Opponents of Ohio Bans say "Just follow the money."
Jump to full article: PR Newswire, 2008-07-23
Author: SOURCE Opponents of Ohio Bans
Intro: "Smoking bans in the U.S. have
been funded by those who directly profit from the sales of Nicotine
Replacement Therapies (NRT)," said Debi Kistner with Opponents of Ohio
Bans. Robert Wood Johnson, the late CEO of Johnson & Johnson, established
the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) tax exempt non-profit 501(c)(3)
in the early 1970s. According to their November 2005 publication, "Taking
on tobacco: The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation's Assault on Smoking", from
1991 to 2005 the foundation paid $446,398,054 in tobacco-control grants.
Grantees that did not move from tobacco education to tobacco control became
ineligible for further grants. . . .
The foundation created the National Center for Tobacco-Free Kids and
has provided more than $84,000,000 in grants to fund that advocacy group.
As a non-profit the foundation can't legally lobby but the center can. The
center aggressively promotes increased taxation on tobacco products.
The foundation sponsors conferences on "how to identify ways to
increase the use of evidence-based tobacco cessation treatments" and
awarded the American Cancer Society a nearly $1,000,000 grant to "expand
the use of tobacco cessation treatments". It's about the money, profits for
stockholders and control. Tobacco control is the best marketing strategy
that pharmaceutical dollars can buy.
The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons has been warning
the government for over a decade of the RWJF's desire to control the health
care policies of this country. . . .
Follow the money behind any ban, study, survey or poll. Questions are
written and asked to solicit the responses desired by those who pay for the
results. Do independent research. Don't believe everything you read. . . .
Among those who lose under the foundation's advocacy are Ohio families
who have invested their life savings, hard work and futures in owning their
piece of the American Dream. . . .
"Why is it legal for a non-profit foundation to directly profit from
stock that is driven by the sales of products coerced by a law that their
grants create? Where are those, such as state attorneys general, who are
supposed to protect consumers' interests? Why should a pharmaceutical
company and their private foundation be profiting while Ohio's businesses
fold? We believe these questions raise important issues that must be
addressed by Ohio legislators," said Pam Parker with Opponents of Ohio
Bans.
Jump to full article » |