Apr 27, 2005
Workplace interventions for smoking cessation (Cochrane Review)
I thought you'd find this interesting. "Interventions" are not working!! We could have told them that. We smokers are a stubborn lot! LOL
Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.cochrane.org/cochrane/revabstr/AB003440.htm
From The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2005.
Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., All rights reserved.
Workplace interventions for smoking cessation (Cochrane Review)
Moher M, Hey K, Lancaster T
ABSTRACT
A substantive amendment to this systematic review was last made on 19 February 2005. Cochrane reviews are regularly checked and updated if necessary.
Background: The workplace has potential as a setting through which large groups of people can be reached to encourage smoking cessation.
Objectives: To categorize workplace interventions for smoking cessation tested in controlled studies and to determine the extent to which they help workers to stop smoking or to reduce tobacco consumption.
Search strategy: We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register in October 2004, MEDLINE (1966 - October 2004), EMBASE (1985 - October 2004) and PsycINFO (to October 2004). We searched abstracts from international conferences on tobacco and we checked the bibliographies of identified studies and reviews for additional references.
Selection criteria: We categorized interventions into two groups: a) Interventions aimed at the individual to promote smoking cessation and b) interventions aimed at the workplace as a whole. We applied different inclusion criteria for the different types of study. For interventions aimed at helping individuals to stop smoking, we included only randomized controlled trials allocating individuals, workplaces or companies to intervention or control conditions. For studies of smoking restrictions and bans in the workplace, we also included controlled trials with baseline and post-intervention outcomes and interrupted times series studies.
Data collection and analysis: Information relating to the characteristics and content of all kinds of interventions, participants, outcomes and methods of the study was abstracted by one author and checked by two others. Because of heterogeneity in the design and content of the included studies, we did not attempt formal meta-analysis, and evaluated the studies using qualitative narrative synthesis.
Main results: Workplace interventions aimed at helping individuals to stop smoking included ten studies of group therapy, seven studies of individual counselling, nine studies of self-help materials and five studies of nicotine replacement therapy. The results were consistent with those found in other settings. Group programmes, individual counselling and nicotine replacement therapy increased cessation rates in comparison to no treatment or minimal intervention controls. Self-help materials were less effective. Workplace interventions aimed at the workforce as a whole included 14 studies of tobacco bans, two studies of social support, four studies of environmental support, five studies of incentives, and eight studies of comprehensive (multi-component) programmes. Tobacco bans decreased cigarette consumption during the working day but their effect on total consumption was less certain. We failed to detect an increase in quit rates from adding social and environmental support to these programmes. There was a lack of evidence that comprehensive programmes reduced the prevalence of smoking. Competitions and incentives increased attempts to stop smoking, though there was less evidence that they increased the rate of actual quitting.
Authors' conclusions:
We found
1. Strong evidence that interventions directed towards individual smokers increase the likelihood of quitting smoking. These include advice from a health professional, individual and group counselling and pharmacological treatment to overcome nicotine addiction. Self-help interventions are less effective. All these interventions are effective whether offered in the workplace or elsewhere. Although people taking up these interventions are more likely to stop, the absolute numbers who quit are low.
2. Limited evidence that participation in programmes can be increased by competitions and incentives organized by the employer.
3. Consistent evidence that workplace tobacco policies and bans can decrease cigarette consumption during the working day by smokers and exposure of non-smoking employees to environmental tobacco smoke at work, but conflicting evidence about whether they decrease prevalence of smoking or overall consumption of tobacco by smokers.
4. A lack of evidence that comprehensive approaches reduce the prevalence of smoking, despite the strong theoretical rationale for their use.
5. A lack of evidence about the cost-effectiveness of workplace programmes.
Citation: Moher M, Hey K, Lancaster T. Workplace interventions for smoking cessation. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2005, Issue 2. Art. No.: CD003440.pub2. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003440.pub2.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is an abstract of a regularly updated, systematic review prepared and maintained by the Cochrane Collaboration. The full text of the review is available in The Cochrane Library (ISSN 1465-1858).
Abstracts of Cochrane Reviews are compiled and produced by Update Software Ltd on behalf of the publisher, John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Thursday, April 28, 2005
Apr 26, 2005
Temporary Payment Shutdown
I received this note from AARON'S MAKE YOUR OWN today. They are also a member of IL Smokers Group. They do not sell cigarettes. Their products are Cigarette Making Machines, Tubes and Tobacco Products/Accessories. This is ridiculous. I have searched and cannot find any Congressional activity on HB 2824, designed to expand the Jenkins Act (which outlaws shipping cigarettes between states) to include smokeless tobacco and possibly all other forms of tobacco also).
Our US Mail is still making deliveries, so aren't the credit card processing companies (seems it is not the credit card companies themselves)practicing discrimination against tobacco products? If anyone else finds (or has) any information on how these activities are currently being justified, please share it with all of us. I know a lot has been written already on the subject, but it appears nothing has been resolved yet.......
Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From:
To:
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2005 6:28 PM
Subject: Temporary Payment Shutdown
Hello friends,
Due to the ever changing "tobacco" political climate, AaronsMYO has been smitten, by our credit card processing company ECI, Humboldt Merchant Services...they will no longer be our processor as it is their policy not to service any business selling 'tobacco products' on the internet.
Although a major inconvenience...hopefully just a temporary setback and we should be able to accept credit card payments soon, as we search for a new secure processor. Until then we've been reduced to "Mail Order" and I thought we couldn't be touched. Our only other alternative would be to remove the tobacco from our site...I'm not going to give in that easy...now it's principle!
Sincerely,
Lou and Jeanne Williams
AaronsMYO
Apr 27, 2005
Temporary Payment Shutdown
Here is the latest on the status for AARON'S MAKE YOUR OWN. Tobacco is being treated like "porn"? It has to be somehow illegal to persecute anyone related to the Tobacco industry. Input? Who has legalized these policies? (See message at bottom from Timothy J. Wallin.)
Garnet Dawn
----- Original Message -----
From: Jeanne n' Lou - Aaron's MYO
To: cawal@msn.com ; garnetdawn@comcast.net
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 10:39 AM
Subject: Fwd: Re: Temporary Payment Shutdown
Hello Tim,Thanks for your support...we did find another processor, Authorize.net, and they know we sell tobacco and claim they'll have us up and running in 1-2 business days. Initially we did not offer tobacco as we hadn't applied for a tobacco retail license...obtaining the license, we added tobacco, thus violating ECI's policy of "innappropriate products", same as 'porn'! As it has been over a year since we initially started with ECI, neither of us can remember if it was an issue then or a recent policy change, so we could be at fault, however , it does feel like "discrimination" regardless. Paypal has the same policy, evidently these companies don't actively scan sites unless for some reason your account gets flagged...which in our case they tried to telephone us at our old address in PA, to discuss a 'client's' credit card activity and we had moved to Florida and hadn't notified them, flagging our account for an update...busted! The dialogue was initiated on Friday, 4/22 and on Monday, 4/25 we were shut down.
Below is someone you may want to contact, Garnet Dawn, a true and practicing activist for tobacco reform.
Thanks again for your support,
Lou and Jeanne Williams
--------------------------------------------------------------------
To:Subject:
Re: Temporary Payment ShutdownDate:
Wed, 27 Apr 2005 01:09:56 -0500
Lou and Jeanne,
If by 'mail order' you mean using money orders and checks to pay for tobacco products so be it. However, tobacco manufacturers, distributors, retailers and end users, (guys like me) need to ban together as one and let our representatives in government know how we feel. We are not powerless. A class action suit against the credit card processing companies for any actions they take against tobacco retailers maybe the 'best' first step to take. Let the courts decide. While I may be speaking out of ignorance we need to be proactive. If you have any suggestions as to what I can do as an end user, please let me know.
Sincerely,
Timothy J. Wallin
cawal@msn.com
Temporary Payment Shutdown
I received this note from AARON'S MAKE YOUR OWN today. They are also a member of IL Smokers Group. They do not sell cigarettes. Their products are Cigarette Making Machines, Tubes and Tobacco Products/Accessories. This is ridiculous. I have searched and cannot find any Congressional activity on HB 2824, designed to expand the Jenkins Act (which outlaws shipping cigarettes between states) to include smokeless tobacco and possibly all other forms of tobacco also).
Our US Mail is still making deliveries, so aren't the credit card processing companies (seems it is not the credit card companies themselves)practicing discrimination against tobacco products? If anyone else finds (or has) any information on how these activities are currently being justified, please share it with all of us. I know a lot has been written already on the subject, but it appears nothing has been resolved yet.......
Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From:
To:
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2005 6:28 PM
Subject: Temporary Payment Shutdown
Hello friends,
Due to the ever changing "tobacco" political climate, AaronsMYO has been smitten, by our credit card processing company ECI, Humboldt Merchant Services...they will no longer be our processor as it is their policy not to service any business selling 'tobacco products' on the internet.
Although a major inconvenience...hopefully just a temporary setback and we should be able to accept credit card payments soon, as we search for a new secure processor. Until then we've been reduced to "Mail Order" and I thought we couldn't be touched. Our only other alternative would be to remove the tobacco from our site...I'm not going to give in that easy...now it's principle!
Sincerely,
Lou and Jeanne Williams
AaronsMYO
Apr 27, 2005
Temporary Payment Shutdown
Here is the latest on the status for AARON'S MAKE YOUR OWN. Tobacco is being treated like "porn"? It has to be somehow illegal to persecute anyone related to the Tobacco industry. Input? Who has legalized these policies? (See message at bottom from Timothy J. Wallin.)
Garnet Dawn
----- Original Message -----
From: Jeanne n' Lou - Aaron's MYO
To: cawal@msn.com ; garnetdawn@comcast.net
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 10:39 AM
Subject: Fwd: Re: Temporary Payment Shutdown
Hello Tim,Thanks for your support...we did find another processor, Authorize.net, and they know we sell tobacco and claim they'll have us up and running in 1-2 business days. Initially we did not offer tobacco as we hadn't applied for a tobacco retail license...obtaining the license, we added tobacco, thus violating ECI's policy of "innappropriate products", same as 'porn'! As it has been over a year since we initially started with ECI, neither of us can remember if it was an issue then or a recent policy change, so we could be at fault, however , it does feel like "discrimination" regardless. Paypal has the same policy, evidently these companies don't actively scan sites unless for some reason your account gets flagged...which in our case they tried to telephone us at our old address in PA, to discuss a 'client's' credit card activity and we had moved to Florida and hadn't notified them, flagging our account for an update...busted! The dialogue was initiated on Friday, 4/22 and on Monday, 4/25 we were shut down.
Below is someone you may want to contact, Garnet Dawn, a true and practicing activist for tobacco reform.
Thanks again for your support,
Lou and Jeanne Williams
--------------------------------------------------------------------
To:
Re: Temporary Payment ShutdownDate:
Wed, 27 Apr 2005 01:09:56 -0500
Lou and Jeanne,
If by 'mail order' you mean using money orders and checks to pay for tobacco products so be it. However, tobacco manufacturers, distributors, retailers and end users, (guys like me) need to ban together as one and let our representatives in government know how we feel. We are not powerless. A class action suit against the credit card processing companies for any actions they take against tobacco retailers maybe the 'best' first step to take. Let the courts decide. While I may be speaking out of ignorance we need to be proactive. If you have any suggestions as to what I can do as an end user, please let me know.
Sincerely,
Timothy J. Wallin
cawal@msn.com
Apr 24, 2005
ALIENS THINK SMOKERS TASTE BAD
We can all stand to read a little humor on smoking issues now and then. Below is an "interesting" theory on the real motivations behind the frenzy to stamp out smoking. Just click on the link to read the rest of the story.
Garnet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.surfingtheapocalypse.net/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=70365
"ALIENS THINK SMOKERS TASTE BAD
Posted By: Il_Bagattel
Date: Wednesday, 20 April 2005.
In Response To: REDUCE POP. TO 500,000,000 PEOPLE (Journey)
The following is in no way an endorsement for smoking. I do not recommend that anyone take up the habit. This is simply some information for your consideration, in the hopes that some will begin to see that there is much more to the stamp out smoking campaign than your well being.
The fact that people have been smoking tobacco on this planet for hundreds of thousands of years, and that cancer is a phenomena that is fairly recent, relatively speaking, tends to call to question the validity of the ongoing witch hunt. When one considers that Marlboro, as an example, buys the cheapest, lowest quality tobacco available...then reconstitutes it with over 300 chemical additives and flavorings, might be a reason for the spike in smoking related illness.
I have been smoking for 45+ years. About 4 years ago I switched to pure unadultered tobacco products and daily make my own filter cigarettes. In full MRI testing at the UCLA cardio center, in Torrance, CA, the doctors could find no evidence that I was a smoker, and were in fact stunned when I told them that I had been a pack a day smoker since my mid-teens. I do supplement my diet with a mineral ascorbate version of vitamin C, mixed tocopheral E, B-12 and prophylactic use of colloidal silver. All of the uncles on my father's side of the family have been smokers and all lived at least into their eighties. My aunt, on my mother's side died young of lung cancer, and never smoked. Statistically, the incidence of lung cancer is about evenly divided between smokers and non-smokers. Go figure. One might presume that other factors are at work here.
There is a hidden agenda in the stamp out smoking campaign. It is not what is being promoted. One would do well to investigate before buying into the government/big medicine propaganda. Why is it that the trillions of dollars that have been poured into cancer research over the past decades have not come up with ONE positive therapy, and avoid at all costs any investigation into a very likely microbial root cause? Cancer is a very profitable big business. There will never be any meaningful research into the root causes, only treatment of the symptoms. Smoking is a wonderful red herring for these people. Why is it that with more and more people kicking the habit, the incidence of cancer is rising?
Below are snips from some related research into this current global program. BTW, here in Europe there is only recently a stigma attached to smoking. They are just beginning to ramp up the witch hunt, under pressure from the globalists: .................................."
ALIENS THINK SMOKERS TASTE BAD
We can all stand to read a little humor on smoking issues now and then. Below is an "interesting" theory on the real motivations behind the frenzy to stamp out smoking. Just click on the link to read the rest of the story.
Garnet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.surfingtheapocalypse.net/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=70365
"ALIENS THINK SMOKERS TASTE BAD
Posted By: Il_Bagattel
Date: Wednesday, 20 April 2005.
In Response To: REDUCE POP. TO 500,000,000 PEOPLE (Journey)
The following is in no way an endorsement for smoking. I do not recommend that anyone take up the habit. This is simply some information for your consideration, in the hopes that some will begin to see that there is much more to the stamp out smoking campaign than your well being.
The fact that people have been smoking tobacco on this planet for hundreds of thousands of years, and that cancer is a phenomena that is fairly recent, relatively speaking, tends to call to question the validity of the ongoing witch hunt. When one considers that Marlboro, as an example, buys the cheapest, lowest quality tobacco available...then reconstitutes it with over 300 chemical additives and flavorings, might be a reason for the spike in smoking related illness.
I have been smoking for 45+ years. About 4 years ago I switched to pure unadultered tobacco products and daily make my own filter cigarettes. In full MRI testing at the UCLA cardio center, in Torrance, CA, the doctors could find no evidence that I was a smoker, and were in fact stunned when I told them that I had been a pack a day smoker since my mid-teens. I do supplement my diet with a mineral ascorbate version of vitamin C, mixed tocopheral E, B-12 and prophylactic use of colloidal silver. All of the uncles on my father's side of the family have been smokers and all lived at least into their eighties. My aunt, on my mother's side died young of lung cancer, and never smoked. Statistically, the incidence of lung cancer is about evenly divided between smokers and non-smokers. Go figure. One might presume that other factors are at work here.
There is a hidden agenda in the stamp out smoking campaign. It is not what is being promoted. One would do well to investigate before buying into the government/big medicine propaganda. Why is it that the trillions of dollars that have been poured into cancer research over the past decades have not come up with ONE positive therapy, and avoid at all costs any investigation into a very likely microbial root cause? Cancer is a very profitable big business. There will never be any meaningful research into the root causes, only treatment of the symptoms. Smoking is a wonderful red herring for these people. Why is it that with more and more people kicking the habit, the incidence of cancer is rising?
Below are snips from some related research into this current global program. BTW, here in Europe there is only recently a stigma attached to smoking. They are just beginning to ramp up the witch hunt, under pressure from the globalists: .................................."
Apr 23, 2005
New Guestbook
I've just added a Guest Book to my web site at http://www.illinoissmokersrights.com/ in the left column.
Please take a moment to say "hello" by going to Illinois Smokers Rights, or click on http://books.dreambook.com/garnet_dawn/illinoissmokersrights.html.
Thanks,
Garnet Dawn
New Guestbook
I've just added a Guest Book to my web site at http://www.illinoissmokersrights.com/ in the left column.
Please take a moment to say "hello" by going to Illinois Smokers Rights, or click on http://books.dreambook.com/garnet_dawn/illinoissmokersrights.html.
Thanks,
Garnet Dawn
Apr 23, 2005
"CLEAN AIR ACT - HOME RULE" - 94TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY VOTE RECORDS - IL
The following links list how our Illinois representatives voted on the recently passed Clean Air Act - Home Rule. Also, if you would like to know how your Illinois State Representative or Senator voted on another bill and you have the bill's number, you can use these Illinois General Assembly links to find out.
