Saturday, December 31, 2005

HAPPY NEW YEAR!!




Dec 31, 2005
New Year To Bring New Laws Affecting Smokers - Chicago and Cook County, IL

Legalized extortion through taxes, "Big brother" and "1984" have arrived!

If authorities can't control the populace through public approval, the new Police States of Chicago and Cook County will do it through force, punishment, incarceration, fines and threats. We have returned to the 1920's. I'm glad I don't live in or near the City because I don't think I want to see the changes in 2006 on a daily basis. I'll still travel into Chicago to visit when necessary, but only to attempt to help other smokers. I will never spend another penny in a Chicago restaurant.

Garnet Dawn




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.wbbm780.com/pages/1574.php
30 December 2005

New Year To Bring New Laws Affecting Smokers

CHICAGO -- The new year is shaping up to be a tough one for Chicago's smokers thanks to the city, with the second consecutive increase in the city's cigarette tax and a new stringent smoking ban set to go into effect next month.

One year after tripling the city's cigarette tax from 16 cents per pack to 48 cents per pack, the city will raise cigarette taxes again on Jan. 1, 2006, this time to 68 cents per pack, to help balance the city's $5.24 billion budget for 2006. The cigarette tax increase was projected to generate an additional $9 million in annual revenue for the city.

Meanwhile, Cook County Board President John H. Stroger Jr. (D- 4th) has proposed doubling the county's cigarette tax from $1 per pack to $2 per pack to help balance the county's $3.1 billion budget for 2006.

The county board has yet to vote on Stroger's budget proposal but earlier this year rejected a plan by Stroger to increase the county's hotel and restaurant taxes to balance the county's 2005 budget.

About two weeks after the city's cigarette tax increase goes into effect, starting on Jan. 16, 2006, smokers will have to snuff their cigarettes, cigars or pipes before entering most public places in the city, including many restaurants.

A sweeping smoking ban that includes virtually all indoor public places, from train stations to convention halls to condominium and apartment building lobbies and hallways. Even taxicabs, limousines and city-owned vehicles are included in the ban.

And smokers won't always be able to get their fix by simply going outside. The ban also requires smokers to stay at least 15 feet away from the entrance of any building where smoking is banned and bans smoking at outdoor train platforms.

But under terms of a compromise that took aldermen months to hammer out, smoking will still be allowed in free-standing taverns and some restaurants with bars until July 1, 2008.

To qualify for the 30-month wait for the ban to take effect, at least 65 percent of the establishment's gross revenues would have to come from liquor sales. If less than 65 percent of a restaurant's revenue comes from liquor sales, the business would not qualify as a bar and would have to be smoke-free starting Jan. 16, 2006.

Any individual who smokes in an area where smoking is banned by the ordinance would be subject to a maximum fine of $100. Anyone who owns, operates or manages a public place and fails to comply with the ban would be subject to a maximum fine of $100 for the first offense. The fine for the second offense within a year of the first offense would be $500 and $2,500 for each subsequent offense within one year of the first.

Also, on the third and subsequent offenses, a business owner would be subject to a 60-day suspension our outright revocation of his or her business licenses for the premises.

Meanwhile, Cook County Commissioner Mike Quigley (D-10th) and four other commissioners have sponsored a county ordinance aimed at banning smoking in all public places in the county.

Quigley announced his plans to introduce the ordinance on Dec. 6, saying it would apply to unincorporated Cook County, though he added that he hoped it could also be enforced in suburban municipalities with home rule power.

"Our jurisdiction spans the county on a lot of issues," he said at the time. He admitted at the time that there were legal questions about whether the smoking ban could apply in all of the suburbs in the county, but said the county enforced laws in suburban municipalities frequently.

The county ban would carry the same fines as the city ban.

Although the cigarette tax is the only city tax or fee being increased in 2006, the city will expand its use of cameras to issue tickets for running red lights and finding parking scofflaws who qualify for a Denver boot.

A total of 30 city intersections were set to be equipped with cameras that record the license plate number of any car caught running a red light by the end of 2005. The 2006 city budget authorizes camera systems for another 20 intersections.

When the cameras catch a car running a red light, the owner -- not necessarily the person driving at the time -- is mailed a $90 fine. The fine can be challenged if the camera recorded the wrong license plate number, if the car was stolen at the time, if the driver was part of a funeral procession, or if the driver was getting out of the way of an emergency vehicle. Emergency vehicles are exempt from the violations.

Expanded use of red light cameras is expected to generate an additional $2 million in annual revenue. Through October, the city had collected $4.3 million in revenue from red light cameras in 2005.

The Department of Revenue will also outfit approximately 20 vehicles with cameras to record the license plate numbers of vehicles parked on the street and compare the numbers to the city's list of vehicles that have three or more overdue parking tickets and that are, therefore, eligible to be booted.

The systems will end the need for parking enforcement aides to check license plates manually against the city's boot list. The program is also expected to generate an additional $2.5 million in annual revenue for the city and to free up 21 parking enforcement aides for other duty.



Dec 31, 2005
Anti-smoking lobby pushes for outdoor bans - WA, Australia

....AND AS OUR GRAND FINALE FOR 2005, THE FOLLOWING NEWS STORY. THE ANTIS JUST DON'T KNOW WHEN TO QUIT! IN THEIR UNBLEIVABLE GREED AND POWER-MAD FEEDING FRENZY, THEY ARE NEGATING ALL THEIR PREVIOUS LIES ABOUT HEALTH AS THEIR MOTIVATION. THIS IS SOCIAL PERSECUTION!

Submitted on behalf of Thomas Laprade......I agree with Thomas!!! - Garnet

"I can't believe it, but it's happening. Ban smoking outside LOL

Thomas
Laprade - Freedom Fighter for your Personal and Business Rights
http://thesnowbird.tripod.com "

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.sundaytimes.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,7034,17676679%255E2761,00.html

Anti-smoking lobby pushes for outdoor bans
By JANE HAMMOND
28dec05

SMOKE-FREE beaches, parks, playgrounds, universities and public events could soon be a reality in WA if the Australian Council On Smoking and Health (ACOSH) has its way.

Perth-based ACOSH has launched a campaign designed to ban cigarettes in public places throughout the state.

ACOSH executive director Stephen Hall said today the campaign would be three-pronged, targeting local councils for support in banning smoking on beaches and in parks; public institutions such as universities, hospitals and the zoo to ban smoking in their grounds; and the organizers of public events such as the Big Day Out to make their events smoke-free.

Mr Hall said there was overwhelming public support to restrict smoking in public places and research showed that restrictions helped smokers to quit.

