iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
GET UPDATES FROM Lance Armstrong
 
GET UPDATES FROM Michael R. Bloomberg
 
GET UPDATES FROM John R. Seffrin, PhD
 

A Vote to Save Lives

Posted: 06/05/2012 1:07 pm

How often are voters given the chance to cast a vote that will save lives? On June 5, the people of California will have an opportunity to do just that -- and to save the financially struggling state billions of dollars in long-term health care costs.

The California Cancer Research Act -- known as Proposition 29 -- would raise the state tobacco tax by $1 to fund more than $500 million each year in lifesaving research on cancer and other tobacco-related diseases, help keep cigarettes out of the hands of children and save the state more than $5 billion in long-term health care costs related to tobacco use.

These are proven public health and economic benefits, backed by extensive research from our organizations and others. We know that when you raise tobacco taxes, people stop smoking. Prop 29 would save more than 100,000 lives annually in California and prevent 228,000 kids in the state from becoming addicted smokers.

Who would oppose a measure that will save lives and money? The tobacco industry -- whose business model depends on profiting from the deaths of its customers. Big Tobacco earns $6,000 in profits for every tobacco-related death in the United States and around the world, according to The Tobacco Atlas, published by the American Cancer Society and the World Lung Foundation. As a result, the six leading tobacco companies made a collective profit of $35.1 billion in 2010, the equivalent of the earnings of Coca Cola, McDonald's and Microsoft combined.

The industry doesn't publicize that its products are responsible for the deaths of 443,000 people in America each year -- nearly one person for every minute of every day. In fact, tobacco companies engage in extensive efforts to portray themselves as responsible corporate citizens. The nation's largest tobacco manufacturer, Altria Group, Inc., recently ran a full-page ad in Roll Call, a Capitol Hill publication aimed at members of Congress, claiming that it markets its products "responsibly" and that "we take our responsibilities seriously."

What the ad didn't say is that tobacco use costs the U.S. economy $193 billion per year in health care, lost productivity and related costs. Every day, 3,800 kids pick up their first cigarette, 1,000 kids become addicted smokers and 1,200 people die from tobacco-related disease.

While tobacco companies work to publicly rehabilitate their image, they discreetly oppose proven tobacco control policies nationwide. The latest example is the industry's funding of groups with innocuous names, such as Californians Against Unaccountable Taxes and California Taxpayers Association, that are working to confuse and deceive the public about Prop. 29.

In addition to saving lives and reducing future health care costs, Prop. 29 would create 12,000 new jobs at research facilities and health centers in California, a state facing the most severe financial crisis in the country. But the tobacco industry is waging an intense campaign to defeat the initiative because it knows that increasing tobacco taxes will shrink its customer base. When your business model involves selling products that kill people, it becomes particularly important to addict a steady stream of new customers.

The hazards of smoking have been known for decades. Unfortunately, that awareness has given rise to a dangerous complacency in response to the tobacco industry's ongoing campaign of addiction and death. The industry is waging its campaign with increasing intensity in unsuspecting countries around the world. By the year 2030, eight million people worldwide will die from tobacco use each year.

It's not enough to say that we already know tobacco use is dangerous, or to conclude that everyone should be able to say "no" to tobacco. Ask the families of the nearly half a million people in the United States who die from tobacco-related causes each year how easy it would have been for their loved ones to quit. Ask the parents of children who are bombarded with positive images of smoking at convenience stores and popular hangouts how simple it must be to keep youth from smoking.

Tobacco use is the single biggest public health threat facing our country today. And it is hiding in plain sight. Tobacco companies manufacture 1 million cigarettes every 5 seconds. They are not backing down, and by supporting Prop. 29 and other proven tobacco control measures nationwide, neither are we.

