May 29, 2012
The No on 29 campaign is a great example of the kind of "tobacco industry interference" that the WHO is highlighting in its materials for World No Tobacco Day.
The WHO's list of "Information sheet on tobacco industry interference" could have been written about the No on 29 campaign:
1. Manoeuvering to hijack the political and legislative process
The tobacco industry has been highly resourceful in undermining governments’ efforts to protect public health. Tobacco companies have become expert in creating and exploiting legislative loopholes and manoeuvering with lobbyists to effectively influence law-making.
2. Exaggerating the economic importance of the industry
May 29, 2012
Philip Morris and Reynolds American's "third party" spokespeople are talking out of both sides of their mouths on whether or not Prop 29 is "inflexible."
On one hand, in the No on 29 ballot argument they criticize Prop 29 as "Establish[ing] another flawed auto-pilot spending mandate" that "createsan unaccountable, government bureaucracy" filled with political appointees" because the Legislature has no control over the use of the funds for the first 15 years.
But then, in response to the CDC's report that most states are not appropriating the CDC's recommended levels of support for tobacco control, the No campaign told the Sacramento Bee, "said the CDC study just proves government can't be trusted with more tobacco tax money."