He said the latest figures showed that nationwide as few as 17.2 per cent of the population smoked daily; and in WA the figure was down to 15.6 per cent.

"Once we get the figures down to less than 10 per cent we will be able to get some serious controls on smoking," Mr Hall said.

He said banning smoking in public places would benefit both smokers and non-smokers.

"We are particularly targeting beaches, children's playgrounds and sporting fields," he said. "Kids don't need to see adults smoking while they play sport.

"There will be some resistance but basically I think it is a no-brainer. Already some local government areas have banned smoking near children's playgrounds and Manly and Bondi beaches in NSW are smoke-free. We have already seen two hospitals in WA ban smoking on their grounds."

Mr Hall said ACOSH had successfully lobbied for an end to smoking in pubs and restaurants in WA, despite 10 years of resistance from industry groups, and the council was prepared to continue its push to end smoking in all public places.


Dec 29, 2005
City smokers kicked in the butts - Ald. Smith: Ban will have small impact in Austin -Chicago

Welcome to The Police State of Chicago, as of January 16th......and Smith keeps on crowing about it..... It's easy for him, because he won't feel the impact of smokers' anger!

Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thursday, December 29, 2005
http://austinweeklynews.1upsoftware.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=460&TM=1634.309

12/28/2005
City smokers kicked in the butts
Ald. Smith: "Ban will have small impact in Austin"

By TERRY DEAN

The Chicago City Council’s ordinance to ban smoking in all public places by January and completely in bars and restaurants by 2008 will have minimal impact on Austin and other West Side taverns, 28th Ward Ald. Ed Smith insists.

Smith, who also chairs the council’s Health Committee, led the effort to make Chicago smoke-free. The city council approved the ordinance in early December. The public ban takes effect Jan. 16, but the city council has given bars and restaurants 2½ years to comply with the ordinance. By July 1, 2008, virtually all indoor Chicago public places will be smoke-free.

"It’s a movement that’s happening all over the world," said Smith, who spent nearly three years laying the groundwork for the ban.

Smith said he considered what impact the ban would have on Austin and other West Side taverns. He predicted any impact would not permanently drive away loyal patrons.

"For two years and eight months, I have thought about it," Smith said of his decision. "We don’t want to hurt any businesses. That certainly was never our intent. It may have a bit of an impact but in time [patrons] are going to come back because these are the businesses in their community."

The city council’s new smoking ban wasn’t the only blow to smokers in the last month or so. Smokers had their butts kicked a second time after Cook County Board President John Stroger proposed another increase on cigarette taxes. Chicago smokers will have to cough up an additional $1 tax, bringing taxes on a single pack of cigarettes to $4.05, if approved by the Cook County Board.

Illinois has joined other states in imposing sweeping smoking bans on businesses and the public. California became the first state to ban smoking in the workplace 10 years ago. The sunshine state next banned smoking in bars and restaurants. The latest ban under consideration would target hotels.

The current anti-smoking campaign has built momentum throughout the Midwest and beyond.

 Village trustees in Deerfield, a northern suburb, approved a smoking ban for public places last week. The law takes effect March 1.

 Des Plaines officials will host a town hall meeting Jan. 4, to discuss possibly banning smoking in all public and work places.

 Greenwood, Ind. officials may introduce an ordinance Jan. 1 that would ban smoking in public places. Indianapolis’ smoke-free ordinance will take effect March 1.

 On Dec. 21, Urbandale, Iowa expanded an existing smoking ban to include parks and other outdoor recreational locales designated for children age 17 and under. The Urbandale City Council voted unanimously for the ban following parents’ complaints of second-hand smoke at parks where children congregate.

 The Washington D.C. City Council voted in early December to ban smoking in bars, restaurants and other indoor facilities by January 2007. Exemptions were made for cigar bars and hotels.

 The American Gaming Association is fighting smoking bans across the country that would prevent gamblers from smoking in casinos.

Anti-smoking advocates say reducing the harmful effects of second-hand smoke on non-smokers is their goal.

"We’re not trying to take away anybody’s cigarettes," said Smith. "Our position is that you don’t smoke in public places. This is about saving lives. Second-hand smoke is a killer. That’s a fact."

CONTACT tdean@wjinc.com


Dec 29, 2005
Village to consider no smoking ban - Vernon Hills, IL

Vernon Hills!!! Of course, we have to take anything the Pioneer Press prints with a grain of salt, as they are the leading Anti paper for all the Chicago suburbs.

Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.pioneerlocal.com/cgi-bin/ppo-story/localnews/current/vh/12-29-05-785007.html
Village to consider no smoking ban
BY MARLENE HUNT
STAFF WRITER

Vernon Hills may be heading toward a smoking ban following the lead of neighboring towns of Highland Park, Deerfield and Lincolnshire.

If an ordinance is proposed, the village will likely hear opposition from some of its 70-75 restaurants.

"Right now we are gathering information," said Village Manager Mike Allison following a recent Village Board meeting where the smoking ban topic was mentioned. "We've collected articles from the Pacific Northwest to London and will put together information including ordinances to see what other communities are doing."

Lake Forest Hospital took the lead among Lake County hospitals becoming the first to ban smoking or the use of any tobacco products on its properties. The total smoking ban, effective New Years Day, applies to all buildings and grounds on its 160 acre campus as well as its Outpatient & Acute Care Center in Grayslake, its medical buildings in Gurnee, Vernon Hills and Libertyville, and its Health & Fitness Center in Lindenhurst.

The City of Highland Park was the first Lake County community to declare itself smoke-free in restaurants and offices. The ordinance, effective in June, does permit smoking within 25 feet of a non-smoking site.

The no-smoking movement got a boost after Deerfield trustees passed a sweeping village-wide smoking ban Dec. 19 prohibiting smoking in all restaurants, taverns, places of employment, stores and within 25 feet of the entrance to buildings. Smokers will not be able to light up at public gatherings such as the Deerfield Farmers Market, either, when the Deerfield Smoke Free Air Ordinance takes effect March 1.

Under the anti-smoking ordinance, Deerfield businesses as well as individuals face fines from $25 to $1,000. For a first violation, it's $25, a second is $50, and for a third or subsequent violation, fines range from $100 to $500. Those owning or managing public places could face penalties of $100 up to $1,000.

The Deerfield board was able to impose the smoking ban after the repeal of an Illinois law that did not allow municipalities to pass laws that were stricter than the state laws. The repeal takes effect Jan. 1.