Garnet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CLEAN AIR ACT - HOME RULE - 94TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY - IL
HB0672 - Third Reading - Wednesday, April 13, 2005
Access voting records at:
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/votehistory.asp?DocNum=672&DocTypeID=HB&LegID=15096&GAID=8&SessionID=50&GA=94&SpecSess
or House Voting Record for HB 672. 94th Assembly - http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/votehistory/94/house/09400HB0672_04132005_032000T.pdf
Short Description: CLEAN AIR ACT-HOME RULE
House Sponsors
Rep. Karen A. Yarbrough - Carolyn H. Krause - Julie Hamos - Elizabeth Coulson - Karen May, Annazette Collins, Marlow H. Colvin, Barbara Flynn Currie, John A. Fritchey, Paul D. Froehlich, Kevin Joyce, Robin Kelly, Joseph M. Lyons, Sidney H. Mathias, Jack McGuire, Larry McKeon, Elaine Nekritz, Harry Osterman, Kathleen A. Ryg, Michael K. Smith, Cynthia Soto, Eddie Washington, Sandra M. Pihos, Deborah L. Graham, Wyvetter H. Younge, George Scully Jr., Naomi D. Jakobsson, Lovana Jones, Lee A. Daniels, Constance A. Howard, JoAnn D. Osmond, Sara Feigenholtz, Patricia Reid Lindner, Michelle Chavez and David E. Miller
Senate Sponsors
(Sen. John J. Cullerton - Christine Radogno - Jacqueline Y. Collins - Martin A. Sandoval - Louis S. Viverito, Jeffrey M. Schoenberg, Susan Garrett, Edward D. Maloney, Carol Ronen, M. Maggie Crotty, Iris Y. Martinez, Ira I. Silverstein, Miguel del Valle, Mattie Hunter, Dan Cronin, Kathleen L. Wojcik, Pamela J. Althoff, Kimberly A. Lightford, James T. Meeks, James A. DeLeo, Rickey R. Hendon and Don Harmon)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SB0254 - Third Reading - Monday, April 11, 2005
Access voting records at:
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/votehistory.asp?DocNum=254&DocTypeID=SB&LegID=15540&GAID=8&SessionID=50&GA=94&SpecSess
or Senate Vote Record for SB 254. 94th Assembly - http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/votehistory/94/senate/09400SB0254_04112005_048000T.pdf
Short Description: CLEAN AIR ACT-HOME RULE
Senate Sponsors
Sen. John J. Cullerton - Christine Radogno - Debbie DeFrancesco Halvorson - Martin A. Sandoval - Louis S. Viverito, Jeffrey M. Schoenberg, Susan Garrett, Edward D. Maloney, Carol Ronen, M. Maggie Crotty, Iris Y. Martinez, Ira I. Silverstein, Miguel del Valle, Mattie Hunter, Dan Cronin, Jacqueline Y. Collins, Kathleen L. Wojcik, Pamela J. Althoff and Kimberly A. Lightford
House Sponsors
(Rep. Karen A. Yarbrough - John A. Fritchey)
"CLEAN AIR ACT - HOME RULE" - 94TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY VOTE RECORDS - IL
The following links list how our Illinois representatives voted on the recently passed Clean Air Act - Home Rule. Also, if you would like to know how your Illinois State Representative or Senator voted on another bill and you have the bill's number, you can use these Illinois General Assembly links to find out.
Garnet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CLEAN AIR ACT - HOME RULE - 94TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY - IL
HB0672 - Third Reading - Wednesday, April 13, 2005
Access voting records at:
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/votehistory.asp?DocNum=672&DocTypeID=HB&LegID=15096&GAID=8&SessionID=50&GA=94&SpecSess
or House Voting Record for HB 672. 94th Assembly - http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/votehistory/94/house/09400HB0672_04132005_032000T.pdf
Short Description: CLEAN AIR ACT-HOME RULE
House Sponsors
Rep. Karen A. Yarbrough - Carolyn H. Krause - Julie Hamos - Elizabeth Coulson - Karen May, Annazette Collins, Marlow H. Colvin, Barbara Flynn Currie, John A. Fritchey, Paul D. Froehlich, Kevin Joyce, Robin Kelly, Joseph M. Lyons, Sidney H. Mathias, Jack McGuire, Larry McKeon, Elaine Nekritz, Harry Osterman, Kathleen A. Ryg, Michael K. Smith, Cynthia Soto, Eddie Washington, Sandra M. Pihos, Deborah L. Graham, Wyvetter H. Younge, George Scully Jr., Naomi D. Jakobsson, Lovana Jones, Lee A. Daniels, Constance A. Howard, JoAnn D. Osmond, Sara Feigenholtz, Patricia Reid Lindner, Michelle Chavez and David E. Miller
Senate Sponsors
(Sen. John J. Cullerton - Christine Radogno - Jacqueline Y. Collins - Martin A. Sandoval - Louis S. Viverito, Jeffrey M. Schoenberg, Susan Garrett, Edward D. Maloney, Carol Ronen, M. Maggie Crotty, Iris Y. Martinez, Ira I. Silverstein, Miguel del Valle, Mattie Hunter, Dan Cronin, Kathleen L. Wojcik, Pamela J. Althoff, Kimberly A. Lightford, James T. Meeks, James A. DeLeo, Rickey R. Hendon and Don Harmon)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SB0254 - Third Reading - Monday, April 11, 2005
Access voting records at:
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/votehistory.asp?DocNum=254&DocTypeID=SB&LegID=15540&GAID=8&SessionID=50&GA=94&SpecSess
or Senate Vote Record for SB 254. 94th Assembly - http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/votehistory/94/senate/09400SB0254_04112005_048000T.pdf
Short Description: CLEAN AIR ACT-HOME RULE
Senate Sponsors
Sen. John J. Cullerton - Christine Radogno - Debbie DeFrancesco Halvorson - Martin A. Sandoval - Louis S. Viverito, Jeffrey M. Schoenberg, Susan Garrett, Edward D. Maloney, Carol Ronen, M. Maggie Crotty, Iris Y. Martinez, Ira I. Silverstein, Miguel del Valle, Mattie Hunter, Dan Cronin, Jacqueline Y. Collins, Kathleen L. Wojcik, Pamela J. Althoff and Kimberly A. Lightford
House Sponsors
(Rep. Karen A. Yarbrough - John A. Fritchey)
Apr 21, 2005
Did Anybody In Here Take That "Real Age"Test?.... Rant Time!
Hi Jim,
I haven't taken the test. I refuse. I figure, if I smoke and occasionally drink martinis....speed (7 miles over the speed limit, unless it's rush hour..then 20), also refuse to wear a seat belt, that they would not be kind to me in calculating my age. I even love parasailing, rollercoasters...... I'll bet all the ones who never do anything exciting or enjoy themselves won't live any longer!
Don't let them get you......the people that create these tests are the ones who are "old and dried up".
Take care,
Garnet
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: Jim Blogg
To: illinoissmokers@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 9:16 PM
Subject: [illinoissmokers] Did Anybody In Here Take That "Real Age"Test?.... Rant Time!
Everywhere I go in Yahoo, there is that annoying Real Age advertisement. I've tried to ignore it, but last night I couldn't stand it anymore so I clicked on it and took their test just to make them happy and wish I didn't! So how old am I really? Well I turned 60 recently, but after I took their test, I found out I'm not really 60, I'm really 67.2! Quite a shock, but because they try to sell you their services after they hit you with the disturbing news, I suspect they pad that figure a bit.
Did Anybody In Here Take That "Real Age"Test?.... Rant Time!
Hi Jim,
I haven't taken the test. I refuse. I figure, if I smoke and occasionally drink martinis....speed (7 miles over the speed limit, unless it's rush hour..then 20), also refuse to wear a seat belt, that they would not be kind to me in calculating my age. I even love parasailing, rollercoasters...... I'll bet all the ones who never do anything exciting or enjoy themselves won't live any longer!
Don't let them get you......the people that create these tests are the ones who are "old and dried up".
Take care,
Garnet
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: Jim Blogg
To: illinoissmokers@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 9:16 PM
Subject: [illinoissmokers] Did Anybody In Here Take That "Real Age"Test?.... Rant Time!
Everywhere I go in Yahoo, there is that annoying Real Age advertisement. I've tried to ignore it, but last night I couldn't stand it anymore so I clicked on it and took their test just to make them happy and wish I didn't! So how old am I really? Well I turned 60 recently, but after I took their test, I found out I'm not really 60, I'm really 67.2! Quite a shock, but because they try to sell you their services after they hit you with the disturbing news, I suspect they pad that figure a bit.
Apr 21, 2005
Governor's Proposed Cigarette Tax Hike - Update
Below is a press release from the Illinois Government News Network, dated March 31st. Though newspapers have not mentioned the proposed cigarette tax hike recently, Jim Blogg found the following excerpt. Notice, there is not any pretense about health issues....just tax the smokers!!!
"The state must help schools eliminate overcrowding and give students and teachers better environments to learn and teach in. In order to meet these needs and fund the state’s other capital needs, the Governor proposed increasing the cigarette tax by 75 cents to pay the debt service on a capital program."
Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.illinois.gov/PRessReleases/PressReleasesListShow.cfm?RecNum=3802
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
March 31, 2005
Gov. Blagojevich unveils comprehensive Higher Standards, Better Schools plan
Proposal increases school funding by another $300 million, and implements strict new high school graduation standards
to better prepare Illinois students for college and the workforce
OAK PARK – Governor Rod Blagojevich today announced his Higher Standards, Better Schools plan – a comprehensive proposal designed to boost education funding...
....4. Building Better Learning Environments
The Governor’s Fiscal Year 2006 Budget includes $550 million in annual funding to build new schools and renovate existing schools. A survey conducted by the Capital Development Board found that Illinois schools reported that they need more than $6 billion in new construction. The state must help schools eliminate overcrowding and give students and teachers better environments to learn and teach in. In order to meet these needs and fund the state’s other capital needs, the Governor proposed increasing the cigarette tax by 75 cents to pay the debt service on a capital program.
Governor's Proposed Cigarette Tax Hike - Update
Below is a press release from the Illinois Government News Network, dated March 31st. Though newspapers have not mentioned the proposed cigarette tax hike recently, Jim Blogg found the following excerpt. Notice, there is not any pretense about health issues....just tax the smokers!!!
"The state must help schools eliminate overcrowding and give students and teachers better environments to learn and teach in. In order to meet these needs and fund the state’s other capital needs, the Governor proposed increasing the cigarette tax by 75 cents to pay the debt service on a capital program."
Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.illinois.gov/PRessReleases/PressReleasesListShow.cfm?RecNum=3802
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
March 31, 2005
Gov. Blagojevich unveils comprehensive Higher Standards, Better Schools plan
Proposal increases school funding by another $300 million, and implements strict new high school graduation standards
to better prepare Illinois students for college and the workforce
OAK PARK – Governor Rod Blagojevich today announced his Higher Standards, Better Schools plan – a comprehensive proposal designed to boost education funding...
....4. Building Better Learning Environments
The Governor’s Fiscal Year 2006 Budget includes $550 million in annual funding to build new schools and renovate existing schools. A survey conducted by the Capital Development Board found that Illinois schools reported that they need more than $6 billion in new construction. The state must help schools eliminate overcrowding and give students and teachers better environments to learn and teach in. In order to meet these needs and fund the state’s other capital needs, the Governor proposed increasing the cigarette tax by 75 cents to pay the debt service on a capital program.
Apr 21, 2005
FL Money Fight - Sharks fighting among themselves!
Hi Darlene,
I agree. Our state representatives across the country are in such a feeding frenzy for tax dollars, that they are fighting among themselves. They aren't even keeping up pretenses any more to tell the public they want to reduce smoking and address so-called "health issues". I'm so glad that the true purposes for selective taxation of cigarettes are finally becoming public. Now, the "health conscious" special interest groups are screaming foul, because their budgets are being cut. Looks like it's time for some of them to find real employment and stop riding the gravy train. The term "sharks in a swimming pool" comes to mind.
Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Darlene"
Date: Wed Apr 20, 2005
Subject: Re: [floridasmokers] FL Money Fight
This is good, right? I mean, we all would love to see the Truth ads go down the toilet. Am I reading this article right? I am leaning toward this being a good thing.
What are your thoughts?
http://www.smokersclubinc.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1362
FL:
Money Fight.
Program to fight smoking is at risk. State legislators are steering
most of the tobacco cash to health and social programs in their own
districts.
FL Money Fight - Sharks fighting among themselves!
Hi Darlene,
I agree. Our state representatives across the country are in such a feeding frenzy for tax dollars, that they are fighting among themselves. They aren't even keeping up pretenses any more to tell the public they want to reduce smoking and address so-called "health issues". I'm so glad that the true purposes for selective taxation of cigarettes are finally becoming public. Now, the "health conscious" special interest groups are screaming foul, because their budgets are being cut. Looks like it's time for some of them to find real employment and stop riding the gravy train. The term "sharks in a swimming pool" comes to mind.
Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Darlene"
Date: Wed Apr 20, 2005
Subject: Re: [floridasmokers] FL Money Fight
This is good, right? I mean, we all would love to see the Truth ads go down the toilet. Am I reading this article right? I am leaning toward this being a good thing.
What are your thoughts?
http://www.smokersclubinc.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1362
FL:
Money Fight.
Program to fight smoking is at risk. State legislators are steering
most of the tobacco cash to health and social programs in their own
districts.
Apr 21, 2005
Government Data Shows Smoking Bans Devastate Bar Industry Reports Leading Economist
Hi Thomas,
That is such a great report. It validates everything we have all been saying. I was debating about including in on the group yesterday. I plan to add it to my blog and the IL Smokers Rights site too! I'm so glad you posted it!!!
Garnet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Thomas Laprade"
Date: Wed Apr 20, 2005 9:12 pm
Subject: Excerpt below is from the Smokers Club, Inc.
http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/April2005/19/c7105.html
Government Data Shows Smoking Bans Devastate Bar Industry Reports Leading Economist
TORONTO, April 19 /CNW/ - Confirming the worst fears of Canada's
hospitality industry The Fair Air Association of Canada (FAAC) and The Pub and
Bar Coalition of Canada (PUBCO) released the most comprehensive economic
analysis yet done on the impact of complete smoking bans on bars and pubs.
The economic impact study offers definitive proof that smoking bans, like
the McGuinty government Bill 164, will lead to widespread devastation
throughout one of Canada's largest employment sectors - the hospitality
industry - in communities across the Province.
The study shows smoking bans in several Ontario cities have had a real
and dramatic impact on revenue. Bar and pub sales were reduced: 23.5% in
Ottawa, 18.7% in London, 24.3% in Kingston and 20.4% in Kitchener.
The study was conducted by Michael Evans, Ph. D., one of North America's
leading economists and a former advisor to the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), NASA, U.S. Senate Finance Committee and the U.S. Treasury. Dr. Evans
was also a Professor of Economics at the Kellogg Graduate School of
Management. The world-renowned economist used Ontario Ministry of Finance
sales and tax receipts data between 2000 and 2003 to ensure the veracity of
his report. The study has been verified by Wade Cook, Ph. D, Associate Dean of
Research, Schulich School of Business.
Prof. Evans concluded, "Government data clearly demonstrates smoking bans
materially reduce sales in bars and nightclubs. The evidence is quite clear.
To suggest that smoking bans don't have a dramatic negative impact on bar
sales would be an opinion - not fact."
"While we do agree that smoking has health risks associated with it, we
believe that adults should be free to exercise their choice to smoke so long
as there are separate, properly ventilated rooms," said Karen Bodirsky, CEO of
the FAAC. "The Province's hospitality industry and its 491,000 employees need
amendments to Bill 164 for the provision of separate ventilated smoking
rooms," added Edgar Mitchell, Chair of PUBCO.
The results not only bring grim news to bars and pubs but also to
community organizations. "This study shows the devastating impact the
government's legislation will have on bars but other sectors are threatened
too. A province-wide ban will have a negative impact on Legion Halls and
charity bingos when the ban is fully in place," stated Bodirsky.
Bodirsky and Mitchell also called on the McGuinty government to conduct
an economic impact study of their own and release the results publicly of the
economic effects of a full smoking ban on Ontario's hospitality industry
before the government passes and implements Bill 164.
The study results echoed reports from other jurisdictions facing smoking
bans.
"We know a smoking ban will have a devastating impact on Newfoundland and
Labrador's hospitality industry. Ontario's economic impact study is further
proof of why the government of Newfoundland and Labrador should choose
ventilation over outright bans," noted Marcel Etheridge, President of the
Beverage Industry Association of Newfoundland. "The same 18 to 25% drop in
business that was seen in Ontario's smoke-free communities will be seen in
communities across Newfoundland and Labrador and will have the same results:
lay offs and business closures."
"There is no doubt that people are losing businesses that were popular
local spots in Saskatchewan communities for 20 years or more. Once the
provincial smoking ban came in, business dried up and the lay offs started.
It's a very tough thing for our local hotel owners to do because they've known
these people for years and still see them every day in the community," said
Tom Mullin, President & CEO, Hotels Association of Saskatchewan.
Sheree Davies, Chair of Central Alberta Businesses for Choice stated that
"The smoking ban will really have an effect in my surrounding communities. The
old spots many of the locals meet at to chat will no longer be around. It's
really sad to think about the nature of our local communities changing so
dramatically."
The Fair Air Association of Canada (FAAC) is a diverse group of
organizations, businesses and individuals committed to the promotion of sound
ventilation science and support of the hospitality industry. Find out more
about the FAAC and ventilation solutions at www.faac.ca or call 416-214-2737 /
416-648-4325.
Founded in 2001, the Pub and Bar Coalition is a not-for-profit
organization committed to effectively representing and protecting the
interests of licensees in Ontario when issues arrive that could affect their
livelihoods. To find out more about PUBCO, go to www.pubcoalition.com or call
1-613-321-0603 or 1-866-314-2179.
