to PubMed and print out the studies that show the actual relative risk factors and learn how to read the studies. Read the 1992 EPA report and be aware of its flaws. Read the court cases. Find out who the players are in this deceitful game.

If you do all of this - and don't delegate it to someone else - you will realize that it doesn't take an Einstein to see who is getting rich off of the nicotine wars. It isn't the families and citizens you have been elected to represent.

This is the United States of America land of the free, home of the brave. Or, at least, it was when I was growing up. Now we are on a slippery slide down a dangerous slope into a pit of governmental regulations that extend into private businesses and will, if not stopped, dictate individual behavior at home, at work and at politically correct play.

To read S. 625/H.R. 1108: Go to the Library of Congress Web site, click on Thomas, and follow the directions.