Lincolnshire is also looking at anti-smoking regulations. Trustee Dan Servi, who sought a stricter regulations two years ago, supports a regional approach that would involve similar restrictions in neighboring municipals. Some Lincolnshire restaurants indicated they were not concerned about possible regulations. Yet another told the Village Board he would be upset if regulations banned smoking from bar areas because of the lost business. After months of discussions Chicago officials passed a smoking ban Dec. 7 by a vote of 46-1. The compromise reached by the City Council allows smoking in taverns and restaurants with bars until July 1, 2008. The ordinance, effective Jan. 16, prohibits smoking in restaurants that do not have bars. Smokers must stay 15 feet away from buildings where smoking is prohibited, as well as in public places.

The Lake County Health Department strongly encouraged restaurants to go smoke free on a voluntary basis because of the health risks of second hand smoke to employees and patrons. By mid-December 626 restaurants in Lake County , including fast-food and dine-in restaurants, indicated they had prohibited smoking within their establishments, reports Leslie Piotrowski, health department spokeswoman.


Dec 22, 2005
Great Eric Zorn Article in the Trib
From: "Jim Blogg"

Web Blog
http://blogs.chicagotribune.com/news_columnists_ezorn/2005/12/burned_cigarett_1.html#comments
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/ericzorn/chi- 0512220272dec22,1,4152908.column?coll=chi-news-col
By Eric Zorn

Thank you, sir--cough--may we pay more taxes?
Published December 22, 2005

Our son is headed off to college in about two years and we're
thinking, why save? Why trim household expenses? We'll get cigarette
smokers to pay for it!

The widely reviled minority of nicotine addicts in Illinois are
already going to cough up an estimated $620 million in state taxes
and $250 million in federal taxes next year. Chicago smokers will
chip in $43 million in city taxes. And if an increase proposed this
week goes through, Cook County smokers will pay an additional $226
million.

Everyone else is balancing their budgets on the backs of tobacco
fiends, why not the Zorn family?

The year 2005 began with an increase in city cigarette taxes of 32
cents a pack--from 16 cents to 48 cents. In February, Gov. Rod
Blagojevich proposed a 75-cents-a-pack state-tax increase--from 98
cents to $1.73. And though the legislature didn't approve that idea,
the state Department of Revenue mounted an aggressive campaign to
collect more than $2 million in back taxes and penalties from those
who had been purchasing cigarettes on the Internet since 1999.

In November, Chicago Mayor Richard Daley proposed a 20-cents-a-pack
increase--to 68 cents--that will take effect next month.

It was the only tax increase in his 2006 budget and "the least
painful" kind of tax hike, he said. "Let's be realistic."

Monday, then, Cook County Board President John Stroger formally
unveiled his 2006 budget, which calls for a doubling of the county
cigarette levy--from $1 to $2 a pack. Assuming the commissioners give
their OK, starting in March, those who buy cigarettes in Chicago will
pay a staggering $4.05 a pack in state, federal and local tobacco
taxes--the highest in America, according to Philip Morris USA.

"I think we should raise it as much as we can," Commissioner Larry
Suffredin (D-Evanston), who often feuds with Stroger, told
reporters. "If we don't, somebody else will."

And, for the most part, smokers will pay. Though some will quit or
cut back and others will start to shop in northwest Indiana suburbs
where cigarette taxes are still under $1 a pack, budget wizards know
from long experience that revenues will still rise by healthy and
predictable amounts.

And they also know that tobacco taxes more than pay for the economic
costs of smoking.

Harvard Law School economist W. Kip Viscusi is among the researchers
who have demonstrated that smokers, by paying heavy taxes as they
puff themselves into early graves, save society far more in state
pension and nursing-care expenses than they cost society in increased
medical expenses. In 1998, Viscusi estimated a net saving to
government "of 32 cents per pack--in addition to the excise taxes."

What's more, as we non-smokers reap more and more of these financial
benefits, we're also reaping social benefits by increasingly
segregating and ostracizing the golden egg-laying geese that form
their pre-cancerous huddles in the cold outside our office buildings
and public accommodations.

Meanwhile, my vices and maybe yours too--such as coffee, pop, salty
snacks, fatty foods and golf--go comparatively untaxed.

It's a great deal, really--particularly if I can swing this college
fund idea of mine.

But in no way do I fool myself that it's a fair deal. Cigarette
levies are a regressive and now wildly excessive form of taxation
that thrives, I figure, because at some level smokers feel they
deserve to be punished for their weakness and so can't complain.

The decrease in local cigarette sales caused by a doubling of the
county tax will result in budget shortfalls at the city and state
levels (Illinois officials estimate the state lost $40 million in
2004 when Cook County hiked per-pack taxes by 82 cents). And because
our elected officials are too cowardly to spread their budget burdens
around, you can be sure who they'll turn to with open palms and moist
smiles when the time comes to make up the difference and plug the
holes.

The cycle will continue until a fair-minded majority says, "Enough
already! Pick on some other self-destructive habit for a change."

Six years from now would be a convenient time.
----------
Are our cigarette taxes fair? Debate the issue and read more at
chicagotribune.com/changeofsubject .


Dec 22, 2005
Groups' cigarette warnings are smoke screen - Arizona

Michael McFadden found this editorial. How true!!! Be sure you don't forget that important contribution to Christmas Seals this year if you want to completely waste your money.

Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/eastvalleyopinions/articles/1221russell21.html

Groups' cigarette warnings are smoke screen
Dec. 21, 2005
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."
- George Orwell
Let's have a little truth about smoking. Just a few errant facts.

The Greeks are the world's heaviest smokers. They have a lower incidence of "smoking-related" diseases than we do, and live longer.

The Japanese are close to the Greeks in tobacco consumption, No. 2 in the world, with the longest life expectancy and a much lower incidence of "smoking-related" diseases than we have.

My wife is a cancer survivor. What did she get from the American Cancer Society? Nada. Yet the American Cancer Society is spending several million dollars to convince us we should pass a law outlawing smoking in public places.

They have an income of $808 million, of which $244 million is expenses, and its CEO, John Seffrin, knocks down $465,000. They are real quick to take away your freedom, but if you have cancer, they ignore you.

I had a heart attack a couple of years ago. What did I get from the American Heart Association? Zip. Another "sponsor" of the Smoke Free Arizona initiative. They have an income of $593 million with "expenses" of $120 million; their CEO, M. Cass Wheeler, pockets $507,000.

They spend their money on restricting your freedom, and if you've survived a heart attack, as far as they are concerned, you should go away and die so you don't bother them.

Look at it plainly, without subterfuge, falsehoods and pseudoscience.