For further information: please contact: Karen Bodirsky, CEO, Fair Air
Association of Canada, (416) 214-2737, (416) 648-4325; Regional Media
Contacts: Newfoundland: Wade Gravelle, Vice President, West Side Charlie's,
Cell: (709) 682-1601; Gerry Connolly, Atlantic Star Satellite Bingo Hall,
Cell: (709) 682-7397; Marcel Ethridge, President, Beverage Industry
Association of Newfoundland, Cell: (709) 727-6999; Manitoba: Jim Baker,
President & CEO, Manitoba Hotel Association, (204) 942-0671; Saskatchewan:
Tom Mullin, President & CEO, Hotels Association of Saskatchewan,
(306) 522-1664; Alberta: Sheree Davies, Chair, Central Alberta Businesses for
Choice, (403) 357-0003; British Columbia: Doug Grant, General Manager, The
Royal Canadian Legion, Esquimalt Dockyard Branch No. 172, (250) 386-7635;
Quebec: Mr. Renaud Poulin, Corporation des propriétaires de bars, brasseries
et tavernes du Québec (CPBBT), (450) 692-8443, cell. (514) 928-4757
Government Data Shows Smoking Bans Devastate Bar Industry Reports Leading Economist
Hi Thomas,
That is such a great report. It validates everything we have all been saying. I was debating about including in on the group yesterday. I plan to add it to my blog and the IL Smokers Rights site too! I'm so glad you posted it!!!
Garnet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Thomas Laprade"
Date: Wed Apr 20, 2005 9:12 pm
Subject: Excerpt below is from the Smokers Club, Inc.
http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/April2005/19/c7105.html
Government Data Shows Smoking Bans Devastate Bar Industry Reports Leading Economist
TORONTO, April 19 /CNW/ - Confirming the worst fears of Canada's
hospitality industry The Fair Air Association of Canada (FAAC) and The Pub and
Bar Coalition of Canada (PUBCO) released the most comprehensive economic
analysis yet done on the impact of complete smoking bans on bars and pubs.
The economic impact study offers definitive proof that smoking bans, like
the McGuinty government Bill 164, will lead to widespread devastation
throughout one of Canada's largest employment sectors - the hospitality
industry - in communities across the Province.
The study shows smoking bans in several Ontario cities have had a real
and dramatic impact on revenue. Bar and pub sales were reduced: 23.5% in
Ottawa, 18.7% in London, 24.3% in Kingston and 20.4% in Kitchener.
The study was conducted by Michael Evans, Ph. D., one of North America's
leading economists and a former advisor to the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), NASA, U.S. Senate Finance Committee and the U.S. Treasury. Dr. Evans
was also a Professor of Economics at the Kellogg Graduate School of
Management. The world-renowned economist used Ontario Ministry of Finance
sales and tax receipts data between 2000 and 2003 to ensure the veracity of
his report. The study has been verified by Wade Cook, Ph. D, Associate Dean of
Research, Schulich School of Business.
Prof. Evans concluded, "Government data clearly demonstrates smoking bans
materially reduce sales in bars and nightclubs. The evidence is quite clear.
To suggest that smoking bans don't have a dramatic negative impact on bar
sales would be an opinion - not fact."
"While we do agree that smoking has health risks associated with it, we
believe that adults should be free to exercise their choice to smoke so long
as there are separate, properly ventilated rooms," said Karen Bodirsky, CEO of
the FAAC. "The Province's hospitality industry and its 491,000 employees need
amendments to Bill 164 for the provision of separate ventilated smoking
rooms," added Edgar Mitchell, Chair of PUBCO.
The results not only bring grim news to bars and pubs but also to
community organizations. "This study shows the devastating impact the
government's legislation will have on bars but other sectors are threatened
too. A province-wide ban will have a negative impact on Legion Halls and
charity bingos when the ban is fully in place," stated Bodirsky.
Bodirsky and Mitchell also called on the McGuinty government to conduct
an economic impact study of their own and release the results publicly of the
economic effects of a full smoking ban on Ontario's hospitality industry
before the government passes and implements Bill 164.
The study results echoed reports from other jurisdictions facing smoking
bans.
"We know a smoking ban will have a devastating impact on Newfoundland and
Labrador's hospitality industry. Ontario's economic impact study is further
proof of why the government of Newfoundland and Labrador should choose
ventilation over outright bans," noted Marcel Etheridge, President of the
Beverage Industry Association of Newfoundland. "The same 18 to 25% drop in
business that was seen in Ontario's smoke-free communities will be seen in
communities across Newfoundland and Labrador and will have the same results:
lay offs and business closures."
"There is no doubt that people are losing businesses that were popular
local spots in Saskatchewan communities for 20 years or more. Once the
provincial smoking ban came in, business dried up and the lay offs started.
It's a very tough thing for our local hotel owners to do because they've known
these people for years and still see them every day in the community," said
Tom Mullin, President & CEO, Hotels Association of Saskatchewan.
Sheree Davies, Chair of Central Alberta Businesses for Choice stated that
"The smoking ban will really have an effect in my surrounding communities. The
old spots many of the locals meet at to chat will no longer be around. It's
really sad to think about the nature of our local communities changing so
dramatically."
The Fair Air Association of Canada (FAAC) is a diverse group of
organizations, businesses and individuals committed to the promotion of sound
ventilation science and support of the hospitality industry. Find out more
about the FAAC and ventilation solutions at www.faac.ca or call 416-214-2737 /
416-648-4325.
Founded in 2001, the Pub and Bar Coalition is a not-for-profit
organization committed to effectively representing and protecting the
interests of licensees in Ontario when issues arrive that could affect their
livelihoods. To find out more about PUBCO, go to www.pubcoalition.com or call
1-613-321-0603 or 1-866-314-2179.
For further information: please contact: Karen Bodirsky, CEO, Fair Air
Association of Canada, (416) 214-2737, (416) 648-4325; Regional Media
Contacts: Newfoundland: Wade Gravelle, Vice President, West Side Charlie's,
Cell: (709) 682-1601; Gerry Connolly, Atlantic Star Satellite Bingo Hall,
Cell: (709) 682-7397; Marcel Ethridge, President, Beverage Industry
Association of Newfoundland, Cell: (709) 727-6999; Manitoba: Jim Baker,
President & CEO, Manitoba Hotel Association, (204) 942-0671; Saskatchewan:
Tom Mullin, President & CEO, Hotels Association of Saskatchewan,
(306) 522-1664; Alberta: Sheree Davies, Chair, Central Alberta Businesses for
Choice, (403) 357-0003; British Columbia: Doug Grant, General Manager, The
Royal Canadian Legion, Esquimalt Dockyard Branch No. 172, (250) 386-7635;
Quebec: Mr. Renaud Poulin, Corporation des propriétaires de bars, brasseries
et tavernes du Québec (CPBBT), (450) 692-8443, cell. (514) 928-4757
Apr 20, 2005
Report cites waste and abuse at TSA - National
These are the same people who are confiscating our lighters at airport security checkpoints to improve "National Security". I would like to know if all the security measures that have been implemented have any value, other than the harassment of travelers. Notice, the measures outlined below are for more NEW equipment--not people. Didn't we have metal detectors before this entire "security" fiasco began? The only results I can see from all the security checks are the humiliation of millions of travelers, trashed carry-ons, and a great collection of cuticle scissors and assorted personal harmless items for the airports to auction.
"In a separate report, the Homeland Security inspector general said screeners were diligent and responsible but not better than they were before the Sept. 11 attacks at detecting fake weapons and bombs undercover agents tried to smuggle aboard planes. Greater use of new technology is needed, the inspector general concluded.
TSA spokesman Mark Hatfield Jr. said the TSA has deployed new baggage screening technology at three airports and plans to spend $30 million to install the new machines at 100 more. The TSA has also installed walkthrough bomb detection machines at airports in 15 cities and plans to install them at the 40 busiest airports."
Why do I have the impression that our National Security has become a "Dog and Pony Show"? Do you feel safer? I do not!
Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/breaking_news/11439456.htm
Posted on Wed, Apr. 20, 2005
The Miami Herald
Report cites waste and abuse at TSA
LESLIE MILLER
Associated Press
WASHINGTON - The Transportation Security Administration allowed lavish spending on a $19 million building for its crisis management center, including $3,000 refrigerators and about $500,000 to acquire artwork, silk plants and other items, an inspector general's report said.
A review of the project's expenditures uncovered evidence of suspicious purchases, improper use of government purchase cards, and unethical and possibly illegal activities by federal employees, according to the report released Tuesday by the Homeland Security Department.
Separate government investigations described Tuesday found that airport screeners employed by private companies do a better job detecting dangerous objects than government screeners and that the screeners' performance apparently had not improved since before the 2001 terrorist attacks.
The Homeland Security inspector general examined the project that resulted in the Transportation Security Operations Center in Herndon, Va. It shares a building with the systems operation control division of the Federal Air Marshals Service.
The project, which began with an undeveloped office building, was completed in July 2003. The building includes 55 offices, more than 150 work stations, two watch floors, 12 conference rooms and seven kitchens, the report said.
The inspector general faulted the TSA for breakdowns in management controls that "left the project vulnerable to waste and abuse." Internal reports that policies were being violated were quashed and those who cited problems were admonished to support the project manager, the report said.
The project manager and facility operating officer improperly purchased decorative and miscellaneous items and kept the nature of the purchases hidden by charging them to the construction contract as "equipment and tools," the report found.
The project spent $252,392 on artwork, $29,032 on art consultants, $30,085 on silk plants, and $13,861 on lamps and other items, the report said. The vendor added a 20 percent markup, a credit for future purchases and overpayments that totaled more than $174,000.
While the center was being built, the project manager made decisions "that appear wasteful," the report said. It cited offices and workspaces larger than standards permitted; televisions with cable service in 45 of 55 offices; kitchen appliances that included dishwashers, icemakers and $3,000 refrigerators; and a 4,200-square-foot fitness center with a towel laundry service.
"Our recommendations emphasize the need for TSA to adhere to disciplined decision-making processes to ensure that projects are implemented at acceptable costs and that procurement practices are consistent with statutes, regulations and rules," the report said.
In its classified report on airport screeners, the Government Accountability Office found statistically significant evidence that passenger screeners, who work at five airports under a pilot program, perform better than their federal counterparts at some 450 airports, said Rep. John Mica, R-Fla., chairman of the House aviation subcommittee.
After the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, Congress ordered all commercial airports except five to switch from privately employed screeners to a government work force. The five exceptions - in San Francisco; Tupelo, Miss.; Rochester, N.Y.; Kansas City, Mo.; and Jackson Hole, Wyo. - all have private workers supervised by TSA officials.
Oregon Rep. Peter DeFazio, a senior Democrat on the aviation subcommittee, opposes private screeners and contends the difference between private and government screeners was slight.
In a separate report, the Homeland Security inspector general said screeners were diligent and responsible but not better than they were before the Sept. 11 attacks at detecting fake weapons and bombs undercover agents tried to smuggle aboard planes. Greater use of new technology is needed, the inspector general concluded.
TSA spokesman Mark Hatfield Jr. said the TSA has deployed new baggage screening technology at three airports and plans to spend $30 million to install the new machines at 100 more. The TSA has also installed walkthrough bomb detection machines at airports in 15 cities and plans to install them at the 40 busiest airports.
Finally, the agency expects to start testing backscatter machines, which can find plastic weapons and improvised bombs, sometime later this year, Hatfield said.
ON THE NET
Transportation Security Administration: http://www.tsa.gov
Homeland Security Department: http://www.dhs.gov
Report cites waste and abuse at TSA - National
These are the same people who are confiscating our lighters at airport security checkpoints to improve "National Security". I would like to know if all the security measures that have been implemented have any value, other than the harassment of travelers. Notice, the measures outlined below are for more NEW equipment--not people. Didn't we have metal detectors before this entire "security" fiasco began? The only results I can see from all the security checks are the humiliation of millions of travelers, trashed carry-ons, and a great collection of cuticle scissors and assorted personal harmless items for the airports to auction.
"In a separate report, the Homeland Security inspector general said screeners were diligent and responsible but not better than they were before the Sept. 11 attacks at detecting fake weapons and bombs undercover agents tried to smuggle aboard planes. Greater use of new technology is needed, the inspector general concluded.
TSA spokesman Mark Hatfield Jr. said the TSA has deployed new baggage screening technology at three airports and plans to spend $30 million to install the new machines at 100 more. The TSA has also installed walkthrough bomb detection machines at airports in 15 cities and plans to install them at the 40 busiest airports."
Why do I have the impression that our National Security has become a "Dog and Pony Show"? Do you feel safer? I do not!
Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/breaking_news/11439456.htm
Posted on Wed, Apr. 20, 2005
The Miami Herald
Report cites waste and abuse at TSA
LESLIE MILLER
Associated Press
WASHINGTON - The Transportation Security Administration allowed lavish spending on a $19 million building for its crisis management center, including $3,000 refrigerators and about $500,000 to acquire artwork, silk plants and other items, an inspector general's report said.
A review of the project's expenditures uncovered evidence of suspicious purchases, improper use of government purchase cards, and unethical and possibly illegal activities by federal employees, according to the report released Tuesday by the Homeland Security Department.
Separate government investigations described Tuesday found that airport screeners employed by private companies do a better job detecting dangerous objects than government screeners and that the screeners' performance apparently had not improved since before the 2001 terrorist attacks.
The Homeland Security inspector general examined the project that resulted in the Transportation Security Operations Center in Herndon, Va. It shares a building with the systems operation control division of the Federal Air Marshals Service.
The project, which began with an undeveloped office building, was completed in July 2003. The building includes 55 offices, more than 150 work stations, two watch floors, 12 conference rooms and seven kitchens, the report said.
The inspector general faulted the TSA for breakdowns in management controls that "left the project vulnerable to waste and abuse." Internal reports that policies were being violated were quashed and those who cited problems were admonished to support the project manager, the report said.
The project manager and facility operating officer improperly purchased decorative and miscellaneous items and kept the nature of the purchases hidden by charging them to the construction contract as "equipment and tools," the report found.
The project spent $252,392 on artwork, $29,032 on art consultants, $30,085 on silk plants, and $13,861 on lamps and other items, the report said. The vendor added a 20 percent markup, a credit for future purchases and overpayments that totaled more than $174,000.
While the center was being built, the project manager made decisions "that appear wasteful," the report said. It cited offices and workspaces larger than standards permitted; televisions with cable service in 45 of 55 offices; kitchen appliances that included dishwashers, icemakers and $3,000 refrigerators; and a 4,200-square-foot fitness center with a towel laundry service.
"Our recommendations emphasize the need for TSA to adhere to disciplined decision-making processes to ensure that projects are implemented at acceptable costs and that procurement practices are consistent with statutes, regulations and rules," the report said.
In its classified report on airport screeners, the Government Accountability Office found statistically significant evidence that passenger screeners, who work at five airports under a pilot program, perform better than their federal counterparts at some 450 airports, said Rep. John Mica, R-Fla., chairman of the House aviation subcommittee.
After the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, Congress ordered all commercial airports except five to switch from privately employed screeners to a government work force. The five exceptions - in San Francisco; Tupelo, Miss.; Rochester, N.Y.; Kansas City, Mo.; and Jackson Hole, Wyo. - all have private workers supervised by TSA officials.
Oregon Rep. Peter DeFazio, a senior Democrat on the aviation subcommittee, opposes private screeners and contends the difference between private and government screeners was slight.
In a separate report, the Homeland Security inspector general said screeners were diligent and responsible but not better than they were before the Sept. 11 attacks at detecting fake weapons and bombs undercover agents tried to smuggle aboard planes. Greater use of new technology is needed, the inspector general concluded.
TSA spokesman Mark Hatfield Jr. said the TSA has deployed new baggage screening technology at three airports and plans to spend $30 million to install the new machines at 100 more. The TSA has also installed walkthrough bomb detection machines at airports in 15 cities and plans to install them at the 40 busiest airports.
Finally, the agency expects to start testing backscatter machines, which can find plastic weapons and improvised bombs, sometime later this year, Hatfield said.
ON THE NET
Transportation Security Administration: http://www.tsa.gov
Homeland Security Department: http://www.dhs.gov
Apr 20, 2005
The Happy Bandwagon! :)
I wanted to share a post Michael sent to SFD-USA@yahoogroups.com . More people need to read it! Enjoy!!
Garnet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wed, 13 Apr 2005
"One of the arguments a lot of us are likely to be running into nowadays when
local ban fights pop up is the "Bandwagon" argument.
Soooo..... I've got a new page at my Cantiloper website that rips it apart
and just as I was getting the page together the Pittsburgh Post Gazette
printed a letter I'd written them a week earlier on the subject! Sooo... that
letter's there too!
:>
Michael
P.S. The first link in my sig below will take you to the main PASAN site
where you can click on "The Happy Bandwagon."
Michael J. McFadden
Author of "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains"
http://www.smokersclubinc.com/antibrains.html
http://smokersclubinc.com/
The Happy Bandwagon! :)
I wanted to share a post Michael sent to SFD-USA@yahoogroups.com . More people need to read it! Enjoy!!
Garnet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wed, 13 Apr 2005
"One of the arguments a lot of us are likely to be running into nowadays when
local ban fights pop up is the "Bandwagon" argument.
Soooo..... I've got a new page at my Cantiloper website that rips it apart
and just as I was getting the page together the Pittsburgh Post Gazette
printed a letter I'd written them a week earlier on the subject! Sooo... that
letter's there too!
:>
Michael
P.S. The first link in my sig below will take you to the main PASAN site
where you can click on "The Happy Bandwagon."