John R. Seffrin, PhD
CEO, American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network and the American Cancer Society

Lance Armstrong
Cancer survivor and Founder and Chairman, the Lance Armstrong Foundation

Michael Bloomberg
Bloomberg Philanthropies and Mayor of New York City

 

Follow Lance Armstrong on Twitter: www.twitter.com/@lancearmstrong

FOLLOW POLITICS
How often are voters given the chance to cast a vote that will save lives? On June 5, the people of California will have an opportunity to do just that -- and to save the financially struggling state ...
How often are voters given the chance to cast a vote that will save lives? On June 5, the people of California will have an opportunity to do just that -- and to save the financially struggling state ...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 149
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4  Next ›  Last »  (4 total)
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
FZliveson
Beating the Conundrum
04:07 PM on 06/10/2012
"tax the people for oleander plants..."
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
FZliveson
Beating the Conundrum
04:06 PM on 06/10/2012
Spectacularly absurd that the author compared thectobbacco companies' earnings with McDonalds and Coca Cola! Isn't it Bloomberg who wants to regulate the size of soft drink and the type of shortening used in New York City? As soon as tobacco is made illegal I will support more slective taxes for this and that. Until then, why not tk people for oeander plants...they are poisonous, you know. Bloomberg stay in your wacked-out Wall Street sanctuarial looney-bin.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Silverfern
05:52 PM on 06/10/2012
People need to pay the true costs for products
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
FZliveson
Beating the Conundrum
07:39 PM on 06/10/2012
What?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PCPrincess
I'm probably gaming.
01:32 PM on 06/10/2012
Until the day that Californians decide that they are willing to pay a little more to help the general fund which has shrunk so far that our schools have had three massive cuts in three years, then I will vote against any tax that is brought against only a small percentage of the population and disproportionally affects lower income Californians. Enough scapegoating damnit!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
PRONESE
Somewhat Opinionated Curmudgeon
12:53 PM on 06/10/2012
So how much of this "Feel Good" sin tax do you think will actually get to this wonderful "Research" project?
Probably about as much as the first Federal Tobacco settlement funds did when CA got that money.
R/ PRONESE
03:43 AM on 06/10/2012
Another tax and another excuse. Why not tax every drink in every gay bar $1.00 to fight AIDs. Why not tax every lawn in California by the square inch to fight Lime Desease. California does not have a problem raising taxes they have a spending problem and a hiring problem. Another liberal and another brainstorming idea to raise a tax.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
marinemomof3
"They lied mom", I know son, I know.
10:13 AM on 06/10/2012
The Governator and the Repubs CUT so much of the State's revenues in ...all of which became tax breaks and hand outs to BigBiz and the 1%.

$6B vehicle reg fee...taken away by the GOP

$6B oil extract fees...eliminated by the GOP

$3.5B commercial property tax breaks

$2.5B luxury tax break.

That's MORE than the $16B deficit. So, in reality...the State's deficit is a REPUBLICAN mess.