Is smoking dangerous? In the real-life laboratories of Greece and Japan, the effect of actually smoking, much less secondhand smoke, is negligible. You can rig test after test, study after study, and with incomes of $808 million and $593 million respectively, the Cancer Society and the Heart Association do a lot of rigging.

Why would they do that? They need to raise funds. Fighting smoking, the fact that it is constantly discussed in the media, the fact that it is a "hot-button" issue, fills their coffers. It allows Mr. Seffrin and Mr. Wheeler to collect mid-six-figure salaries.

Do they help people with cancer, who have had a heart attack? The two things that are the greatest cause of bankruptcy and personal tragedy in this country? No, they don't do that.

Instead, they pocket significant pieces of what is entrusted to them to do that, and use the rest to lie to the public in order to raise more money.

The kicker here is that enough people fall for it to make it work. There has to be a reason they are targeting the state that's 50th in education.

Rick Russell is the co-author of Antique Traders Vintage Magazine Price Guide and can be reached at editor@abbookman.com .
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From Michael McFadden:

Dear Editor,

Rick Russell's 12/21 article (Groups' cigarette warnings are smokescreen) leads off with the Orwellian quote, "During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."

Russell speaks primarily of deceit concerning the health effects of smoking itself, but a far more insidious form of deceit has been waged on the battlefront of smoking bans and secondary tobacco smoke exposure. In virtually every smoking ban hearing throughout the country in the past two years "The Great Helena Heart Miracle Study" has been held up as proof that protecting nonsmokers from smoke will bring about an immediate and drastic decrease in heart attacks.

The deceit lies in two facts: First, the study itself never analyzed heart attacks in nonsmokers or made any measurements at all of secondary smoke exposure. And second, a publicly available official government database covering over 1,000 times as many heart attack victims as were studied in Helena clearly indicates that, rather than decreasing, heart attacks may actually INCREASE after smoking bans!

California banned smoking in all bars in 1998. According to the accepted wisdom of Helena, heart attacks should have gone down by as much as 40%. In reality they went up by 6%.

While publicly available (and almost certainly known by at least some of the researchers who touted the Helena results in pursuit of smoking bans) this information has only now been analyzed and presented to the public. Four weeks ago a paper was presented to media outlets, published on the web, and noted in the Rapid Responses of the British Medical Journal itself pointing out this analysis and its important public policy implications.

The Helena study made international headlines when it was announced. This new study, over 1,000 times as large and co-authored by Missouri researcher Dave Kuneman and myself, has received literally NO media recognition.

Why? Simply because, as Orwell knew, when universal deceit rules the day, the truth is sometimes simply too revolutionary to be given a hearing.

Those interested in investigating the subject further are forced to go beyond the print and broadcast media. Dave Kuneman's website and physician Mike Siegel's website both examine the reality that has overtaken Helena but is too "revolutionary" for the media:

Kuneman/McFadden Study:
http://kuneman.smokersclub.com/hospitaladmissions.html

Dr. Mike Siegel's Expanded Study:
http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2005/11/new-study-casts-doubt-on-claim-that.html

:_)
Michael


Dec 22, 2005
Smoking ban proposed - Cook County, IL

Sure, they'll study it! They have already made up their minds, in advance.

Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.dailysouthtown.com/southtown/yrtwn/seast/222seyt5.htm
Local digest
Thursday, December 22, 2005

COOK COUNTY
Smoking ban proposed

A proposal to ban smoking indoors in public places throughout Cook County was formally introduced and sent to committee Wednesday.

Commissioner Mike Quigley (D-Chicago) announced the proposal last week. It would affect any suburb without its own smoking ban in place, and covers nearly all public places, including bars and restaurants.

County Board President John Stroger said he wanted to explore the proposal but would not "pre-judge" whether he will support it. But he said it was "a good idea" and repeated his instructions to public health officials to work with Quigley on researching a ban's effects.

— Jonathan Lipman


Dec 20, 2005
Stroger proposes $1 tax hike on cigarettes - Cook County, IL

Greed, greed and more greed!
Referencing the $.82 per pack Cook County cigarette tax hike the beginning of 2004, I did research it and the board did not vote for the last tax hike till it was included in the annul budget and approved by the Finance Committee. I've included my research results on the 2004 increase (including how the commissioners voted) below the Sun Times news story.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3646/is_200403/ai_n9347830
Mar 9, 2004

The Cook County, Illinois, cigarette tax rate has been increased from 18¢ per pack to $1 per pack, effective April 1, 2004. The 82¢ increase was included in a $2.99 billion balanced budget approved by the Cook County Board of Commissioners on February 24, 2004. The cigarette tax increase was approved by the Finance Committee in early February after the Commissioners failed to garner enough votes to pass a new county lease transaction tax or an increase in the county sales tax rate. (Telephone Conversation, Cook County, Illinois, Board of Commissioners, February 24, 2004.)

Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-county20.html
News
Stroger proposes $1 tax hike on cigarettes
December 20, 2005
BY GARY WISBY Staff Reporter

Cook County Board President John Stroger sought to balance the county's proposed $3.1 billion budget on Monday by dropping the hammer on smokers for the third time in two weeks -- urging a doubling of the $1 county tax on a pack of cigarettes.

If approved by the County Board, Chicagoans would pay $4.05 in taxes per pack. Smokers in New York City cough up $3.39.

The proposed tax increase is the third recent slap at smokers. On Dec. 7, the City Council imposed a smoking ban on virtually all of indoor Chicago, exempting private homes, clubs and lodges, retail tobacco stores and 25 percent of hotel rooms. The ban takes effect Jan. 1, but taverns and restaurant bars have until July 1, 2008, to comply.

RISING COUNTY FEE
WHERE IT GOES

Cook County board president John Stroger wants to raise the county cigarette tax by $1, which would bring taxes on a single pack in Chicago to $4.05:
*68 cents for the city
*$1 for Cook County; Stroger
would increase that to $2
*98 cents for the State of Illinois
*39 cents
for the federal govt.

And last Wednesday, aldermen raised the city's per-pack tax by 20 cents, to 68 cents. That's on top of 98 cents for the state and 39 cents for the federal government.

17 cents not so long ago

The county tax was a mere 17 cents until last year, when it shot up another 83 cents. But it raised so much money -- $130 million compared with $69 million expected -- that Stroger decided to go for another increase.

A new $2 tax would raise an additional $50 million, he said. That would enable the county to avoid a property tax hike for the seventh year in a row.

