SubscribeBig Tobacco Defeats Kids’ Health Care In OR
From the professional unbiased reporter, Janie Har of The Oregonian:
Jerre Petersen pulls up the the ballot box near the Multnomah County Elections office Tuesday, Nov. 6, 2007, in Portland, Ore.
Health plan gets burned after state’s costliest race
Wednesday, November 07, 2007
JANIE HAR
After the most expensive political campaign in Oregon history, voters Tuesday overwhelmingly rejected a tobacco tax increase to pay for children’s health care.
The 3-to-2 vote against Measure 50, which would have increased Oregon’s cigarette tax by 85 cents a pack, follows similar defeats in California and Missouri after tobacco makers spent millions to oppose the measures.
In Oregon, Reynolds American and Philip Morris, the makers of Camel and Marlboro cigarettes, spent a record $12 million, primarily on a TV commercial blitz.
The decisive failure kicks a complex public health issue back to the Legislature and Gov. Ted Kulongoski, who have been unable to make health care more accessible for an estimated 576,000 Oregonians who lack insurance…
Disappointed supporters, who were outspent 4-to-1, chalked up their loss to the tobacco money and vowed to continue working on health care.
“I think that this is just a battle in a long war,” said Gov. Ted Kulongoski before making a concession speech before 100 supporters at downtown Portland’s Benson Hotel.
Later in the evening, Kulongoski said: “The tobacco industry basically bought an election. I don’t think it’s a reflection of what Oregonians think about health care and children.”
In rejecting the tax, Oregonians broke with tradition. They approved cigarette tax increases in 1996 and 2002…
Opponents zeroed in on four basic arguments against the tax: There was no way to account for how the money would be spent; it was inappropriate to stick a product tax in the constitution; it was unfair to smokers; and the program was fiscally unsustainable as costs eventually would outstrip revenue.
Labor unions, insurance companies, hospitals and health groups fought back with a $3.4 million campaign that promised the tax increase would go to insure nearly 100,000 children and to discourage more Oregonians from smoking.
Bill Lunch, chairman of the political science department at Oregon State University, called the measure’s failure “an example of an election being bought. It’s as simple as that,” he said, pointing to Oregonians’ previous approval of cigarette tax increases…
Kulongoski promised supporters the Legislature would revisit the issue in 2009. The crowd called back with pleas to address health care for children during the supplemental session in February.
A glum Senate President Peter Courtney, D-Salem, said he doubts that will happen. “Our kids are losers tonight. I don’t know where we go from here,” he said.
Oregon’s proposal tried to get at the growing number of people without health insurance as premiums grow too pricey for many working families to afford. About one in six Oregonians lack health insurance, including an estimated 116,000 children…
J.L. Wilson, spokesman for Reynolds American, which spent about $5 million to defeat the tobacco tax, emerged from a private party in Salem to say opponents weren’t celebrating. He said the gathering was more of a “decompression chamber” after working long hours and being “called every name in the book” by anti-tobacco activists.
“We’re not going to crack open champagne and smoke cigars,” he said. “It was a job we had to do.”
Gosh, those big tobacco people are horrible. They’re almost as mean as Republicans.
By the way, when Democrats win an election where they outspend the GOP does our watchdog media say the election was bought?
Related Articles:
- Remember Hillary Clinton's Vaccine Fiasco?
- AP: House Fails To Protect 10 Million Children
- The Dangerous Demagoguery Of Nancy Pelosi
- ABC News Propagandizes About SCHIP Veto
- '93 Memo: Kid Care Precursor To Hillarycare
- Dems Add $35B To "Children" Insurance Plan
- Hillary Files - The First "Hillarycare" Fiasco
- Insider: Hillary Not Author Of "Hillarycare"
- ABC: Bush To "Reign In" Kids' Health Care
4 Responses to “Big Tobacco Defeats Kids’ Health Care In OR”
Leave a Reply
You must be registered and logged in to post a comment.
November 7th, 2007 at 9:59 pm
Why should smokers have to foot the bill for health insurance for 116,000 children? Smoking is not a crime, it’s not even immoral!
Why not tax abortionists? Or pornographers? I guess, in the eyes of a liberal, smoking is one of the most evil, vicious activities in which a person could engage. The liberals took an ass-whipping here and it’s amusing to hear them whining.
November 7th, 2007 at 11:10 pm
“Why should smokers have to foot the bill for health insurance for 116,000 children? Smoking is not a crime, it’s not even immoral!”
That’s a good question. It seems to me it smacks of being a “bill of attainder.”
From Wikipedia:
November 8th, 2007 at 11:15 am
Buried deep in the article is the little “oh by the way” this was going to change our freaking constitution! Talk about a step backwards to openly impose a discriminatory amendment into our constitution! It would be like when the KKK used to run this state, as opposed to our progressive age now when our state is controlled by democrats (wait … now I seem to remember a little Byrd telling me something about that). I can assure you that I was not paid a dime to vote against this nor did I receive compensation to tell everyone I knew why they should vote against it. It is odd to me that they quote the poli-sci professor to say almost verbatim what the governor said but did not walk across the street to the Communication department and ask them about the argumentative fallacy of an emotional appeal?
November 8th, 2007 at 11:49 am
SG - I would love to sit down with you and have a real discussion - you do some real amazing work here and help me back up my beliefs with solid proof. Thank you - and for all those who add their 2 cents worth - it just helps to come back to the few libs I encounter. But you know (and yes, I live in a real heavily conservative, Troop supporting area) - I am seeing the msm as so much a real propaganda shill for the DNC - in real life - not just here as we discuss their biases.
I worked on Tuesday as a Poll Worker. I am seriously thinking and re-thinking working next year. It was good work, not that horrible (the worst was a half-hour lesson - govermentally/beauracratically turned into a four hour snore fest) and I feel good doing a civic duty (I’ve been laying out of involvement since my son’s injury/thewar/moving/retiring - you know, my life got in the way). But next year is two days (Primary & General) and it is a Presidential Election - which will make it looooooooooong days. We shall see.
Now to my real reason for posting - I was the one Republican judge (I think, the head signed after us and in a separate place - so I wasn’t sure of her pol party) - but the other three women were identical to me - against the tax hikes, ok with the war, cut the political pandering and corruption, stop the earmarks and pork and so on (even pro-life).
Now I realize it was just three other people - but the left takes one person and exhalts that to the Group speak - so I don’t think that America is really as divided and at odds that the msm makes her out to be.
But then thanks to S & L we’ve been kept up on the bias, lies and distortions that the msm is foisting on America. And of course (to actually relate it back to this posting article) It’s Never Been About the Children - and the libs can’t realize people are finally seeing through the bs.