Michael J. McFadden
Author of "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains"
http://www.smokersclubinc.com/antibrains.html
http://smokersclubinc.com/
Apr 18, 2005
Columbia students create smoke-free bar night ads - Chicago, IL; McDonald's 50th Anniversary - Des Plaines, IL
I hope the American Lung Association of Metropolitan Chicago and the Cherry Red bar fall flat on their faces...... Also, remember McDonald's are smoke-free.....If you can't smoke, don't go!
Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.suntimes.com/output/lazare/cst-fin-lew18.html
Columbia students create smoke-free bar night ads
April 18, 2005
BY LEWIS LAZARE SUN-TIMES COLUMNIST
The American Lung Association has begun a Chicago-focused, smoke-free bar initiative, and advertising students at Columbia College are doing their part to get the word out about it.
To kick off the anti-smoking crusade, Cherry Red, a bar at 2833 N. Sheffield, will offer a no-smoking night this Thursday.
"We think there may be a big audience for smoke-free bar nights," said Jessica Kwiatkowski, who co-owns Cherry Red with her husband.
Columbia advertising students were given the task of creating an ad to promote this first attempt at getting bars to go smoke-free. They developed a bold, sexually suggestive concept aimed at twenty- and thirtysomethings who are Cherry Red's target demographic. They tested the ad with focus groups just like the big ad agencies do, and concluded the execution worked well enough to put it before the public at large.
"It seems like there is a huge potential for smoke-free bar nights," said Kevin B. Tynan, deputy executive director/marketing for the American Lung Association of Metropolitan Chicago. "We have a half dozen other bars ready to launch similar events."
Want an espresso with that?
Friday's 50th anniversary event at the new supersized McDonald's in River North provided some revealing clues about where the burger behemoth is headed.
The McDonald's Ray Kroc opened 50 years ago in Des Plaines had no indoor seating. Though the facade of the new McDonald's resembles that first restaurant, inside it's a different story, especially on the sprawling second floor where cushy armchairs cry out for customers to sit down and stay a while.
Even more interesting is the gourmet coffee and dessert bar that is the second story's culinary focal point. There customers can buy high-end desserts, Italian gelato and made-to-order espressos.
The McDonald's of the future may not ever resemble a European coffee house. But if this new spot is a reflection of what McDonald's wants to become, the chain looks to be jettisoning as many of its fast-food-joint trappings as it can, as fast as possible.
Columbia students create smoke-free bar night ads - Chicago, IL; McDonald's 50th Anniversary - Des Plaines, IL
I hope the American Lung Association of Metropolitan Chicago and the Cherry Red bar fall flat on their faces...... Also, remember McDonald's are smoke-free.....If you can't smoke, don't go!
Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.suntimes.com/output/lazare/cst-fin-lew18.html
Columbia students create smoke-free bar night ads
April 18, 2005
BY LEWIS LAZARE SUN-TIMES COLUMNIST
The American Lung Association has begun a Chicago-focused, smoke-free bar initiative, and advertising students at Columbia College are doing their part to get the word out about it.
To kick off the anti-smoking crusade, Cherry Red, a bar at 2833 N. Sheffield, will offer a no-smoking night this Thursday.
"We think there may be a big audience for smoke-free bar nights," said Jessica Kwiatkowski, who co-owns Cherry Red with her husband.
Columbia advertising students were given the task of creating an ad to promote this first attempt at getting bars to go smoke-free. They developed a bold, sexually suggestive concept aimed at twenty- and thirtysomethings who are Cherry Red's target demographic. They tested the ad with focus groups just like the big ad agencies do, and concluded the execution worked well enough to put it before the public at large.
"It seems like there is a huge potential for smoke-free bar nights," said Kevin B. Tynan, deputy executive director/marketing for the American Lung Association of Metropolitan Chicago. "We have a half dozen other bars ready to launch similar events."
Want an espresso with that?
Friday's 50th anniversary event at the new supersized McDonald's in River North provided some revealing clues about where the burger behemoth is headed.
The McDonald's Ray Kroc opened 50 years ago in Des Plaines had no indoor seating. Though the facade of the new McDonald's resembles that first restaurant, inside it's a different story, especially on the sprawling second floor where cushy armchairs cry out for customers to sit down and stay a while.
Even more interesting is the gourmet coffee and dessert bar that is the second story's culinary focal point. There customers can buy high-end desserts, Italian gelato and made-to-order espressos.
The McDonald's of the future may not ever resemble a European coffee house. But if this new spot is a reflection of what McDonald's wants to become, the chain looks to be jettisoning as many of its fast-food-joint trappings as it can, as fast as possible.
Apr 18, 2005
Cigarette Lighters Banned From Airplanes
Hi Theresa,
Which airport was it? Did they find the lighters on the second search? The people in those areas are about as courteous as the minimum wage security guards policing along the fronts of "departure" and "arrival" pick ups and drop offs at airports. Couldn't security personnel deduce that you wouldn't have proceeded that far if you hadn't been through security already? That's great, if travelers are penalized for errors by security personnel.
I also have a question now about the danger of lighters in checked luggage. People have to check their pets for travel in the cargo space of aircrafts. I have had to do it. I would think that cargo area pressurization and safety needs to be on a par with airline cabins. If lighters weren't being outlawed on flights, I would have never have considered this question. I cannot understand where the danger is presented in the cargo hold by butane lighters. If the danger is there, then how can people be expected to trust the safety of their four-legged family members to the airlines?
Responses anyone?
Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: Theresa Coscia
To: illinoissmokers@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005
Re: Cigarette Lighters Banned From Airplanes
I actually have a story to share re lighters! On 4/1 I had to fly home on an emergency basis and KNEW that a one-way ticket for travel the same day would raise a red flag. I arrived at the airport with 2 hours to spare prepared for the extra security I believed I'd be subjected to.
As I thought, I was "selected" for additional security, which resulted in a small (tiny) pair of scissors being "voluntarily relinquished" after my purse and luggage were pawed through.
After a beer and a few cigs in the airport SMOKERS bar, I went to the gate, only to be told TSA had failed to punch my boarding pass and I had to go back! With 8 minutes before my flight was to depart, I went through the whole thing again (no one remembered me and I couldn't find the original "searcher"), which on that second go-round included the "wand" search AND two of the four lighters in my purse were confiscated. The guard said that as of July 1st, only ONE would be allowed. (So why did the first guard miss FOUR lighters? Maybe because the first one was a man and the second a woman?)
Obviously there's still some confusion re this new ruling so expect differing opinions when traveling.
Theresa in AZ
Cigarette Lighters Banned From Airplanes
Hi Theresa,
Which airport was it? Did they find the lighters on the second search? The people in those areas are about as courteous as the minimum wage security guards policing along the fronts of "departure" and "arrival" pick ups and drop offs at airports. Couldn't security personnel deduce that you wouldn't have proceeded that far if you hadn't been through security already? That's great, if travelers are penalized for errors by security personnel.
I also have a question now about the danger of lighters in checked luggage. People have to check their pets for travel in the cargo space of aircrafts. I have had to do it. I would think that cargo area pressurization and safety needs to be on a par with airline cabins. If lighters weren't being outlawed on flights, I would have never have considered this question. I cannot understand where the danger is presented in the cargo hold by butane lighters. If the danger is there, then how can people be expected to trust the safety of their four-legged family members to the airlines?
Responses anyone?
Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: Theresa Coscia
To: illinoissmokers@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005
Re: Cigarette Lighters Banned From Airplanes
I actually have a story to share re lighters! On 4/1 I had to fly home on an emergency basis and KNEW that a one-way ticket for travel the same day would raise a red flag. I arrived at the airport with 2 hours to spare prepared for the extra security I believed I'd be subjected to.
As I thought, I was "selected" for additional security, which resulted in a small (tiny) pair of scissors being "voluntarily relinquished" after my purse and luggage were pawed through.
After a beer and a few cigs in the airport SMOKERS bar, I went to the gate, only to be told TSA had failed to punch my boarding pass and I had to go back! With 8 minutes before my flight was to depart, I went through the whole thing again (no one remembered me and I couldn't find the original "searcher"), which on that second go-round included the "wand" search AND two of the four lighters in my purse were confiscated. The guard said that as of July 1st, only ONE would be allowed. (So why did the first guard miss FOUR lighters? Maybe because the first one was a man and the second a woman?)
Obviously there's still some confusion re this new ruling so expect differing opinions when traveling.
Theresa in AZ
Apr 18, 2005
Cigarette Lighters Banned From Airplanes
At least the TSA didn't ban matches...of course, in all practicality, how can they? Also, banning matches would require the passing of new federal legislation. My suspicion is that travelers will begin to smuggle lighters in their luggage, even with the potential danger. Eliminate one problem, and create new ones.....our country is getting good at it......
Kevin Mitchell, president of the Business Travel Coalition, said the ban on lighters amounted to "silliness in the extreme."
"It only adds to consumer confusion and longer lines, and longer lines represent a security threat," Mitchell said.
Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&e=2&u=/ap/20050414/ap_on_re_us/air_travelers_lighters&sid=84439559
U.S. National - AP
Cigarette Lighters Banned From Airplanes
Apr 14, 2005
By LESLIE MILLER, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON - Starting Thursday, air travelers will have to leave their lighters at home. Unlike guns, knives and other dangerous items that a passenger cannot carry aboard but may stow in checked bags, lighters are banned everywhere on a plane.
Lighters to Be Banned at Airports Thursday
The rule change is expected to produce a large number of seizures of lighters even though airports, airlines and the government have been telling travelers for the past 45 days about the impending ban.
"I'm sure we'll have a bunch of them," said George Doughty, executive director of Lehigh Valley International Airport in Allentown, Pa.
TSA screeners already seize a half-million prohibited items every month. They've been more vigilant about finding and confiscating banned items than were the private screeners who worked at airports before the Sept. 11, 2001, hijackings.
Lighters haven't been permitted in checked bags for at least 30 years because they might start fires in cargo holds. Congress passed a bill last year adding lighters to the list of items prohibited in the cabin.
The genesis for the ban was Richard Reid, who tried unsuccessfully to light explosives hidden in his shoes on a trans-Atlantic flight in 2001. He used matches.
The sponsors of the ban, Democratic Sens. Byron Dorgan of North Dakota and Ron Wyden of Oregon, worried that a lighter might have worked.
"This is a commonsense step to protect passengers in the face of a proven threat," Wyden said.
Mark Peterson, a Sioux Falls, S.D., appraiser who was grabbing a smoke outside Reagan Washington National Airport on Wednesday, wondered why it took so long.
"It's been 3 1/2 years since 9/11 and they've finally figured it out," Peterson said.
The ban does not include matches. Passengers still may carry aboard a plane up to four books of safety matches. Not allowed on planes are "strike anywhere" matches, which can be struck using any abrasive surface.
David Stempler, president of the Air Travelers Association, said the lighter ban is long overdue. But he said matches ought to be included, too.
"The problem with the TSA on the matches is the inability to detect them," Stempler said.
Kevin Mitchell, president of the Business Travel Coalition, said the ban on lighters amounted to "silliness in the extreme."
"It only adds to consumer confusion and longer lines, and longer lines represent a security threat," Mitchell said.
Wehns Billen, visiting Washington from Micronesia for a conference, said he was told of the impending ban by his airline. He left his expensive lighter at home.
People can mail prohibited items, take them to their cars or give them to someone who is not traveling. Otherwise, seized items are not returned.
"The whole thing is silly," Billen said. "I wish they'd put a smoking section on the plane."
Billen may be typical of overseas travelers. They are more likely to smoke than U.S. citizens, said Steve van Beek, executive vice president of the Airports Council International, which represents airport officials.
"How are we going to notify every other passenger in the world connecting through and transiting the United States that their lighters are going to be seized?" van Beek said.
___
On the Net:
Transportation Security Administration: http://www.tsa.gov
Cigarette Lighters Banned From Airplanes
At least the TSA didn't ban matches...of course, in all practicality, how can they? Also, banning matches would require the passing of new federal legislation. My suspicion is that travelers will begin to smuggle lighters in their luggage, even with the potential danger. Eliminate one problem, and create new ones.....our country is getting good at it......
Kevin Mitchell, president of the Business Travel Coalition, said the ban on lighters amounted to "silliness in the extreme."
"It only adds to consumer confusion and longer lines, and longer lines represent a security threat," Mitchell said.
Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&e=2&u=/ap/20050414/ap_on_re_us/air_travelers_lighters&sid=84439559
U.S. National - AP
Cigarette Lighters Banned From Airplanes
Apr 14, 2005
By LESLIE MILLER, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON - Starting Thursday, air travelers will have to leave their lighters at home. Unlike guns, knives and other dangerous items that a passenger cannot carry aboard but may stow in checked bags, lighters are banned everywhere on a plane.
Lighters to Be Banned at Airports Thursday
The rule change is expected to produce a large number of seizures of lighters even though airports, airlines and the government have been telling travelers for the past 45 days about the impending ban.
"I'm sure we'll have a bunch of them," said George Doughty, executive director of Lehigh Valley International Airport in Allentown, Pa.
TSA screeners already seize a half-million prohibited items every month. They've been more vigilant about finding and confiscating banned items than were the private screeners who worked at airports before the Sept. 11, 2001, hijackings.
Lighters haven't been permitted in checked bags for at least 30 years because they might start fires in cargo holds. Congress passed a bill last year adding lighters to the list of items prohibited in the cabin.
The genesis for the ban was Richard Reid, who tried unsuccessfully to light explosives hidden in his shoes on a trans-Atlantic flight in 2001. He used matches.
The sponsors of the ban, Democratic Sens. Byron Dorgan of North Dakota and Ron Wyden of Oregon, worried that a lighter might have worked.
"This is a commonsense step to protect passengers in the face of a proven threat," Wyden said.
Mark Peterson, a Sioux Falls, S.D., appraiser who was grabbing a smoke outside Reagan Washington National Airport on Wednesday, wondered why it took so long.
"It's been 3 1/2 years since 9/11 and they've finally figured it out," Peterson said.
The ban does not include matches. Passengers still may carry aboard a plane up to four books of safety matches. Not allowed on planes are "strike anywhere" matches, which can be struck using any abrasive surface.
David Stempler, president of the Air Travelers Association, said the lighter ban is long overdue. But he said matches ought to be included, too.
"The problem with the TSA on the matches is the inability to detect them," Stempler said.
Kevin Mitchell, president of the Business Travel Coalition, said the ban on lighters amounted to "silliness in the extreme."
"It only adds to consumer confusion and longer lines, and longer lines represent a security threat," Mitchell said.
Wehns Billen, visiting Washington from Micronesia for a conference, said he was told of the impending ban by his airline. He left his expensive lighter at home.
People can mail prohibited items, take them to their cars or give them to someone who is not traveling. Otherwise, seized items are not returned.
"The whole thing is silly," Billen said. "I wish they'd put a smoking section on the plane."
Billen may be typical of overseas travelers. They are more likely to smoke than U.S. citizens, said Steve van Beek, executive vice president of the Airports Council International, which represents airport officials.
"How are we going to notify every other passenger in the world connecting through and transiting the United States that their lighters are going to be seized?" van Beek said.
___
On the Net:
Transportation Security Administration: http://www.tsa.gov
Apr 15, 2005
House OKs bill that gives towns power to regulate smokers - Springfield, IL
The Antis succeeded this time. All Illinois communities can initiate smoking bans. Now, the "fun" really begins. I wrote a letter today to Colleen McShane (President of the Illinois Restaurant Association), who has been a staunch supporter against smoking bans, offering help from our pro-smokers groups. I think she is going to need it.
Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/north/chi-0504140286apr14,1,4747244.story?coll=chi-newslocalnorth-hed&ctrack=1&cset=true
Smoking bans may get easier
House OKs bill that gives towns power to regulate smokers
By Christi Parsons and Erika Slife, Tribune staff reporters.
Tribune staff reporter Ray Long contributed to this report
Published April 14, 2005
SPRINGFIELD -- Only a handful of Illinois communities have moved to ban smoking in bars and restaurants and very few have the authority to even try, but Illinois lawmakers are moving to make that easier.
The Illinois House voted 62-48 Wednesday to give most towns and cities the power to clamp down hard on smoking if they wish, a right now reserved for just 20 communities under a legal quirk. The Senate passed a similar measure this week, but the versions will have to be reconciled.
The House action was cheered by anti-smoking advocates, who said it could prove a powerful new tool to allow local authorities to crack down on secondhand smoke.
"This would mean that the people of this state could work with local officials to regulate a serious health hazard," said Mark Peysakhovich, senior director of advocacy for the American Heart Association and the American Stroke Association. "They could make their communities safer for themselves and their families."
Liquor and restaurant interests have lobbied aggressively against the proposals, saying they stand to hurt their businesses. Lawmakers sympathetic to their argument said the enabling blanket smoking ban was too sweeping a remedy for a problem that the free market can solve.
Diners who don't want to inhale secondhand smoke should pressure their favorite restaurants to prohibit smoking, said Rep. Terry Parke (R-Hoffman Estates), who voted present on the bill.
"I don't go to restaurants that have a lot of smoke," Parke said. "This is a choice that I constantly make ... It ought not be a decision foisted upon businesses."
A 1989 state law required the establishment of designated smoking areas in most public places. It forbade local communities from going beyond that unless they had more stringent anti-smoking rules in place when the law went into effect. Only about 20, including Chicago, did.
The Chicago City Council from time to time has talked about imposing a restaurant and, possibly, a bar smoking ban, but never has. Skokie, Wilmette and Evanston have in recent years enacted tough restrictions, with Wilmette going the furthest by banning smoking in nearly all indoor public places.
The no-smoking in public places movement has gained far more steam in outside of Illinois, with the legislature in Montana, home of the fictional Marlboro Country, voting last week to make that state the 10th to ban smoking on a widespread scale.