Democratic Commissioner Mike Quigley, who later in the day exited his planned challenge to Stroger and threw his support behind Commissioner Forrest Claypool, said the cigarette tax gambit eventually must reach the point of diminishing returns. Stroger, he said, "better hope [residents] chain-smoke at home."

Taxes don't need to be raised at all if the board can find the will to "streamline and restructure" county government, Quigley maintained.

He noted that he introduced a county smoking ban, mirroring the city's, two weeks ago and fully anticipates it will pass.

Claypool said he and other commissioners have urged Stroger to earmark new cigarette tax revenue for health care, but to no avail.

Cuts in the federal government's Medicaid program were the biggest hurdle to clear in crafting a balanced budget, Stroger said. His talks by phone Friday with U.S. senators and congressmen from Illinois assured him $20 million more will be forthcoming from the feds, he said.

Waste at hospital, Stroger says

The board president pledged to lean on the county health bureau, which runs Stroger Hospital, to trim costs. He departed from his 40-minute budget proposal to describe a recent visit to the facility.

"It makes me angry to see all the trash out front and toilet paper hanging from the walls," he said. "I asked who was in charge of the janitors, and a fella came down wearing a three-piece suit. Even the chief janitor shouldn't be in a three-piece suit. We're going to correct that."

Under Stroger's tenure, his finance team has managed to slash the property tax rate by 40 percent since he took office in 1994. That has saved taxpayers $1.8 billion, he said.

This year, Stroger said his team managed to overcome a deficit that loomed as high as $307 million in September. Reductions included eliminating jobs, cutting salaries and further trimming payments for overtime, travel, seminars, training and supplies.

The county hopes for further economies in ongoing negotiations with unions, largely by winning higher worker contributions for health care, Stroger said.

Public safety is the budget's largest single component, totaling more than $1 billion. That would fund operations of the sheriff's department, state's attorney's and public defender's offices, chief judge, clerk of the court and juvenile detention center.

3.8 million prescriptions in '05
The county health bureau demands another big chunk of the budget, $830 million to run the Stroger, Provident and Oak Forest hospitals, public health department and 28 clinics. The county filled 3.8 million prescriptions this year, far more than the 2.2 million filled in 2003, Stroger said.

Republican Commissioner Tony Peraica, who filed papers Monday to run against Stroger, said, "The poor people of Cook County are being used by President Stroger in a cynical way. If we continue four more years with the Stroger administration, Cook County is going to be bankrupt."

The deadline for passing the budget is Feb. 28. Public hearings are set for Jan. 5 at the Markham Courthouse, Jan. 9 at the Skokie Courthouse and Jan. 12 at the Maywood Courthouse, all at 6:30 p.m., and for Jan. 6 at the County Courthouse, at 10 a.m.

The budget proposal and Stroger's budget speech can be seen online at www.cookcountygov.com .

gwisby@suntimes.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.smokersclubinc.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1202
Aug 1, 2005
Cook County $.82/pack increase in 2004

I was asked for some information about Illinois' most recent tobacco tax increase and the officials responsible for it. I found our Cook County increase from 2004. Notice how sneakily it had to be passed. Sound like Congress. They couldn't get the increase passed on it's own merit, so it was tacked onto the county's almost $3 billion annual budget instead!!! I thought the mechanics of the increase were with sharing here.
Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

COOK COUNTY 2004 $.82 PER CIGARETTE PACK TAX INCREASE

This was the most recent tax increase in Illinois. I don’t have records of earlier ones.

It would be interesting to learn if the tax proceeds, since the Cook County (including Chicago) tax increase in the beginning of Fiscal year 2004, have been deposited into the specified “Tobacco-Healthcare Distribution Fund” created in the treasury of Cook County. They gave themselves any existing tobacco tax revenues in a general fund. (See below)

The decision makers for this increase should have been the Cook County Commissioners Board, but they did not have enough votes to approve the tobacco tax increase. Instead it was passed in February by the Finance Committee as a portion of the 2004 $2.99 billion budget. Since the voting records of the Commissioners and their comments are informative, I have also copied them below.

Cook County Commissioners in favor of the tax increase were Butler, Collins, Daley, Maldonado, Moreno, Murphy, Sims, Steele and President Stroger.


http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3646/is_200403/ai_n9347830
ILLINOIS: Tobacco Tax: Cook
County Raises Tax
State Tax Review

Mar 9, 2004

The Cook
County, Illinois, cigarette tax rate has been increased from 18¢ per pack to $1
per pack, effective April 1, 2004. The 82¢ increase was included in a $2.99
billion balanced budget approved by the Cook County Board of Commissioners on
February 24, 2004. The cigarette tax increase was approved by the Finance
Committee in early February after the Commissioners failed to garner enough
votes to pass a new county lease transaction tax or an increase in the county
sales tax rate. (Telephone Conversation, Cook County, Illinois, Board of
Commissioners, February 24, 2004.)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.jointogether.org/sa/news/summaries/reader/0,1854,570255,00.html
Chicago's New Cigarette Tax Second Highest in Nation4/5/2004

An 82-cent-per-pack cigarette tax hike that went into effect April 1 in Cook County, Ill., which includes Chicago, gives the county the second highest tobacco tax in the nation behind New York City, the Associated Press reported April 2.

With the new tax, the average cost of a pack of cigarettes in the county is about $6.

The tax increase, approved by the Cook County Board in February, is aimed at helping smokers quit and preventing youngsters from starting. "I'm convinced that we will save many thousands of kids and adults from smoking," said Cook County Commissioner Robert Maldonado.

Tobacco maker Philip Morris USA said the tax hike by the county and one under consideration next year could have unintended consequences. "Over the past two years, as a record number of states have sought to address budget issues by using increases in excise taxes, there's been an increase of illegal or contraband activity in cigarette sales," said spokeswoman Jamie Drogin. _____________________________________________________________________________
Note: All proceeds were to be deposited in the Cook County Bureau of Health "...For expansion of existing programs or the development of new health programs which specifically address tobacco-related illnesses, which shall include but shall not be limited to, cessation of smoking classes, educational programs aimed at stopping smoking and the direct treatment of diseases such as sarcoidosis, emphysema, asthma, chronic bronchitis, lung cancer, cystic fibrosis, pneumonia, pulmonary hypertension, tuberculosis and any other disease related to the lung and heart.”
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commissioners voted as follows:

Yeas:
Commissioners Butler, Collins, Daley, Maldonado, Moreno, Murphy, Sims, Steele and President Stroger (9)

Nays:
Commissioners Claypool, Gorman, Goslin, Hansen, Peraica, Quigley, Silvestri and Suffredin (8)

Section 3. Tax Distribution Fund

(a) Such sum as was collected from the Retail Sale of Cigarette Tax Ordinance in Fiscal Year 2003 shall be transferred to the general fund of the County of Cook.