So the intelligent people of California, followed suit as the country did, elected a DEM to clean it up :)
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
dwillisno1
Learning to Butt Heads Without Being Buttheads
05:48 PM on 06/10/2012
Apparently you weren't conscious all those years that our tax dollars were subsidizing the tobacco industry while it was knowingly killing people with a product they knew to be highly lethal. That tax was all right with you? Are you people getting to the place where you wouldn't allow a tax hike even if there was a ironclad guarantee of a cure for cancer?
01:33 AM on 06/10/2012
29 was an attempt by Big Cancer to use the tax system to collect money for them instead of having to get it the hard way via donations. We all know donations, regretfully, have been down along with the economy. Big Cancer tried using our hatred of Big Tobacco for their own ends. They made it undoable with a 15 year suit of impenatrable armour because they knew the people would get wise and kill it later on. They tried to play the people for suckers and lost.
I am a non-smoker. I know smokers are people, too, with familes, mortgages, and bills to pay. That's where this annual $500 million would have come from. And Big Cancer tried to take that away from them by fooling the rest of us.
I wish the lefty tax hounds would pull back the covers and take a careful look at where they're going to sleep instead of just jumping in because it looks good on the surface. I don't care if a Lance Armstrong says it's okay. There could be a snake in that bed.
Big Cancer needs to get back in the line with the rest of the many worthy charities (God bless them all) and fight for our donations with the rest of them. I pray that all worthy charities will get the doantions they need to keep us from the ravages of the enemies they fight on our behalf.
Let us all make regular generous donations.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
10:17 PM on 06/06/2012
1. "California Taxpayers Association" is deceptive and confusing; "California Cancer Research Act" is not.
2. "Prop 29 would save more than 100,000 lives annually in California..." According to the AMA, there are something like 36,000 annual California deaths "attributable to smoking". Are you telling us that people are dying from smoking three or four times each but a $1 per pack tax would save them all?
3. All of the above is OK because you are the good guys and "big tobacco" are the bad guys. The smokers who would actually pay the tax don't count.
4. I'm not going to bring up the equal protection clause, or fairness, or honesty; we're well past principles and into low-down and dirty politics. I'm pretty sure AOL will let me get away with "A pox on both your houses" - even though that doesn't begin to express my feelings for you selfless public servants. (If sarcasm could kill...)
photo
Mr Bobo
Punk Rock Libertarian. Different. Better.
10:08 AM on 06/06/2012
The people have spoken.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
VJ Sleight MA TTS
Tobacco Treatment Specialist
08:51 PM on 06/06/2012
Not yet. There are still enough uncounted votes that Prop. 29 can rise from the ashes. The State has not certified the results yet and we won't concede until every last vote is counted.
photo
desertsapien
I'm here- I'm there- I'm everywhere
02:14 AM on 06/06/2012
I'm all for slapping a $2 tax on a bottle of beer or a glass of wine.
Should help keep drunk drivers off the road.
Would also help keeping that first beer out of juniors hands.
Think I'll vote a big yes on that it if it ever comes up.
And since I don't drink it won't matter one iota to me.
photo
Mr Bobo
Punk Rock Libertarian. Different. Better.
10:04 AM on 06/06/2012
There two kinds of people I don't trust, teetotalers and alcoholics.
photo
desertsapien
I'm here- I'm there- I'm everywhere
01:44 AM on 06/06/2012
So, who gets the patent on the cure after it is discovered?
The people who paid for it.?
The government ?
Nope.
Pharma that's who.
Then they will kill you with the bill they send you.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Pembrokelib
11:32 PM on 06/05/2012
Many avoid the tax by buying cheap cigarettes from the Indians. It's easy to do online; might even help the poor Indians. Therefore, smoking is good and helps others!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
notdarkyet
End the Drug War.
11:19 PM on 06/05/2012
Tobacco taxes are regressive. They are paid by the poorest amongst us. How about you fund your cancer research with higher taxes on billionaires.
photo
thereisonlyoneparty
more amazing than you
10:36 PM on 06/05/2012
I am as anti-cancer as the next guy, but this is all nonsense.

Cancer research has eaten up a huge amount of resources over the past 50 years. What are the results? Not much.

This is just another attempt to exploit people that are addicted to a product. Nicotine causes real addiction. People have a need to consume more tobacco products. This increases price elasticity of demand. In the short term cigarettes are an inelastic good. People will continue to consume even with price increases. There are no substitutes for nicotine.

Also, I would think that obesity is a bigger issue than smoking. Americans do not smoke. Go to another country and tell people that you are an American. They will assume that you are not a smoker. Americans are really fat though. go to another country and you will be assumed to be American if you are fat.
photo
LoneTree
Liberty is more precious than life.
09:08 PM on 06/05/2012
A $1/pack tax is going to fund $500 million in research? So 12% of adult Californians smoke, something over 3 million smokers (this is a very conservative estimate). And they smoke, as all smokers do, a pack a day (+/-). So that's 1.095 billion packs of cigarettes a year * $1/pack ~ $1.1 in revenues. To fund $500M in research?

Who gets the other half billion, Solyndra?
photo
Iatros78
Science is the consensus of expert opinion
08:36 PM on 06/05/2012
Philip Morris/Altria and RJ Reynolds are both federally-convicted racketeering enterprises. Why such criminal organizations are allowed to fund political campaigns or in any way participate in the American democratic process is beyond me. It should be made illegal for them to do so. The reason they are involved in opposing Prop 29 has nothing to do with their commitment to low taxes, freedom, small government or (incredibly) cancer treatment, but one thing: higher cigarette taxes will mean fewer people smoking, especially those they term "replacement smokers" (i.e. children). With fewer replacement smokers able to afford cigarettes, fewer children will become addicted to tobacco products. Fewer children addicted to tobacco products means less profits for Philip Morris/Altria and RJ Reynolds. It's all about profits for these merchants of death. Everything else is irrelevant.

Thank you Lance Armstong Foundation, American Cancer Society, American Lung Association, and American Heart Association for standing up against Big Tobacco! Vote YES on Prop 29!