In other action Wednesday, Chicago Mayor Richard Daley reversed earlier setbacks when the Senate Executive Committee advanced several gun-control measures he is championing that had been bottled up by another Senate panel.
But Daley's initiatives still face tough going in the full Senate, where many Downstate Democrats and Republicans are suspicious of what the National Rifle Association calls "Chicago-style gun control." Among Daley's proposals are bills to require gun shops to get state licenses and to let victims of gun violence sue gun dealers who should have known their sale to an ineligible buyer was illegal.
There were signs of difficulty looming in the House for gun-control groups, too, as that chamber voted to pass a measure that would take away one tool prosecutors now use to shut down illegal gun dealers.
Currently, prosecutors can threaten to seize property from an owner who fails to obey an order to shut down a suspected illegal gun operation on their premises, even if the owner is not involved in it. The NRA backed bill would require that forfeiture action not go forward unless someone had been convicted of illegal gun sales.
An aide to Gov. Rod Blagojevich declared the measure "dead on arrival" if it hits the governor's desk. Still, gun-control groups were stunned by the vote, fearing it indicates there is a more strongly pro-gun sentiment in the House than they had earlier suspected.
In the Senate, lawmakers approved legislation to allow public financing of Supreme Court races, a move that followed a race last year for a southern Illinois seat that saw candidates raise $9 million, a record for such a court race.
Under the measure, candidates could get as much as $1.5 million in public funds for their race, according to the bill's sponsor.
Meanwhile, top legislators emerged from a budget hearing with Blagojevich, saying the governor informed them that the current year's budget is coming up $86 million short and that there may be furloughs of state workers, including some at state prisons, if lawmakers fail to close the gap.
As lawmakers debated those issues, Chicago teachers flooded the Capitol to voice outrage over Blagojevich's refusal to endorse a school funding plan that their union favors.
About 600 members of the Chicago Teachers Union gathered in front of the Statehouse to protest funding disparities among wealthy and poorer districts and to reiterate their support for legislation to overhaul the funding system.
Copyright © 2005, Chicago Tribune
House OKs bill that gives towns power to regulate smokers - Springfield, IL
The Antis succeeded this time. All Illinois communities can initiate smoking bans. Now, the "fun" really begins. I wrote a letter today to Colleen McShane (President of the Illinois Restaurant Association), who has been a staunch supporter against smoking bans, offering help from our pro-smokers groups. I think she is going to need it.
Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/north/chi-0504140286apr14,1,4747244.story?coll=chi-newslocalnorth-hed&ctrack=1&cset=true
Smoking bans may get easier
House OKs bill that gives towns power to regulate smokers
By Christi Parsons and Erika Slife, Tribune staff reporters.
Tribune staff reporter Ray Long contributed to this report
Published April 14, 2005
SPRINGFIELD -- Only a handful of Illinois communities have moved to ban smoking in bars and restaurants and very few have the authority to even try, but Illinois lawmakers are moving to make that easier.
The Illinois House voted 62-48 Wednesday to give most towns and cities the power to clamp down hard on smoking if they wish, a right now reserved for just 20 communities under a legal quirk. The Senate passed a similar measure this week, but the versions will have to be reconciled.
The House action was cheered by anti-smoking advocates, who said it could prove a powerful new tool to allow local authorities to crack down on secondhand smoke.
"This would mean that the people of this state could work with local officials to regulate a serious health hazard," said Mark Peysakhovich, senior director of advocacy for the American Heart Association and the American Stroke Association. "They could make their communities safer for themselves and their families."
Liquor and restaurant interests have lobbied aggressively against the proposals, saying they stand to hurt their businesses. Lawmakers sympathetic to their argument said the enabling blanket smoking ban was too sweeping a remedy for a problem that the free market can solve.
Diners who don't want to inhale secondhand smoke should pressure their favorite restaurants to prohibit smoking, said Rep. Terry Parke (R-Hoffman Estates), who voted present on the bill.
"I don't go to restaurants that have a lot of smoke," Parke said. "This is a choice that I constantly make ... It ought not be a decision foisted upon businesses."
A 1989 state law required the establishment of designated smoking areas in most public places. It forbade local communities from going beyond that unless they had more stringent anti-smoking rules in place when the law went into effect. Only about 20, including Chicago, did.
The Chicago City Council from time to time has talked about imposing a restaurant and, possibly, a bar smoking ban, but never has. Skokie, Wilmette and Evanston have in recent years enacted tough restrictions, with Wilmette going the furthest by banning smoking in nearly all indoor public places.
The no-smoking in public places movement has gained far more steam in outside of Illinois, with the legislature in Montana, home of the fictional Marlboro Country, voting last week to make that state the 10th to ban smoking on a widespread scale.
In other action Wednesday, Chicago Mayor Richard Daley reversed earlier setbacks when the Senate Executive Committee advanced several gun-control measures he is championing that had been bottled up by another Senate panel.
But Daley's initiatives still face tough going in the full Senate, where many Downstate Democrats and Republicans are suspicious of what the National Rifle Association calls "Chicago-style gun control." Among Daley's proposals are bills to require gun shops to get state licenses and to let victims of gun violence sue gun dealers who should have known their sale to an ineligible buyer was illegal.
There were signs of difficulty looming in the House for gun-control groups, too, as that chamber voted to pass a measure that would take away one tool prosecutors now use to shut down illegal gun dealers.
Currently, prosecutors can threaten to seize property from an owner who fails to obey an order to shut down a suspected illegal gun operation on their premises, even if the owner is not involved in it. The NRA backed bill would require that forfeiture action not go forward unless someone had been convicted of illegal gun sales.
An aide to Gov. Rod Blagojevich declared the measure "dead on arrival" if it hits the governor's desk. Still, gun-control groups were stunned by the vote, fearing it indicates there is a more strongly pro-gun sentiment in the House than they had earlier suspected.
In the Senate, lawmakers approved legislation to allow public financing of Supreme Court races, a move that followed a race last year for a southern Illinois seat that saw candidates raise $9 million, a record for such a court race.
Under the measure, candidates could get as much as $1.5 million in public funds for their race, according to the bill's sponsor.
Meanwhile, top legislators emerged from a budget hearing with Blagojevich, saying the governor informed them that the current year's budget is coming up $86 million short and that there may be furloughs of state workers, including some at state prisons, if lawmakers fail to close the gap.
As lawmakers debated those issues, Chicago teachers flooded the Capitol to voice outrage over Blagojevich's refusal to endorse a school funding plan that their union favors.
About 600 members of the Chicago Teachers Union gathered in front of the Statehouse to protest funding disparities among wealthy and poorer districts and to reiterate their support for legislation to overhaul the funding system.
Copyright © 2005, Chicago Tribune
Apr 14, 2005
Sixth-graders at Baldwin School will get a chance to kick butts Wednesday - Quincy, IL
Does the following story remind you of Nazi youth brainwashing techniques? These kids are 11-years-old! Coincidentally, the percentages of college students who smoke is still continuing to climb and has since 1993. It seems as if colleges banning smoking is having a reverse effect on smoking trends. A backlash perhaps?
Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.whig.com/344319912967382.php
Tuesday, April 12, 2005
By Kelly Wilson
Herald-Whig Staff Writer
Sixth-graders at Baldwin School will get a chance to kick butts Wednesday.
As part of a nationwide initiative, Kick Butts Day will give students a chance to stand up to tobacco companies and sign pledges that they won't pick up the smoking habit.
The local celebration is being coordinated by the Cancer Center at Blessing Hospital.
"We want to raise their awareness of not only the adverse health effects of smoking, but also to let them know the big tobacco companies are making huge amounts of money — and they're trying to target youth," said Debbie Lewis, community outreach educator at the Cancer Center.
Sponsored by the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, Kick Butts Day is an annual celebration of youth leadership and activism in the fight against tobacco use.
"Our youth need to stand out, speak up and seize control in the fight against big tobacco companies," Lewis said.
The nearly 500 sixth-graders at Baldwin School will participate in an anti-tobacco poster contest, and also will be asked to put their handprint and signature on a cloth banner.
"They're making a pledge they're not going to buy into big tobacco industries' efforts to get them to be new smokers," Lewis said.
Tobacco companies spend $12.4 billion a year on advertising and marketing, much of it targeted to youth in an effort to attract new smokers. A Massachusetts Department of Health study found that cigarette advertising in magazines with high youth readership actually increased 33 percent in the year after the November 1998 state tobacco settlement, in which the tobacco companies agreed not to market to kids.
"Those people who are selling tobacco are getting rich while the people who are smoking are getting sick," Lewis said. "We want kids to know, you can fight back against Big Tobacco. You don't have to play into their marketing ploys."
Among the most recent marketing tactics, she says, is flavored cigarettes. R.J. Reynolds, for example, has marketed its Camel cigarettes in flavors such as Warm Winter Toffee, Winter Mocha Mint, Kauai Kolada (pineapple and coconut) and Twista Lime.
Every day, more than 4,000 young people under age 18 try smoking for the first time and more than half of them become new regular, daily smokers. One-third of these addicted smokers will die prematurely.
Tobacco use is the leading preventable cause of death in the United States, killing more than 400,000 people each year — more than alcohol, cocaine, crack, heroin, homicide, suicide, car accidents and AIDS combined.
"Lung cancer, throat cancer, mouth cancer, heart disease, stroke and emphysema are just some of the painful, life-threatening diseases linked with smoking," Lewis said. "We have to start educating kids early about the dangers of tobacco use before it's too late."
If information about the health risks doesn't get through to young people, Lewis hopes that the financial toll of tobacco use might get their attention.
"If we talk about dollars and cents, it may trip another trigger to make them think twice before they start the habit," she said.
On the Web:
www.kickbuttsday.org
Contact Staff Writer Kelly Wilson
at kwilson@whig.com or
(217) 221-3391
Sixth-graders at Baldwin School will get a chance to kick butts Wednesday - Quincy, IL
Does the following story remind you of Nazi youth brainwashing techniques? These kids are 11-years-old! Coincidentally, the percentages of college students who smoke is still continuing to climb and has since 1993. It seems as if colleges banning smoking is having a reverse effect on smoking trends. A backlash perhaps?
Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.whig.com/344319912967382.php
Tuesday, April 12, 2005
By Kelly Wilson
Herald-Whig Staff Writer
Sixth-graders at Baldwin School will get a chance to kick butts Wednesday.
As part of a nationwide initiative, Kick Butts Day will give students a chance to stand up to tobacco companies and sign pledges that they won't pick up the smoking habit.
The local celebration is being coordinated by the Cancer Center at Blessing Hospital.
"We want to raise their awareness of not only the adverse health effects of smoking, but also to let them know the big tobacco companies are making huge amounts of money — and they're trying to target youth," said Debbie Lewis, community outreach educator at the Cancer Center.
Sponsored by the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, Kick Butts Day is an annual celebration of youth leadership and activism in the fight against tobacco use.
"Our youth need to stand out, speak up and seize control in the fight against big tobacco companies," Lewis said.
The nearly 500 sixth-graders at Baldwin School will participate in an anti-tobacco poster contest, and also will be asked to put their handprint and signature on a cloth banner.
"They're making a pledge they're not going to buy into big tobacco industries' efforts to get them to be new smokers," Lewis said.
Tobacco companies spend $12.4 billion a year on advertising and marketing, much of it targeted to youth in an effort to attract new smokers. A Massachusetts Department of Health study found that cigarette advertising in magazines with high youth readership actually increased 33 percent in the year after the November 1998 state tobacco settlement, in which the tobacco companies agreed not to market to kids.
"Those people who are selling tobacco are getting rich while the people who are smoking are getting sick," Lewis said. "We want kids to know, you can fight back against Big Tobacco. You don't have to play into their marketing ploys."
Among the most recent marketing tactics, she says, is flavored cigarettes. R.J. Reynolds, for example, has marketed its Camel cigarettes in flavors such as Warm Winter Toffee, Winter Mocha Mint, Kauai Kolada (pineapple and coconut) and Twista Lime.
Every day, more than 4,000 young people under age 18 try smoking for the first time and more than half of them become new regular, daily smokers. One-third of these addicted smokers will die prematurely.
Tobacco use is the leading preventable cause of death in the United States, killing more than 400,000 people each year — more than alcohol, cocaine, crack, heroin, homicide, suicide, car accidents and AIDS combined.
"Lung cancer, throat cancer, mouth cancer, heart disease, stroke and emphysema are just some of the painful, life-threatening diseases linked with smoking," Lewis said. "We have to start educating kids early about the dangers of tobacco use before it's too late."
If information about the health risks doesn't get through to young people, Lewis hopes that the financial toll of tobacco use might get their attention.
"If we talk about dollars and cents, it may trip another trigger to make them think twice before they start the habit," she said.
On the Web:
www.kickbuttsday.org
Contact Staff Writer Kelly Wilson
at kwilson@whig.com or
(217) 221-3391
Apr 14, 2005
Council poised to pass smoking ban - Highland Park, IL
They're back!! Highland Park beat this initiative last year. Here we go again. Colleen McShane, president of the IL Restaurant Association, was also instrumental in fighting the recently defeated smoking ban in Oak Park.
"Colleen McShane... spoke on behalf of seven local restaurant owners who asked her to appear. She said she had asked the city for information about complaints received about smoking and found that none had been filed.
"Is this a solution looking for a problem?" she said.
McShane argued that owners should be permitted to set policies for their customers, especially in a community where about 90 percent of the restaurants have chosen to be smoke-free. To impose the new law will hurt their business."
Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.pioneerlocal.com/cgi-bin/ppo-story/localnews/current/hp/04-14-05-559180.html
Pioneer Press - April 14, 2005
Council poised to pass smoking ban
BY KENNETH L R. PATCHEN
STAFF WRITER
Smoking in all public spaces of Highland Park -- restaurants and office buildings included -- could be banned if the Highland Park City Council approves a proposed ordinance April 25.
Almost two dozen residents testified at Monday night's Highland Park City Council meeting in favor of a ban. A baker's dozen argued against adoption.
"This kind of ban is just too oppressive," said Fred London, of Highland Park, a local resident speaking against smoking prohibition.
Elm Place Middle School students Otis Heyman, Genevra Higginson and Karly Brint testified about the impact cigarette smoke has on their ability to enjoy restaurants or public areas.
Dr. Mark Hill, a surgeon who lives in Highland Park, favors a ban.
"I have seen too many things we can not prevent," Dr. Hill said. He urged the council to protect public health from the impact of cigarette smoke. Disease from smoking is one thing people can choose to prevent, he said.
A proposal for Highland Park to join a small number of Illinois communities that do not allow smoking has been working its way through the city council for many years, said Council Member Steven Mandel. Hearings on the proposal have been held by the Business and Economic Development Commission, which then recommended the city not adopt a ban. The Healthy Highland Park Task Force, however, recommended a ban be adopted.
The city currently bans smoking but allows it in designated areas.
The council listened to testimony from more than 30 people for about 90 minutes Monday and then voted unanimously to consider adoption of a ban at their April 25 council meeting.
"I want a complete smoking ban in public places," said Council member Scott Levenfeld. Jim Kirsch, Michael Brenner, Mayor Michael D. Belsky and Mandel agreed. Only four votes will be needed to pass the ban.
"I'm quite torn on this issue," said Mari Barnes, a business owner and liaison to the Highland Park Chamber of Commerce.
She asked for further consideration to allow late-night smoking in restaurants. Council colleague Larry Silberman also urged consideration of a ban that would permit late night smoking rather than adoption of a total ban that would place businesses in jeopardy.
There was no support for the incremental ban.
"We are the stewards of the community," said Brenner. "Health has to come first."
Resident Paul Rubenstein, a smoker for 27 years who had cancer surgery three years ago, said he could not understand how business owners could argue in favor of smoking given the health risks.
"The fact is, smoking bans increase business," Rubenstein said.
Resident Marliss Levin, who is allergic to smoke, praised Timbers Charhouse Restaurant, 295 Route 41, for becoming smoke-free.
The lingering effect of smoke is dangerous too, said resident Mortimer Gross, even if smoking is allowed only part of the time.
"If you can smell smoke," he said, "you are breathing it."
Kathryn Govas, owner of the Metropolitan Café, 1791 St. Johns Ave., said she had to switch her policies to allow late night smoking in order to compete with other restaurants that allow it.
"Unless this is a state mandate, this is something that should be left to the business owner," she said.
Colleen McShane, president of the Illinois Restaurant Association, spoke on behalf of seven local restaurant owners who asked her to appear. She said she had asked the city for information about complaints received about smoking and found that none had been filed.
"Is this a solution looking for a problem?" she said.
McShane argued that owners should be permitted to set policies for their customers, especially in a community where about 90 percent of the restaurants have chosen to be smoke-free. To impose the new law will hurt their business.
Bluegrass Restaurant owner Jim Lederer said he has a late night clientele who want to smoke.
"We attract people from all over," he said about his Old Deerfield Road location. "There is an opportunity for a late-night menu."
He asked the council not to eliminate the opportunity for some area restaurants to meet the needs of the late-night dining community.
Council poised to pass smoking ban - Highland Park, IL
They're back!! Highland Park beat this initiative last year. Here we go again. Colleen McShane, president of the IL Restaurant Association, was also instrumental in fighting the recently defeated smoking ban in Oak Park.
"Colleen McShane... spoke on behalf of seven local restaurant owners who asked her to appear. She said she had asked the city for information about complaints received about smoking and found that none had been filed.
"Is this a solution looking for a problem?" she said.
McShane argued that owners should be permitted to set policies for their customers, especially in a community where about 90 percent of the restaurants have chosen to be smoke-free. To impose the new law will hurt their business."
Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.pioneerlocal.com/cgi-bin/ppo-story/localnews/current/hp/04-14-05-559180.html
Pioneer Press - April 14, 2005
Council poised to pass smoking ban
BY KENNETH L R. PATCHEN
STAFF WRITER
Smoking in all public spaces of Highland Park -- restaurants and office buildings included -- could be banned if the Highland Park City Council approves a proposed ordinance April 25.
Almost two dozen residents testified at Monday night's Highland Park City Council meeting in favor of a ban. A baker's dozen argued against adoption.
"This kind of ban is just too oppressive," said Fred London, of Highland Park, a local resident speaking against smoking prohibition.
Elm Place Middle School students Otis Heyman, Genevra Higginson and Karly Brint testified about the impact cigarette smoke has on their ability to enjoy restaurants or public areas.
Dr. Mark Hill, a surgeon who lives in Highland Park, favors a ban.
"I have seen too many things we can not prevent," Dr. Hill said. He urged the council to protect public health from the impact of cigarette smoke. Disease from smoking is one thing people can choose to prevent, he said.
A proposal for Highland Park to join a small number of Illinois communities that do not allow smoking has been working its way through the city council for many years, said Council Member Steven Mandel. Hearings on the proposal have been held by the Business and Economic Development Commission, which then recommended the city not adopt a ban. The Healthy Highland Park Task Force, however, recommended a ban be adopted.
The city currently bans smoking but allows it in designated areas.
The council listened to testimony from more than 30 people for about 90 minutes Monday and then voted unanimously to consider adoption of a ban at their April 25 council meeting.
"I want a complete smoking ban in public places," said Council member Scott Levenfeld. Jim Kirsch, Michael Brenner, Mayor Michael D. Belsky and Mandel agreed. Only four votes will be needed to pass the ban.
"I'm quite torn on this issue," said Mari Barnes, a business owner and liaison to the Highland Park Chamber of Commerce.
She asked for further consideration to allow late-night smoking in restaurants. Council colleague Larry Silberman also urged consideration of a ban that would permit late night smoking rather than adoption of a total ban that would place businesses in jeopardy.
There was no support for the incremental ban.
"We are the stewards of the community," said Brenner. "Health has to come first."
Resident Paul Rubenstein, a smoker for 27 years who had cancer surgery three years ago, said he could not understand how business owners could argue in favor of smoking given the health risks.
"The fact is, smoking bans increase business," Rubenstein said.
Resident Marliss Levin, who is allergic to smoke, praised Timbers Charhouse Restaurant, 295 Route 41, for becoming smoke-free.
The lingering effect of smoke is dangerous too, said resident Mortimer Gross, even if smoking is allowed only part of the time.
"If you can smell smoke," he said, "you are breathing it."
Kathryn Govas, owner of the Metropolitan Café, 1791 St. Johns Ave., said she had to switch her policies to allow late night smoking in order to compete with other restaurants that allow it.
"Unless this is a state mandate, this is something that should be left to the business owner," she said.
Colleen McShane, president of the Illinois Restaurant Association, spoke on behalf of seven local restaurant owners who asked her to appear. She said she had asked the city for information about complaints received about smoking and found that none had been filed.
"Is this a solution looking for a problem?" she said.
McShane argued that owners should be permitted to set policies for their customers, especially in a community where about 90 percent of the restaurants have chosen to be smoke-free. To impose the new law will hurt their business.
Bluegrass Restaurant owner Jim Lederer said he has a late night clientele who want to smoke.
"We attract people from all over," he said about his Old Deerfield Road location. "There is an opportunity for a late-night menu."
He asked the council not to eliminate the opportunity for some area restaurants to meet the needs of the late-night dining community.
Apr 11, 2005
Too Much Smoke Too Little Coverage
It seems the Antis and their sympathizers are trying to blame smoking for Peter Jennings' illness. It is very sad that he has developed lung cancer, but aren't the Antis contradicting everything they have said about how quitting smoking will eliminate any additional risk of cancer? I cannot be the only person who has noticed their faulty logic. This Anti attempt to use Peter Jennings as an example to expound on the dangers of smoking is really reprehensible.
Andrew Tyndall's condescending attitude is also completely infuriating. All my life I have believed news was supposed to inform the public, not preach life styles. It hasn't succeeded in winning "the drug wars" or changed smokers' attitudes. News coverage will not change the public's eating habits either.
Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA516402.html?display=News&referral=SUPP
News
Too Much Smoke Too Little Coverage
By Andrew Tyndall -- Broadcasting & Cable, 4/11/2005
Though the industry was stunned to learn of Peter Jennings' lung cancer, in recent years network news has turned down the heat on the health dangers of tobacco
When Peter Jennings announced last week that he was suffering from lung cancer and confessed his past cigarette habit, the irony was unavoidable. Just last fall, the ABC News anchorman had hosted Untold Stories of Betrayal and Neglect, an hour-long prime time special on “the power of Big Tobacco and the failure of the Congress to do anything about it.”
Jennings introduced the special by asserting that the health dangers of cigarette smoking were an ongoing concern at ABC: “We have kept a Tobacco File at ABC News for more than 20 years.” In fact, the special was mostly a retrospective of the tobacco wars of the mid 1990s—the regulatory disputes and the anti-industry lawsuits. Jennings conceded that the urgency had gone out of the story: “By the late '90s, many people thought the government and the tobacco industry and the public-health community had finally made real progress in the campaign against smoking.”
Sadly, he reflected that relaxed vigilance in his personal life last week, during the raspy message he recorded to end World News Tonight with substitute anchor Elizabeth Vargas, when he acknowledged, “Yes, I was a smoker until about 20 years ago. And I was weak and I smoked over 9/11.”
This ebbing sense of crisis about the scourge of cigarettes has also been evident in the agenda of the networks' nightly newscasts—not just Jennings' World News Tonight but at CBS and NBC as well. Over the past six years, cigarette coverage has plummeted to less than one-fifth of the volume it received during the heat of the tobacco wars in the mid '90s.
Back then, the clash between Big Tobacco and Big Media was epic. Most vivid was the case of 60 Minutes' pulling its story on nicotine manipulation by Brown & Williamson. It's so memorable because CBS' suppressed source, Jeffrey Wigand, went on to be the central figure of the movie The Insider.
Less well remembered is ABC's short-lived prime time magazine Day One. Reporter John Martin alleged that cigarettes are “high-technology nicotine-delivery devices” spiked with extra nicotine to keep smokers addicted. He explained that “the companies say the nicotine is a natural part of the extract used for flavoring, not intended to addict smokers.” Philip Morris sued ABC News for libel as a result of the report. (The lawsuit was settled, with a retraction by ABC of some details, a limited apology, a payment of legal costs and no damages.)
During the six-year period 1993-1998, the three networks' nightly newscasts averaged an annual total of almost four hours on tobacco-related reporting: the famous congressional hearings where executive after Big Tobacco executive swore that nicotine was not addictive; the debate over whether the FDA could regulate cigarettes; the state-level lawsuits to set up anti–youth-smoking advertising campaigns.
Of the two networks whose journalists came under legal fire, CBS (524 minutes over the six years vs. ABC's 459 and NBC's 412) followed the story most closely.
At the time, the increased interest in tobacco was astonishing since it marked the substitution of legal drugs for illegal ones in the headlines. The previous five years had seen saturation coverage of President George H. W. Bush's War on Drugs, with the Medellin cocaine cartel, not the Marlboro Man, occupying the position of Public Enemy No. 1.
Since 1999, however, all three networks' news operations have lost interest in the beat, each averaging just 15 minutes each year on tobacco—scarcely more newsworthy than alcohol. And just as tobacco supplanted cocaine in the news hierarchy of threats to the nation's health, so now the focus is on Big Food. Stories on obesity, nutrition, fast food, bioengineered crops and so on receive four times the attention that cigarettes attract.
The news agenda has followed the same fads as Hollywood—from drugs to cigs to gluttony, from Scarface to The Insider to Supersize Me. Unfortunately, the cancer-causing properties of tobacco failed to mimic the shifting emphases of network news coverage.
Even though Jennings swore off cigarettes at the time ABC News began compiling its Tobacco File two decades ago, he now finds himself grappling with an illness that will strike tens of thousands of smokers this year and many more in the years to come. We are sorry that, under duress, he slipped a few years ago, and we wish him the best for a full recovery.
HOT TOPICS
How broadcast networks' average annual coverage (in minutes) has changed over the years
1988-1992 Total ABC CBS NBC
Illegal drugs 478 147 148 183
Tobacco 68 27 18 24
Alcohol 56 19 17 20
Food 77 32 27 18
1993-1998 Total ABC CBS NBC
Illegal drugs 165 55 56 54
Tobacco 232 76 87 69
Alcohol 45 14 12 20
Food 191 56 80 55
1999-2004 Total ABC CBS NBC
Illegal drugs 78 30 31 18
Tobacco 42 16 16 10
Alcohol 28 9 9 9
Food 174 56 65 54
-----------------------------------------------------
Apr 11, 2005
Re: Too Much Smoke Too Little Coverage
Hi Garnet! :)
I agree with your feelings about Tyndall's attitude: the way he ends by being "sorry" about Jenning's "slipping under duress" during 9/11 was pretty cheap. Picture if Jennings had had heart problems 10 years ago after a lifetime of eating Big Macs and then switched over to a healthy vegan bean sprout diet for years. Then during 9/11 he ate cheesesteaks at the trade center site reporting. Then he now has another massive heart attack: would Tyndall have editorialized about not only his past diet but about how it was unfortunate that Jennings "slipped" during the world trade center?
A note on the time thing though: the correlation of lung cancer with smoking has a 20 to 30 year or so time lag.
Smokers are supposed to have roughly 15 times the chance of nons of getting lung cancer: that's about 5 to 10% (we're talking pack or two a day here). If they quit it's supposed to go down to half that level in 10 years and then half again in 20 years.... which would leave them at about triple the risk of nons or about 1.5% {note: the figures I'm giving here are NOT accurate enough to be quoted anywhere... I'm pulling them out of memory research of five or more years ago.}
Was Jenning's lung cancer caused by smoking? If my figures above are roughly correct then you'd have to say that there's about a 60 to 70% chance it was and a 30 to 40% chance it wasn't. In any event: Jenning's "slip" on 9/11 had NOTHING to do with his lung cancer 3 1/2 years later.
- Michael
Michael J. McFadden
Author of "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains"
http://www.smokersclubinc.com/antibrains.html
http://smokersclubinc.com
Too Much Smoke Too Little Coverage
It seems the Antis and their sympathizers are trying to blame smoking for Peter Jennings' illness. It is very sad that he has developed lung cancer, but aren't the Antis contradicting everything they have said about how quitting smoking will eliminate any additional risk of cancer? I cannot be the only person who has noticed their faulty logic. This Anti attempt to use Peter Jennings as an example to expound on the dangers of smoking is really reprehensible.
Andrew Tyndall's condescending attitude is also completely infuriating. All my life I have believed news was supposed to inform the public, not preach life styles. It hasn't succeeded in winning "the drug wars" or changed smokers' attitudes. News coverage will not change the public's eating habits either.
Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA516402.html?display=News&referral=SUPP
News
Too Much Smoke Too Little Coverage
By Andrew Tyndall -- Broadcasting & Cable, 4/11/2005
Though the industry was stunned to learn of Peter Jennings' lung cancer, in recent years network news has turned down the heat on the health dangers of tobacco
When Peter Jennings announced last week that he was suffering from lung cancer and confessed his past cigarette habit, the irony was unavoidable. Just last fall, the ABC News anchorman had hosted Untold Stories of Betrayal and Neglect, an hour-long prime time special on “the power of Big Tobacco and the failure of the Congress to do anything about it.”
Jennings introduced the special by asserting that the health dangers of cigarette smoking were an ongoing concern at ABC: “We have kept a Tobacco File at ABC News for more than 20 years.” In fact, the special was mostly a retrospective of the tobacco wars of the mid 1990s—the regulatory disputes and the anti-industry lawsuits. Jennings conceded that the urgency had gone out of the story: “By the late '90s, many people thought the government and the tobacco industry and the public-health community had finally made real progress in the campaign against smoking.”
Sadly, he reflected that relaxed vigilance in his personal life last week, during the raspy message he recorded to end World News Tonight with substitute anchor Elizabeth Vargas, when he acknowledged, “Yes, I was a smoker until about 20 years ago. And I was weak and I smoked over 9/11.”
This ebbing sense of crisis about the scourge of cigarettes has also been evident in the agenda of the networks' nightly newscasts—not just Jennings' World News Tonight but at CBS and NBC as well. Over the past six years, cigarette coverage has plummeted to less than one-fifth of the volume it received during the heat of the tobacco wars in the mid '90s.
Back then, the clash between Big Tobacco and Big Media was epic. Most vivid was the case of 60 Minutes' pulling its story on nicotine manipulation by Brown & Williamson. It's so memorable because CBS' suppressed source, Jeffrey Wigand, went on to be the central figure of the movie The Insider.
Less well remembered is ABC's short-lived prime time magazine Day One. Reporter John Martin alleged that cigarettes are “high-technology nicotine-delivery devices” spiked with extra nicotine to keep smokers addicted. He explained that “the companies say the nicotine is a natural part of the extract used for flavoring, not intended to addict smokers.” Philip Morris sued ABC News for libel as a result of the report. (The lawsuit was settled, with a retraction by ABC of some details, a limited apology, a payment of legal costs and no damages.)
During the six-year period 1993-1998, the three networks' nightly newscasts averaged an annual total of almost four hours on tobacco-related reporting: the famous congressional hearings where executive after Big Tobacco executive swore that nicotine was not addictive; the debate over whether the FDA could regulate cigarettes; the state-level lawsuits to set up anti–youth-smoking advertising campaigns.
Of the two networks whose journalists came under legal fire, CBS (524 minutes over the six years vs. ABC's 459 and NBC's 412) followed the story most closely.
At the time, the increased interest in tobacco was astonishing since it marked the substitution of legal drugs for illegal ones in the headlines. The previous five years had seen saturation coverage of President George H. W. Bush's War on Drugs, with the Medellin cocaine cartel, not the Marlboro Man, occupying the position of Public Enemy No. 1.
Since 1999, however, all three networks' news operations have lost interest in the beat, each averaging just 15 minutes each year on tobacco—scarcely more newsworthy than alcohol. And just as tobacco supplanted cocaine in the news hierarchy of threats to the nation's health, so now the focus is on Big Food. Stories on obesity, nutrition, fast food, bioengineered crops and so on receive four times the attention that cigarettes attract.
The news agenda has followed the same fads as Hollywood—from drugs to cigs to gluttony, from Scarface to The Insider to Supersize Me. Unfortunately, the cancer-causing properties of tobacco failed to mimic the shifting emphases of network news coverage.
Even though Jennings swore off cigarettes at the time ABC News began compiling its Tobacco File two decades ago, he now finds himself grappling with an illness that will strike tens of thousands of smokers this year and many more in the years to come. We are sorry that, under duress, he slipped a few years ago, and we wish him the best for a full recovery.
HOT TOPICS
How broadcast networks' average annual coverage (in minutes) has changed over the years
1988-1992 Total ABC CBS NBC
Illegal drugs 478 147 148 183
Tobacco 68 27 18 24
Alcohol 56 19 17 20
Food 77 32 27 18
1993-1998 Total ABC CBS NBC
Illegal drugs 165 55 56 54
Tobacco 232 76 87 69
Alcohol 45 14 12 20
Food 191 56 80 55
1999-2004 Total ABC CBS NBC
Illegal drugs 78 30 31 18
Tobacco 42 16 16 10
Alcohol 28 9 9 9
Food 174 56 65 54
-----------------------------------------------------
Apr 11, 2005
Re: Too Much Smoke Too Little Coverage
Hi Garnet! :)
I agree with your feelings about Tyndall's attitude: the way he ends by being "sorry" about Jenning's "slipping under duress" during 9/11 was pretty cheap. Picture if Jennings had had heart problems 10 years ago after a lifetime of eating Big Macs and then switched over to a healthy vegan bean sprout diet for years. Then during 9/11 he ate cheesesteaks at the trade center site reporting. Then he now has another massive heart attack: would Tyndall have editorialized about not only his past diet but about how it was unfortunate that Jennings "slipped" during the world trade center?
A note on the time thing though: the correlation of lung cancer with smoking has a 20 to 30 year or so time lag.
Smokers are supposed to have roughly 15 times the chance of nons of getting lung cancer: that's about 5 to 10% (we're talking pack or two a day here). If they quit it's supposed to go down to half that level in 10 years and then half again in 20 years.... which would leave them at about triple the risk of nons or about 1.5% {note: the figures I'm giving here are NOT accurate enough to be quoted anywhere... I'm pulling them out of memory research of five or more years ago.}
Was Jenning's lung cancer caused by smoking? If my figures above are roughly correct then you'd have to say that there's about a 60 to 70% chance it was and a 30 to 40% chance it wasn't. In any event: Jenning's "slip" on 9/11 had NOTHING to do with his lung cancer 3 1/2 years later.
- Michael
Michael J. McFadden
Author of "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains"
http://www.smokersclubinc.com/antibrains.html
http://smokersclubinc.com
Apr 11, 2005
The Anti-Smoking Lobby Just Doesn't Get It
Here is an editorial I found over the weekend. It was written in 1998, but still reads as well and rings as true as it did when written. The contents also help to remind us of how the contributions of Rob Reiner, Al Gore, Bill Clinton, the Attorneys General and Big Tobacco's lead to the MSA settlement and current smoking bans. It doesn't hurt to refresh our memories of how today's discriminations against smokers have developed.
".......And then look at what the Anti-Smoking Lobby has not achieved. It has done nothing to reduce the number of people who choose to smoke in our society. In fact the numbers are increasing. Meanwhile, the lessons learned during the Prohibition Era ring faintly in the distance........."