(b) Beginning in Fiscal Year 2004, all proceeds from the Retail Sale of Cigarette Tax Ordinance shall be deposited in a “Tobacco-Healthcare Distribution Fund” created in the treasury of Cook County.

(c) All amounts collected, beginning in Fiscal Year 2004, shall be used by the Cook County Bureau of Health for expansion of existing programs or the development of new health programs which specifically address tobacco-related illnesses, which shall include but shall not be limited to, cessation of smoking classes, educational programs aimed at stopping smoking and the direct treatment of diseases such as sarcoidosis, emphysema, asthma, chronic bronchitis, lung cancer, cystic fibrosis, pneumonia, pulmonary hypertension, tuberculosis and any other disease related to the lung and heart.

Section 4. Effective Date. This Amendment shall become effective upon its passage.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.co.cook.il.us/secretary/CommitteePages/Meeting%20Reports/Finance%20Committee/2004/2-3-04.htm

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON FINANCE
December 16, 2003

(recessed and reconvened on February 3, 2004)

Commissioner Peraica spoke in opposition to the proposed cigarette tax increase. Commissioner Peraica further commented that streamlining and reducing the cost of County government must be realized without increasing any tax.

Commissioner Claypool stated that if the proposed sales tax increase were levied, the decline in sales of cigarettes would negatively impact city and state revenue. Further, if these governmental bodies were to raise cigarette taxes to counteract declining sales, county sales of cigarettes would decline further. He further stated that the proposed tax increase would eliminate entry-level jobs.

Commissioner Hansen stated that he knows of no statistics that correlate cigarette sales to health benefits to the community. He asserted that increasing the value of cigarettes by increasing their tax would stimulate both the black market and turf war, and would induce related crimes.

Commissioner Suffredin introduced the amendment, which would funnel revenue from the proposed cigarette tax increase into a special tobacco healthcare distribution fund that would be used by the Cook County Bureau of Health Services to expand existing programs or develop new programs which specifically address heart and lung diseases.....


Dec 20, 2005
Chicago Suburb Approves Smoking Ban - Deerfield, IL

Idiots!!!! They didn't even put up a fight!!! Wait till March.....then the bars and restaurants will have plenty to say!

As I said before, the best thing about Deerfield is their bakery. I sure don't plan on spending any time there, any more than in Skokie.......and Skokie has the gigantic Old Orchard shopping center. Who needs it?

Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://cbs2chicago.com/topstories/local_story_354081651.html
Dec 20, 2005

Chicago Suburb Approves Smoking Ban
Smoking Prohibited In Public, Work Places


(AP) DEERFIELD Village trustees in the northern Chicago suburb of Deerfield have approved a ban on smoking in public and work places.

Trustees unanimously approved the ordinance six-nothing last night. It takes effect Mar. 1.

Trustee William Seiden says restaurants, taverns, offices and public gatherings such as farmers markets, parades and public assemblies will be included in the ban.

The City of Chicago passed a smoking ban for nearly all public places earlier this month that takes effect January 16th. But Chicago's ban gives taverns and bars located inside restaurants until the middle of 2008 to comply.


Dec 20, 2005
Chicago Suburb Approves Smoking Ban - Deerfield, IL

Idiots!!!! They didn't even put up a fight!!! Wait till March.....then the bars and restaurants will have plenty to say!

As I said before, the best thing about Deerfield is their bakery. I sure don't plan on spending any time there, any more than in Skokie.......and Skokie has the gigantic Old Orchard shopping center. Who needs it?

Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://cbs2chicago.com/topstories/local_story_354081651.html
Dec 20, 2005

Chicago Suburb Approves Smoking Ban
Smoking Prohibited In Public, Work Places


(AP) DEERFIELD Village trustees in the northern Chicago suburb of Deerfield have approved a ban on smoking in public and work places.

Trustees unanimously approved the ordinance six-nothing last night. It takes effect Mar. 1.

Trustee William Seiden says restaurants, taverns, offices and public gatherings such as farmers markets, parades and public assemblies will be included in the ban.

The City of Chicago passed a smoking ban for nearly all public places earlier this month that takes effect January 16th. But Chicago's ban gives taverns and bars located inside restaurants until the middle of 2008 to comply.



Dec 20, 2005
UK Study Suggests Smoking Bans in Public Places Leads to Increased Exposure to Second-Hand Smoke at Home

This article really makes good sense.....except for agreeing that SHS harms children. Most of us grew up around smoking parents. The Antis have stepped on their own toes this time with this attempt to invade smokers' homes with their bans.

This latest propaganda about smoking at home around children, does not seem to be having the results they anticipated.....and our government considers smokers to be the "goose that lays the golden eggs". Public officials everywhere are addicted to our tax dollars. If corporations performed financial forecasts with the same lack of foresight our states have used, they would go bankrupt. As long as smoking is legal, over 20% of the population will continue to smoke.....somewhere....

Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.newsinferno.com/storypages/12-19-2005~002.html
New York, NY
December 19 2005

UK Study Suggests Smoking Bans in Public Places Leads to Increased Exposure to Second-Hand Smoke at Home
Date Published: December 19, 2005
Source: Newsinferno News Staff

As more and more countries enact bans on smoking in public places to cut down on second-hand smoke, the locations where smokers can light up have dwindled considerably.

A study conducted by the department of economics of the University College London now indicates that total bans may not be the way to go since such absolute prohibitions only tend to displace the problem they seek to prevent.

When the researchers studied data from 30,000 non-smokers in states in the U.S. with varying anti-smoking bans, it was found that outright bans may not be the best solution. According to study author, Dr. Jerome Adda: "Policies aimed at reducing exposure to tobacco instead induce changes in behavior that can offset these policies. Bans in bars may induce smokers to spend more time at home, and therefore expose other members of the household, especially children."

Thus, it has been suggested that a more effective policy to control second-hand smoke exposure to non-smokers would be to provide designated areas where smoking would be permitted.

This would allow smokers to light up at more locations outside of their homes thereby providing them with alternatives to their living quarters where family members are subjected to the very exposure bans seek to prevent.

One pro-smoking lobby group in the UK claims the study proves outright bans are “just window dressing” that do not solve the problem but merely serve to promote the “agenda” of the anti-smoking advocates.


Dec 18, 2005
'Butt buses' ignite Edmonton furor - Edmonton, Canada

This first story below was compliments of Thomas Laprade. It appears that the Edmonton school busses are joining company with Gary Walker's motor home, in Lincoln NE, as an innovative idea to give smokers a place to light up in smoke banned areas. Canadians are taking advantage of the "grey area" loophole in their ban....I really hope it works!!!

I wonder how "smoking-allowed busses" would look parked in Chicago or Springfield, Illinois in front of restaurants?

Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20051216/SMOKINGBUS16/TPNational/Email 'Butt buses' ignite Edmonton furor
Bar owners find bylaw loophole for patrons to light up out of the cold


By KATHERINE HARDING
December 16, 2005

EDMONTON -- It's happy hour at T. B.'s Pub, but the place is almost empty. The real party is happening just steps away on a smoke-filled red school bus parked beside the bar in a gritty, working-class part of northwest Edmonton.
This is the "butt bus," a place for bar patrons to light up between pints of Molson Canadian and Bud.

It's also Edmonton City Hall's newest legal nightmare.

City officials have been working feverishly to figure out a way to shut down the buses that have sprung up outside at least two bars since the city's strict smoking bylaw came into effect July 1. A decision could come as early as today.

"This city is becoming so . . . communist. You'd think we lived in freaking Toronto or something," Kevin Schotts, a 31-year-old T. B. Pub regular, complained as he took a drag on his cigarette. "This is redneck Alberta. We should be able to have a smoke wherever we want to."
The bus belongs to the bar's owner, Tony Burke. He said there is nothing the city can do because it is his private vehicle and is registered under his name -- not the bar's.

"I can let people smoke on it if I want," said Mr. Burke, who is a non-smoker. "The city doesn't have control over what people do in their own vehicles. I did my research."

Mr. Burke bought the GMC bus for $1,500 and spent months, and about $1,000, renovating it, including moving the seats to line its walls and installing insulation and carpeting. Patrons aren't allowed to drink on the bus, and a lime-green sign has been posted, warning: "No beverages beyond this point at all!"

Mr. Burke said he had to open the special bus or risk losing his business all together, especially as winter approached and smokers would have to brave frigid conditions if they wanted a hit of nicotine.

Since the start of the smoking ban, which covers all public places, Mr. Burke estimates he has lost at least $10,000 a month.

"About 90 per cent of my customers smoke," he said. "I have to save my business. The city sure won't."

David Aitken, director of the city's bylaw-enforcement section, acknowledged that the butt buses have been an unexpected but "certainly creative" wrinkle in Edmonton's plan to go smoke free this year.

Mr. Aitken said city officials have been sifting through several bylaws, including the new smoking ban, to come up with a way to get rid of them, and he's confident there is a solution.

In the meantime, since the "butt buses" began to receive local media attention in recent days, variations on it are already starting to spring up, including a "butt van" that has opened outside a bar down the street from T. B.'s Pub.

Mr. Aitken said he is only aware of one other jurisdiction -- Winnipeg -- that was confronted with a similar problem. In December, 2003, a hotel owner was charged after patrons were caught smoking in a refurbished school bus that was decorated with tables, chairs and Christmas lights.

But Mr. Aitken said Winnipeg officials had more flexibility to lay charges in that situation because the smoking bylaw banned lighting up in all indoor public places; public places were defined as "where the public has access to."

Edmonton's bylaw isn't as broad, and only prohibits people from smoking in public buildings and/or structures, he added.

Despite the loophole, Edmonton Mayor Stephen Mandel has told reporters that bars should comply with the spirit of the law.

Back at T. B.'s Pub, there is already talk that some of the regulars may form a barricade around their beloved bus if city officials eventually try to take it away.

"We are not going to go down without a fight," warned Jarred Foran, a 29-year-old regular at the bar. "This is my home No. 2."

Mr. Schotts nodded in agreement. "I'm not one to care about civil liberties and all that, but this is getting out of hand," he said. "What's next? Arresting people who are smoking in their own cars?"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.journalstar.com/articles/2005/01/22/local/doc41f19a4334e10030489579.txt

Man vows to take smoking fight to court
By CHUCK BROWN / The Associated Press
January 23, 2005

A Lincoln man was issued a citation Friday for parking his motor home at the Hi-way Diner and not complying with city zoning codes for commercial property.

Gary Walker, who owns the motor home, was told to move the vehicle by Thursday. He moved the motor home, but just to another area of the parking lot.

Mike Merwick, director of the city's Building and Safety Department, said the lot was checked Friday and Walker was given a violation notice that he was not complying with city code.

"He either corrects it or it will be referred to the law department for prosecution," Merwick said.

Walker said he has no plans of moving the motor home.

"I will leave it here until a judge and a jury tell me to move it," Walker said.

Walker is butting heads with city officials over a motor home he allows patrons of a local diner to use as a smoking area.

On Jan. 10, Walker was informed that the motor home he parks outside the Hi-Way Diner along Nebraska Highway 2 is in violation of a city code banning the parking of recreational vehicles on commercial property.

Walker said he has been parking the motor home in the front of the diner, which his son, Scott, owns, since November and it wasn't a problem until the city's smoking ban went into effect on Jan. 1.

"It's all an issue with the smoking thing," Walker said.......


Dec 18, 2005
AARP Link

AARP was also one of the bigger donors to the Antismokers pushing the Washington State ban (I-901). See Norm Kjono's excellent piece on it at:
http://www.forces.org/writers/kjono/pdf/i901cont2005.pdf

I think the ACLU got hijacked by the Antis early on with the idea of nonsmokers having a "civil liberty" to breathe smoke-free air.

:/
Michael

Michael J. McFadden
Author of "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains"
Mid-Atlantic Regional Director of The Smoker's Club, Inc.
web page:
http://pasan.thetruthisalie.com/
mailto:
Cantiloper@aol.com


Dec 18, 2005
Religious groups join fray against tobacco - National

Hi Keith,

Thanks!! Here's the link below. This entire tobacco control issue, that is now becoming a "moral" issue is soooo hypocritical!! I can't believe this minister is trying to speak for Jesus! This is so sick! I wonder how much the Anti tobacco non-profits "donated" to this Texas minister (or any of the other religious backer named in the story) to persuade him to publicly make his totally asinine statement below?

Wasn't that one of the original premises of this country....to keep church and state separate. Of course, so was liberty and justice for all.....

"I'm sure there will be some people who think we're meddling where we don't belong," said the Rev. Glynden Bode, a Methodist minister in Missouri City, Texas. "But I don't think Jesus would say this is a wrong place for the church to be."