".......But if you think that the Anti-Smoking Lobby will reduce smoking in America, look at the War on Drugs, and remember the Prohibition Era.
Demand fuels supply, not the other way around."
Garnet Dawn
http://www.aegil.com/smoking.htmlanalogous
The Anti-Smoking Lobby Just Doesn't Get It
Here is an editorial I found over the weekend. It was written in 1998, but still reads as well and rings as true as it did when written. The contents also help to remind us of how the contributions of Rob Reiner, Al Gore, Bill Clinton, the Attorneys General and Big Tobacco's lead to the MSA settlement and current smoking bans. It doesn't hurt to refresh our memories of how today's discriminations against smokers have developed.
".......And then look at what the Anti-Smoking Lobby has not achieved. It has done nothing to reduce the number of people who choose to smoke in our society. In fact the numbers are increasing. Meanwhile, the lessons learned during the Prohibition Era ring faintly in the distance........."
".......But if you think that the Anti-Smoking Lobby will reduce smoking in America, look at the War on Drugs, and remember the Prohibition Era.
Demand fuels supply, not the other way around."
Garnet Dawn
http://www.aegil.com/smoking.htmlanalogous
Apr 6, 2005
Smoking ban debated - Peoria, IL
Here it is finally, the real reason behind House Bill 672 and Senate Bill 254. So nice of antis to finally clarify their real goal, along with the same old rhetoric about how smoking bans do not hurt small businesses. From the feedback I have received from my mailings to our state legislature, our lawmakers are under the impression that these bill have no real relation to smoking bans, they are only intended to give local governments increased home rule choice.
"Some states, such as California, ban smoking statewide. Bash said statewide bans only occurred after a period where local governing bodies could ban smoking first."
Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.pjstar.com/stories/040605/TRI_B628RF19.014.shtml
Smoking ban debated
Illinois lawmakers expected to vote on bill for municipalities before April 15
Wednesday, April 6, 2005
BY TIM McKENZIE
OF THE JOURNAL STAR
PEORIA - Local anti-smoking advocates hope the Legislature will allow municipalities to choose for themselves if they want to ban smoking in bars and restaurants - an option cities, including Peoria, do not have.
"The Illinois Clean Indoor Air Act was passed in 1989, and it has become a very weak bill," said Patti Bash, a member of the Peoria County Tobacco Coalition who spoke with the Journal Star's editorial board on Tuesday.
The act limits smoking in government buildings and workplaces, but it also prevents local governments from setting more stringent rules on bars, restaurants and bowling alleys.
Lawmakers are expected to vote on House Bill 672 and Senate Bill 254 before April 15. Those bills would amend the Indoor Air Act to allow all Illinois communities to decide whether to ban smoking in public places. A similar bill failed by one vote last year.
A lot of people fear the law would require all cities to ban smoking, but that is not the case, said Dr. Jill Carnahan, a resident at Methodist Medical Center. "All it is doing is allowing us to have a choice."
One argument against a city ban is that it could send patrons to neighboring communities where smoking is permitted. But where smoking bans have been imposed, profits from the bar and restaurant business have remained steady or grown, said Carrie Otto, a youth advocate for Ignite Illinois, an anti-tobacco group.
Nationwide, about 1,700 cities have bans on smoking in bars and restaurants. About 20 cities in Illinois have more stringent rules on smoking because they are home-rule communities that had the smoking rules in place before the Indoor Air Act was passed.
Some states, such as California, ban smoking statewide. Bash said statewide bans only occurred after a period where local governing bodies could ban smoking first.
Individual businesses already can choose to restrict or ban smoking, and many Peoria-area restaurants have done so.
Smoking ban debated - Peoria, IL
Here it is finally, the real reason behind House Bill 672 and Senate Bill 254. So nice of antis to finally clarify their real goal, along with the same old rhetoric about how smoking bans do not hurt small businesses. From the feedback I have received from my mailings to our state legislature, our lawmakers are under the impression that these bill have no real relation to smoking bans, they are only intended to give local governments increased home rule choice.
"Some states, such as California, ban smoking statewide. Bash said statewide bans only occurred after a period where local governing bodies could ban smoking first."
Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.pjstar.com/stories/040605/TRI_B628RF19.014.shtml
Smoking ban debated
Illinois lawmakers expected to vote on bill for municipalities before April 15
Wednesday, April 6, 2005
BY TIM McKENZIE
OF THE JOURNAL STAR
PEORIA - Local anti-smoking advocates hope the Legislature will allow municipalities to choose for themselves if they want to ban smoking in bars and restaurants - an option cities, including Peoria, do not have.
"The Illinois Clean Indoor Air Act was passed in 1989, and it has become a very weak bill," said Patti Bash, a member of the Peoria County Tobacco Coalition who spoke with the Journal Star's editorial board on Tuesday.
The act limits smoking in government buildings and workplaces, but it also prevents local governments from setting more stringent rules on bars, restaurants and bowling alleys.
Lawmakers are expected to vote on House Bill 672 and Senate Bill 254 before April 15. Those bills would amend the Indoor Air Act to allow all Illinois communities to decide whether to ban smoking in public places. A similar bill failed by one vote last year.
A lot of people fear the law would require all cities to ban smoking, but that is not the case, said Dr. Jill Carnahan, a resident at Methodist Medical Center. "All it is doing is allowing us to have a choice."
One argument against a city ban is that it could send patrons to neighboring communities where smoking is permitted. But where smoking bans have been imposed, profits from the bar and restaurant business have remained steady or grown, said Carrie Otto, a youth advocate for Ignite Illinois, an anti-tobacco group.
Nationwide, about 1,700 cities have bans on smoking in bars and restaurants. About 20 cities in Illinois have more stringent rules on smoking because they are home-rule communities that had the smoking rules in place before the Indoor Air Act was passed.
Some states, such as California, ban smoking statewide. Bash said statewide bans only occurred after a period where local governing bodies could ban smoking first.
Individual businesses already can choose to restrict or ban smoking, and many Peoria-area restaurants have done so.
Apr 5, 2005
Website Info EZSmokes.biz
Here's one I just got...
----- Original Message -----
From: EZSmokes.biz
Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2005 5:36 PM
Subject: Website Info EZSmokes.biz
"To All Our Customers:
EZSmokes.biz is still shipping orders! We are taking phone orders and email orders at this time. We will no longer have a presence on the internet though and we can no longer accept credit card payments. The preferred method of payment is a money order from the post office or Western Union.
The state attorney generals and ATF at this point have been successful in getting Visa, MasterCard, AmericanExpress, and Discover's cooperation in stopping internet credit card payment for cigarettes. This not only applies to our company but any internet cigarette store.
We are trying to resolve the situation but it looks like the future of internet cigarette sales will be money order payments. As consumers you need to contact your state Senators and House Representatives and voice your displeasure. Cigarette smokers are quickly becoming second class citizens with no representation in our government.
Sorry for the short comings of our government. We hope to continue to serve you as we fight this attempt to fight free trade over the internet. Our phone order volume has been high so if at all possible email us your order and we will email you back a confirmation order which you can send in with your money order.
Thanks for your support and continued patronage.
EZSmokes.biz
PO Box 398
Irving, NY 14081
Toll Free 1-866-766-5370
Store Hours: M-Th 8AM to 5PM Friday 8AM to 3PM and Sunday 9AM to 3PM"
Website Info EZSmokes.biz
Here's one I just got...
----- Original Message -----
From: EZSmokes.biz
Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2005 5:36 PM
Subject: Website Info EZSmokes.biz
"To All Our Customers:
EZSmokes.biz is still shipping orders! We are taking phone orders and email orders at this time. We will no longer have a presence on the internet though and we can no longer accept credit card payments. The preferred method of payment is a money order from the post office or Western Union.
The state attorney generals and ATF at this point have been successful in getting Visa, MasterCard, AmericanExpress, and Discover's cooperation in stopping internet credit card payment for cigarettes. This not only applies to our company but any internet cigarette store.
We are trying to resolve the situation but it looks like the future of internet cigarette sales will be money order payments. As consumers you need to contact your state Senators and House Representatives and voice your displeasure. Cigarette smokers are quickly becoming second class citizens with no representation in our government.
Sorry for the short comings of our government. We hope to continue to serve you as we fight this attempt to fight free trade over the internet. Our phone order volume has been high so if at all possible email us your order and we will email you back a confirmation order which you can send in with your money order.
Thanks for your support and continued patronage.
EZSmokes.biz
PO Box 398
Irving, NY 14081
Toll Free 1-866-766-5370
Store Hours: M-Th 8AM to 5PM Friday 8AM to 3PM and Sunday 9AM to 3PM"
Apr 5, 2005
Internet Sales Tax and Cigarettes
Please use the link below to the Smokers Club Internet Sales Tax and Cigarettes page to learn the background and current status on the recent abolition of credit card usage and internet ordering for tobacco purchases from remote sources. This prohibition is illegal and, in fact, these tactics technically qualify our "Democratic Republic" as a Fascism.
Forty-two of our greedy State Attorneys General have completely ignored the basic premises of our government and Constitution, in this most recent manipulation of power and law, to single out and persecute both the suppliers and consumers of tobacco products.
Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Credit cards don't have a press release out yet because they don't know how to tell their customers that some of them are being discriminated against. They should be worried... this is going to lead to a lot of people switching over to bank debit cards and the loss of a lot of credit card interest money.
http://www.smokersclubinc.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=893
where you can find all the history, who started this mess and why, etc..."
Internet Sales Tax and Cigarettes
Please use the link below to the Smokers Club Internet Sales Tax and Cigarettes page to learn the background and current status on the recent abolition of credit card usage and internet ordering for tobacco purchases from remote sources. This prohibition is illegal and, in fact, these tactics technically qualify our "Democratic Republic" as a Fascism.
Forty-two of our greedy State Attorneys General have completely ignored the basic premises of our government and Constitution, in this most recent manipulation of power and law, to single out and persecute both the suppliers and consumers of tobacco products.
Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Credit cards don't have a press release out yet because they don't know how to tell their customers that some of them are being discriminated against. They should be worried... this is going to lead to a lot of people switching over to bank debit cards and the loss of a lot of credit card interest money.
http://www.smokersclubinc.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=893
where you can find all the history, who started this mess and why, etc..."
Apr 5, 2005
eSmokes Alert
I'm forwarding an e-mail I received today. It's just a heads-up. Incidentally, my cigarette source has deleted their website in the past couple of weeks. Maybe, once the Antis and our government are finished with bankrupting all the small businesses in this country they will turn their attention to something more constructive. I doubt it though........
Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't really understand how this can happen. I've lived all over the world
and this has got to be the most repressive country ever!
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Chris at eSmokes"
> To:
> Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2005 9:10 AM
> Subject: eSmokes Alert
>
>> Dear Valued Customer,
>>
>> We here at eSmokes received your concerns and right now we have to give
> everyone a refund. Currently we cannot accept credit cards and we are
> working on a site update to incorporate other methods of payment. As soon as
> we accomplish this we will let you know. Right now we are issuing refunds,
> so if you have a standing order it will be refunded shortly.
>> Thank you for understanding.
>>
>>
>> -eSmokes Customer Service Department
eSmokes Alert
I'm forwarding an e-mail I received today. It's just a heads-up. Incidentally, my cigarette source has deleted their website in the past couple of weeks. Maybe, once the Antis and our government are finished with bankrupting all the small businesses in this country they will turn their attention to something more constructive. I doubt it though........
Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't really understand how this can happen. I've lived all over the world
and this has got to be the most repressive country ever!
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Chris at eSmokes"
> To:
> Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2005 9:10 AM
> Subject: eSmokes Alert
>
>> Dear Valued Customer,
>>
>> We here at eSmokes received your concerns and right now we have to give
> everyone a refund. Currently we cannot accept credit cards and we are
> working on a site update to incorporate other methods of payment. As soon as
> we accomplish this we will let you know. Right now we are issuing refunds,
> so if you have a standing order it will be refunded shortly.
>> Thank you for understanding.
>>
>>
>> -eSmokes Customer Service Department
Apr 5, 2005
A smoking ban-the first weekend - Minnesota
Dear Sue,
Your diary on the results from the smoking ban is an excellent idea. It's such a shame and you must be exhausted, in addition to being very angry. This is something that has needed documenting for all of us to use in the future. For once, an honest report on the real responses by customers to smoking bans!
The business losses you are describing in your digest, are the first time I have been able to read the actual day-to-day results from a smoking ban. It's such a travesty for you to have to endure this. Best of luck.
Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2005
From: S1U2E3@aol.com
minnesotasmokers@yahoogroups.com
Subject: A smoking ban-the first weekend
Hello all,
We have made it through the first weekend of the smoking ban. Sales at my
bar were down each day by about 25% from the week before. Our Sunday food and
liquor sales were reduced by 50%. One VFW was down 65%.
Customer reactions have been consistent. Most customers, smokers or not, are
angry. Some stayed for shorter periods of time, some refused to patronize
Minneapolis, some stayed home. My smoking customers are not buying a beer when
they are outside having a smoke......
Being so close to the University my bar has customers visiting from out of
state. These customers visiting this weekend stayed for one beer and left,
they did not order food or another round of drinks. They informed us they will
not be back, ever. Even some of my "regulars" are now informing me they will
be going to a nearby county to drink as they become someone else's "regular"
customer.
I spent some time in the small bars in NE Minneapolis this weekend, two bars
had zero customers. One of the larger NE bars had many people outside
smoking, angry customers who said they will not be back and would not stay as long
as usual, keep in mind the weather was nice as they stood outside and smoked.
Bar owners around town compared notes...one bar in St. Paul was empty on
Thursday night but after receiving a waiver on Friday noticed customer counts
were well above average when smoking was allowed again. A bar in Anoka County (a
county that just voted no ban) was crowed with transplants (customers and
staff) from Ramsey County businesses who could no longer allow smoking.
Versions of this were heard over and over again.
A small group of the smoke haters feel they need to visit my bar or send me
an anonymous letters, telling me how stupid I am. One drove all the way from
Burnsville to gloat and antagonize my customers. These gullible and
uninformed people usually list inaccurate facts and are terrified SHS will kill them
if they are exposed to a whiff of smoke. They do not realize SHS levels in
bars with ventilation test at 150 times BELOW the OSHA safety limits. They do
not understand the concept of private property rights and personal freedoms but
they do exercise their freedom of speech rights. They are lucky some of my
customers did not beat them up, my staff is well trained.
The city of Minneapolis has added insult to injury this weekend. In
anticipation of the upcoming riots this weekend when the University of Minnesota
Men's Hockey team play in the Frozen Four, they have capped all parking meters so
no cars will be allowed to park on our streets. Of course bar owners will
now be responsible for the smokers outside adding fuel to the fire. (Pun
intended) Lets hope they are smart enough to have the garbage receptacles empty.
Sue Jeffers
Stub and Herb's
612-384-4374
A smoking ban-the first weekend - Minnesota
Dear Sue,
Your diary on the results from the smoking ban is an excellent idea. It's such a shame and you must be exhausted, in addition to being very angry. This is something that has needed documenting for all of us to use in the future. For once, an honest report on the real responses by customers to smoking bans!
The business losses you are describing in your digest, are the first time I have been able to read the actual day-to-day results from a smoking ban. It's such a travesty for you to have to endure this. Best of luck.
Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2005
From: S1U2E3@aol.com
minnesotasmokers@yahoogroups.com
Subject: A smoking ban-the first weekend
Hello all,
We have made it through the first weekend of the smoking ban. Sales at my
bar were down each day by about 25% from the week before. Our Sunday food and
liquor sales were reduced by 50%. One VFW was down 65%.
Customer reactions have been consistent. Most customers, smokers or not, are
angry. Some stayed for shorter periods of time, some refused to patronize
Minneapolis, some stayed home. My smoking customers are not buying a beer when
they are outside having a smoke......
Being so close to the University my bar has customers visiting from out of
state. These customers visiting this weekend stayed for one beer and left,
they did not order food or another round of drinks. They informed us they will
not be back, ever. Even some of my "regulars" are now informing me they will
be going to a nearby county to drink as they become someone else's "regular"
customer.
I spent some time in the small bars in NE Minneapolis this weekend, two bars
had zero customers. One of the larger NE bars had many people outside
smoking, angry customers who said they will not be back and would not stay as long
as usual, keep in mind the weather was nice as they stood outside and smoked.
Bar owners around town compared notes...one bar in St. Paul was empty on
Thursday night but after receiving a waiver on Friday noticed customer counts
were well above average when smoking was allowed again. A bar in Anoka County (a
county that just voted no ban) was crowed with transplants (customers and
staff) from Ramsey County businesses who could no longer allow smoking.
Versions of this were heard over and over again.
A small group of the smoke haters feel they need to visit my bar or send me
an anonymous letters, telling me how stupid I am. One drove all the way from
Burnsville to gloat and antagonize my customers. These gullible and
uninformed people usually list inaccurate facts and are terrified SHS will kill them
if they are exposed to a whiff of smoke. They do not realize SHS levels in
bars with ventilation test at 150 times BELOW the OSHA safety limits. They do
not understand the concept of private property rights and personal freedoms but
they do exercise their freedom of speech rights. They are lucky some of my
customers did not beat them up, my staff is well trained.
The city of Minneapolis has added insult to injury this weekend. In
anticipation of the upcoming riots this weekend when the University of Minnesota
Men's Hockey team play in the Frozen Four, they have capped all parking meters so
no cars will be allowed to park on our streets. Of course bar owners will
now be responsible for the smokers outside adding fuel to the fire. (Pun
intended) Lets hope they are smart enough to have the garbage receptacles empty.
Sue Jeffers
Stub and Herb's
612-384-4374
Apr 3, 2005
Higher Rent for Smokers?
Hi Matt,
Is the reason for the additional charge on the lease? They also have to document your additional payment on your Rental Agreement. Have you seen the place and thoroughly examined it? Is it CLEAN? I mean is it freshly painted, new/clean blinds or drapes, new carpeting? Make them note anything in the apartment that is not new (any spots or burns) on the lease, so you are protected. I guess it's better to pay a little extra now and not have to worry about extra charges when you move out. No it is not right, but they own the place.
Garnet
------------------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: Matt
To: illinoissmokers@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, April 03, 2005
Subject: [illinoissmokers] higher rent for smokers?
Hey, my girlfriend and I are looking around for an apartment and the
place we really liked charges an extra fifty dollars a month rent to
smokers plus a 150 dollar higher security deposit! Can they legally do
this? I suppose they can probably do whatever they want but that
really pisses me off.
------------------------------------------
From: "Jim Blogg" jimbl@bwsys.net
Sun Apr 3, 2005
Sounds like this greedy "smokelord" has taken a page from the legislators' book on how to squeeze money out of smokers! Even if you really like the place and might be willing to pay the extra costs, you have to consider the fact that a guy with this kind of mentality is not a good person to do business with. I suspect he is big trouble in other ways for everybody, smokers or non.
Jim
Higher Rent for Smokers?
Hi Matt,
Is the reason for the additional charge on the lease? They also have to document your additional payment on your Rental Agreement. Have you seen the place and thoroughly examined it? Is it CLEAN? I mean is it freshly painted, new/clean blinds or drapes, new carpeting? Make them note anything in the apartment that is not new (any spots or burns) on the lease, so you are protected. I guess it's better to pay a little extra now and not have to worry about extra charges when you move out. No it is not right, but they own the place.
Garnet
------------------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: Matt
To: illinoissmokers@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, April 03, 2005
Subject: [illinoissmokers] higher rent for smokers?
Hey, my girlfriend and I are looking around for an apartment and the
place we really liked charges an extra fifty dollars a month rent to
smokers plus a 150 dollar higher security deposit! Can they legally do
this? I suppose they can probably do whatever they want but that
really pisses me off.
------------------------------------------
From: "Jim Blogg" jimbl@bwsys.net
Sun Apr 3, 2005
Sounds like this greedy "smokelord" has taken a page from the legislators' book on how to squeeze money out of smokers! Even if you really like the place and might be willing to pay the extra costs, you have to consider the fact that a guy with this kind of mentality is not a good person to do business with. I suspect he is big trouble in other ways for everybody, smokers or non.
Jim
Apr 2, 2005 5:45 pm
West Allis mandates smoking in all taverns - Milwaukee, WI
Here is an article to brighten any smoker's day.
Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.onmilwaukee.com/bars/articles/mandatesmoking.html
April 1, 2005
On Milwaukee
West Allis mandates smoking in all taverns
By OMC Staff Writers
The City of West Allis has long maintained that it knows the wants and needs of its community, and it reserves the right to regulate the health and safety of its citizens.
It wasn't much of a surprise to observers, then, that West Allis officials bucked the national trend and announced today that they will mandate smoking in all taverns within city limits. Beginning Monday, all patrons entering a West Allis bar will be assessed a $5 fee and provided with a pack of cool, refreshing cigarettes.
"Have you even sat in a local watering hole for an entire evening? Everyone in there smokes, so why not give the people what they want?" said Mayor Jeanette Bell at a press conference outside Smokie Joe's Corner Tap at 3391 S. 68th St.
Industry experts agree. Part of a free society, they say, involves freedom of choice. If people don't want to smoke, then they shouldn't go to bars, no matter what are the health risks.
"Second hand smoke, my ass," said WATA (West Allis Tavern Association) Vice President Greg McKlusky. "This is a great day for us. When in Rome, ya know, do as the Romans do, der. Smoke 'em if you got 'em, and if you don’t, you'll get 'em!"
Just months after an entire nation known for its smoking, Cuba, banned smoking in public places and suspended sales of cigarettes to children under age 16 and at stores less than 100 yards from schools, West Allis, to some, seems to be telling the anti-smoking crowd to take a hike.
"We don't want you here," Bell said of non-smokers. "Go live over by San Francisco, once, you dirty hippy."
"We support the American Cancer Association and their efforts, but when NASCAR is on and you are in a bar, you gotta smoke. Why not ensure that everyone enjoys the delicious sensation," added McKlusky.
Others were quick to liken the mandatory cigarette purchase to the drink minimums at many comedy and jazz clubs.
Smoking and drinking go hand in hand, everyone knows that," said longtime West Allis barfly Jim Rizynczki. "Bar owners stay in business because of those Mafia-owned cigarette machines. To deny them the right to force patrons to smoke, well, that's communism."
Officials at area casinos had no immediate reaction to the decision.
---------------------------------------------------------
April Fool! (I didn't know that when I posted it!) LOL
---------------------------------------------------------
Apr 2, 2005
Potawatomi bans non-smokers - Milwaukee, WI
Just for fun, here is one more April 1st story....... At least, On Milwaukee staff writers still have their sense of humor...... Would be nice though!
Garnet
----------------------------------------------------------
April 1, 2004
Potawatomi bans non-smokers
By OMC Staff Writers
http://www.onmilwaukee.com/ent/articles/potawatomiapril.html
Get ready, Milwaukee. Potawatomi Bingo Casino is about to get even smokier.
"We are sick of people making formal complaints to management about the high levels of cigarette smoke in the casino, so we decided it was in everyone's best interest to ban non-smokers," says Potawatomi Blackjack Pit Manager, Douglas Pigeon.
"The only thing that concerns us about increased 'lighting up' is that the hair of troll dolls and rabbits feet are highly flammable," says Pigeon. "We hope gamblers will choose more flame-retardant good luck charms to bring with them, like iron horseshoes or buffalo nickels."
Potawatomi has no plans to increase ventilation in any way but will burn lots of "make mo' money" incense purchased from central-city Amoco stations to try to mask the smell. Employees will also routinely squeegee the slot machine screens to prevent tar from covering up the images.
Free lighters and Crest tooth whitening strips will be awarded every Tuesday in April to celebrate the increased carbon monoxide inhalation.
Pamela Sticks, public relations manager for the Phillip Morris Company, says, "We find Potawatomi's decision very cutting edge. Milwaukee is way ahead on this one. It will be years before the coasts catch up to Brew City's foresight."
West Allis mandates smoking in all taverns - Milwaukee, WI
Here is an article to brighten any smoker's day.
Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.onmilwaukee.com/bars/articles/mandatesmoking.html
April 1, 2005
On Milwaukee
West Allis mandates smoking in all taverns
By OMC Staff Writers
The City of West Allis has long maintained that it knows the wants and needs of its community, and it reserves the right to regulate the health and safety of its citizens.
It wasn't much of a surprise to observers, then, that West Allis officials bucked the national trend and announced today that they will mandate smoking in all taverns within city limits. Beginning Monday, all patrons entering a West Allis bar will be assessed a $5 fee and provided with a pack of cool, refreshing cigarettes.
"Have you even sat in a local watering hole for an entire evening? Everyone in there smokes, so why not give the people what they want?" said Mayor Jeanette Bell at a press conference outside Smokie Joe's Corner Tap at 3391 S. 68th St.
Industry experts agree. Part of a free society, they say, involves freedom of choice. If people don't want to smoke, then they shouldn't go to bars, no matter what are the health risks.
"Second hand smoke, my ass," said WATA (West Allis Tavern Association) Vice President Greg McKlusky. "This is a great day for us. When in Rome, ya know, do as the Romans do, der. Smoke 'em if you got 'em, and if you don’t, you'll get 'em!"
Just months after an entire nation known for its smoking, Cuba, banned smoking in public places and suspended sales of cigarettes to children under age 16 and at stores less than 100 yards from schools, West Allis, to some, seems to be telling the anti-smoking crowd to take a hike.
"We don't want you here," Bell said of non-smokers. "Go live over by San Francisco, once, you dirty hippy."
"We support the American Cancer Association and their efforts, but when NASCAR is on and you are in a bar, you gotta smoke. Why not ensure that everyone enjoys the delicious sensation," added McKlusky.
Others were quick to liken the mandatory cigarette purchase to the drink minimums at many comedy and jazz clubs.
Smoking and drinking go hand in hand, everyone knows that," said longtime West Allis barfly Jim Rizynczki. "Bar owners stay in business because of those Mafia-owned cigarette machines. To deny them the right to force patrons to smoke, well, that's communism."
Officials at area casinos had no immediate reaction to the decision.
---------------------------------------------------------
April Fool! (I didn't know that when I posted it!) LOL
---------------------------------------------------------
Apr 2, 2005
Potawatomi bans non-smokers - Milwaukee, WI
Just for fun, here is one more April 1st story....... At least, On Milwaukee staff writers still have their sense of humor...... Would be nice though!
Garnet
----------------------------------------------------------
April 1, 2004
Potawatomi bans non-smokers
By OMC Staff Writers
http://www.onmilwaukee.com/ent/articles/potawatomiapril.html
Get ready, Milwaukee. Potawatomi Bingo Casino is about to get even smokier.
"We are sick of people making formal complaints to management about the high levels of cigarette smoke in the casino, so we decided it was in everyone's best interest to ban non-smokers," says Potawatomi Blackjack Pit Manager, Douglas Pigeon.
"The only thing that concerns us about increased 'lighting up' is that the hair of troll dolls and rabbits feet are highly flammable," says Pigeon. "We hope gamblers will choose more flame-retardant good luck charms to bring with them, like iron horseshoes or buffalo nickels."
Potawatomi has no plans to increase ventilation in any way but will burn lots of "make mo' money" incense purchased from central-city Amoco stations to try to mask the smell. Employees will also routinely squeegee the slot machine screens to prevent tar from covering up the images.
Free lighters and Crest tooth whitening strips will be awarded every Tuesday in April to celebrate the increased carbon monoxide inhalation.
Pamela Sticks, public relations manager for the Phillip Morris Company, says, "We find Potawatomi's decision very cutting edge. Milwaukee is way ahead on this one. It will be years before the coasts catch up to Brew City's foresight."
Apr 1, 2005
Letters and Reports sent to the Illinois Assembly for HB 672 and SB 254
In the past twenty-four hours, I have sent the following two letters with the attached reports, supplied by David Kuneman and Michael McFadden, to our entire Illinois State Assembly (see below).
We have 59 Senators and 118 House Representatives in Illinois. These are only our state legislators and do not include our Federal legislators. I was able to find a total of 160 e-mail addresses...of course not all were deliverable. The Assembly should now be aware that smokers, who are also IL voters, do object to the pending smoking ban legislation amendments. I hope some of them will read these excellent reports from Dave and Michael, defending smokers.
Please take a few minutes to write to your personal IL representatives.....use my IL Site to find them.....and feel free to use any portions from these letters...
Garnet
P.S. We really need help to collect e-mail addresses for legislators in every state to fight bans and taxes!!!!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number 1:
Do Not Support HB 672 and SB 254 - Please Read "ECONOMIC LOSSES DUE TO SMOKING BANS IN CALIFORNIA AND OTHER STATES!"
Dear Illinois Representative,
The Illinois General Assembly will soon be reconvening. House Bill 672 and Senate Bill 254 are on final reading in both chambers. Both these smoking ban bills may come up for a vote.
PLEASE DO NOT TO SUPPORT THESE BILLS. Anti-smoking groups have really stepped up their efforts to have these bill passed, but I urge you to read the following article explaining and documenting the negative impact smoking bans create.
Sincerely,
______________________________
Garnet Dawn - The Smoker's Club, Inc. - Midwest Regional Director
The United Pro Choice Smokers Rights Newsletter - http://www.smokersclubinc.com
Illinois Smokers Group - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/illinoissmokers/
mailto:garnetdawn@comcast.net - Respect Freedom of Choice!
I am an Illinois resident and voter. My personal information is as follows: Garnet Dawn, Lake Bluff, IL (I filled in my full address and phone number for the legislators' information)
----------------------------------------------------
(Full text included for representatives)
ECONOMIC LOSSES DUE TO SMOKING BANS IN CALIFORNIA AND OTHER STATES at http://www.smokersclubinc.com/economic.html By David W. Kuneman and Michael J. McFadden
_____________________________________________________________________
Number 2:
RE: Do Not Support HB 672 and SB 254 - Please Read "Time trends of public health and public smoking"
Dear Illinois Senator,
Please take a few minutes to read the following article on "Time Trends of Public Health and Public Smoking" before these bills are presented for a vote, so that you will make an informed decision.
Even though HB 672 and SB 254 do not propose a state-wide smoking ban, the legislation will pave the way for many additional bans in our state. Just last year HB 3996, CLEAN AIR-REPEAL HOME RULE was defeated. Does this type of legislation, promoted by the American Lung Association, need to become an annual event until it is passed?
PLEASE DO NOT TO SUPPORT THESE BILLS.
Sincerely,
______________________________
Garnet Dawn - The Smoker's Club, Inc. - Midwest Regional Director
The United Pro Choice Smokers Rights Newsletter - http://www.smokersclubinc.com
Illinois Smokers Group - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/illinoissmokers/
mailto:garnetdawn@comcast.net - Respect Freedom of Choice!
I am an Illinois resident and voter. My personal information is as follows: Garnet Dawn, Lake Bluff, IL (I filled in my full address and phone number for the legislators' information)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Time trends of public health and public smoking
by David Kuneman 04/05
"During the 1970’s, our adult smoking rate was twice what it is now and public smoking was allowed in schools, malls, day care centers, hospitals, workplaces, and airliners. Since twice as many adults smoked, almost twice as many private residences also contained at least one smoking family member, and they all smoked freely inside their homes. In addition, residents of homes not occupied by smokers often allowed their guests to smoke...."(See http://groups.yahoo.com/group/illinoissmokers/message/1157 to read rest of report)
Letters and Reports sent to the Illinois Assembly for HB 672 and SB 254
In the past twenty-four hours, I have sent the following two letters with the attached reports, supplied by David Kuneman and Michael McFadden, to our entire Illinois State Assembly (see below).
We have 59 Senators and 118 House Representatives in Illinois. These are only our state legislators and do not include our Federal legislators. I was able to find a total of 160 e-mail addresses...of course not all were deliverable. The Assembly should now be aware that smokers, who are also IL voters, do object to the pending smoking ban legislation amendments. I hope some of them will read these excellent reports from Dave and Michael, defending smokers.
Please take a few minutes to write to your personal IL representatives.....use my IL Site to find them.....and feel free to use any portions from these letters...
Garnet
P.S. We really need help to collect e-mail addresses for legislators in every state to fight bans and taxes!!!!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number 1:
Do Not Support HB 672 and SB 254 - Please Read "ECONOMIC LOSSES DUE TO SMOKING BANS IN CALIFORNIA AND OTHER STATES!"
Dear Illinois Representative,
The Illinois General Assembly will soon be reconvening. House Bill 672 and Senate Bill 254 are on final reading in both chambers. Both these smoking ban bills may come up for a vote.
PLEASE DO NOT TO SUPPORT THESE BILLS. Anti-smoking groups have really stepped up their efforts to have these bill passed, but I urge you to read the following article explaining and documenting the negative impact smoking bans create.
Sincerely,
______________________________
Garnet Dawn - The Smoker's Club, Inc. - Midwest Regional Director
The United Pro Choice Smokers Rights Newsletter - http://www.smokersclubinc.com
Illinois Smokers Group - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/illinoissmokers/
mailto:garnetdawn@comcast.net - Respect Freedom of Choice!
I am an Illinois resident and voter. My personal information is as follows: Garnet Dawn, Lake Bluff, IL (I filled in my full address and phone number for the legislators' information)
----------------------------------------------------
(Full text included for representatives)
ECONOMIC LOSSES DUE TO SMOKING BANS IN CALIFORNIA AND OTHER STATES at http://www.smokersclubinc.com/economic.html By David W. Kuneman and Michael J. McFadden
_____________________________________________________________________
Number 2:
RE: Do Not Support HB 672 and SB 254 - Please Read "Time trends of public health and public smoking"
Dear Illinois Senator,
Please take a few minutes to read the following article on "Time Trends of Public Health and Public Smoking" before these bills are presented for a vote, so that you will make an informed decision.
Even though HB 672 and SB 254 do not propose a state-wide smoking ban, the legislation will pave the way for many additional bans in our state. Just last year HB 3996, CLEAN AIR-REPEAL HOME RULE was defeated. Does this type of legislation, promoted by the American Lung Association, need to become an annual event until it is passed?
PLEASE DO NOT TO SUPPORT THESE BILLS.
Sincerely,
______________________________
Garnet Dawn - The Smoker's Club, Inc. - Midwest Regional Director
The United Pro Choice Smokers Rights Newsletter - http://www.smokersclubinc.com
Illinois Smokers Group - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/illinoissmokers/
mailto:garnetdawn@comcast.net - Respect Freedom of Choice!
I am an Illinois resident and voter. My personal information is as follows: Garnet Dawn, Lake Bluff, IL (I filled in my full address and phone number for the legislators' information)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Time trends of public health and public smoking
by David Kuneman 04/05
"During the 1970’s, our adult smoking rate was twice what it is now and public smoking was allowed in schools, malls, day care centers, hospitals, workplaces, and airliners. Since twice as many adults smoked, almost twice as many private residences also contained at least one smoking family member, and they all smoked freely inside their homes. In addition, residents of homes not occupied by smokers often allowed their guests to smoke...."(See http://groups.yahoo.com/group/illinoissmokers/message/1157 to read rest of report)