Houses of Worship were one of the targeted tobacco control goals, along with health insurance companies, named in the closing plenary at the 2005 National Conference on Tobacco and Health held last May in Chicago. Look like the tobacco control fascists are making good on their threats.

Garnet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.journalnow.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=WSJ/MGArticle/WSJ_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1128768766295
December 17, 2005
Religious groups join fray against tobaccoBy Bruce Taylor Seeman
NEWHOUSE NEWS SERVICE

WASHINGTON

Public-health advocates battling cigarette-makers have welcomed an unexpected ally to their foxhole: religious groups.

Interfaith organizations in New Jersey, Ohio and other states have joined efforts to discourage smoking and broaden tobacco regulation.

Religious leaders said that tobacco companies are morally wrong to market lethal products, particularly to youth. One group is pressuring U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay, R-Texas, to drop his opposition to oversight of cigarette sales by the Food and Drug Administration.

"I'm sure there will be some people who think we're meddling where we don't belong," said the Rev. Glynden Bode, a Methodist minister in Missouri City, Texas. "But I don't think Jesus would say this is a wrong place for the church to be."

About 22 percent of Americans smoke, according to federal estimates. Every day, nearly 3,900 youths try their first cigarette, and 1,500 become daily smokers.

Some religious groups already report success. In Indiana, the Hoosier Faith and Health Coalition helped block funding cuts for smoking-cessation programs. In Columbus, Ohio, the Metropolitan Area Church Council helped persuade the city council to ban smoking in public places. Protecting "the health of children and other individuals is a clear mandate for the church," said Alvin Hadley, the director of the council.

In New Jersey, a group called the Interfaith Partnership Campaign Against Tobacco is supporting a proposed smoking ban in most indoor public places. Pennsylvania Faith United Against Tobacco has circulated resolutions for a similar law.

"We would like to deliver a number of these to the Legislature and say: 'Look, there's overwhelming support for this. It's a moral issue,'" said the Rev. Sandra L. Strauss, the director of public policy for the Pennsylvania Council of Churches.

The pressure on DeLay comes from Texas Faith United Against Tobacco, a coalition of Southern Baptists, Methodists, Lutherans and others. The group has sent proclamations to about 200 religious leaders, asking them to join the call for DeLay to support FDA oversight.

In March, a related national group, Faith United Against Tobacco, wrote to DeLay, then House majority leader, saying, "We find it incredible that the FDA can ensure the safety of everyday items like macaroni and cheese, but has no authority over tobacco."

DeLay, who faces felony charges of money laundering in Texas, has stepped down from his leadership post. But religious leaders said they will keep pressuring him since he remains influential.

"We're really disturbed that Mr. DeLay and others have opposed FDA regulation," said the Rev. Cynthia Abrams, an addictions and health-care specialist at an agency within the United Methodist Church in Washington. "There's a lot of talk by politicians about family values. But when we're talking about - the health of families and children - that's a family value."

While tobacco kills 400,000 annually, many lives would be spared if cigarettes were regulated as a drug, health experts say. Current proposals would give the FDA power to restrict tobacco marketing, ban candy-flavor cigarettes, prohibit unproven claims about products' "reduced risks," and require cigarette-makers to disclose more about products' contents and health effects.

Last year, a bill containing a provision for FDA oversight passed the Senate 78-15. Maneuvers by DeLay killed similar legislation in the House. The idea has been reintroduced by Democratic and Republican sponsors, but the bills are stuck in Senate and House committees.

Ben Porritt, a DeLay spokesman, said that DeLay maintains his opposition to FDA oversight and believes that the focus should be on enforcing laws against smoking by minors.

An Illinois group, the Faith-Based Coalition United Against Tobacco, said it will join the fight by pressuring House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., to support FDA regulation

"Key religious leaders are concerned that he's not supporting this legislation," said the Rev. Tracy Smith Malone, pastor of Wesley United Methodist Church in Aurora. "We represent a large number of people who are not very happy."
Reader's Reaction
Posted on 12/17 at 06:24 PM
It beats all I've ever seen how hard everyone is fighting to control the use of tobacco and trying to ruin the tobacco industries. It is ok with these religious leaders that people can go out and drink and drive and kill. They don't seem to be pushing hard for any kind of legislation on that. Teenagers are teens and they are going to try all kinds of things out while they are young. They will find a way to drink, smoke, do dope, have sex or whatever. Enforce the laws you have for teens.
peggysrosebush1

Dec 18, 2005
ACLU and AARP

Hi Linda and Dale,

I wrote several letters to the ACLU, to different recommended e-mail addys. I never received the courtesy of a human response....only computer generated answers that made it clear no one had read my letters. If anyone wants my list of ACLU contacts, I will be glad to send them. I dropped my membership with the ACLU this year, for that reason.

In speaking to several people about the ACLU, the consensus seems to be that they do not want to fight a battle on behalf of smokers that would very possibly result in failure and possibly tarnish their image. However, the ACLU has publicly denounced Weyco for their discriminatory employment policy. Their people are backing the employees, but it does not seem a priority to them. The ACLU also made headlines last Autumn:

http://www.projo.com/news/content/projo_20050925_ntribe23.2755d94.html
ACLU backing tribe in smoke-shop suit
The state has asked that the case be reconsidered, saying the ruling would dramatically limit its ability to enforce laws on the Narragansetts' land.

Sunday, September 25, 2005
BY KATIE MULVANEY
Journal Staff Writer

The American Civil Liberties Union and the National Congress of American Indians are backing the Narragansett tribe in challenging the state's raid on a tribal smoke shop.

The Rhode Island Affiliate of the ACLU, the national ACLU and the NCAI filed a friend-of-the-court brief Wednesday arguing that the highly publicized raid violated the tribe's sovereign rights.
I still get the ACLU newsletter.

Once again, the only way to currently beat these discriminatory life style choice policies is at a state level. Michigan and Ohio need "Right to Privacy" laws enacted to protect employees.....as many other states (29) already have. The legislative process is, I believe, already under way in Michigan.

Also, forget AARP. Here is a blurb from Tobacco Free Kids, with Novelli as the Chair on the Board of Directors at TFK.
Chair
William D. Novelli
Chief Executive Officer
American Association of Retired Persons
Washington, DC
______________________________
Garnet Dawn - The Smoker's Club, Inc. - Midwest Regional Director
The United Pro Choice Smokers Rights Newsletter - http://www.smokersclubinc.com
Illinois Smokers Rights - http://www.illinoissmokersrights.com/
mailto:garnetdawn@comcast.net - Respect Freedom of Choice!


Dec 17, 2005
A New Plan of Action for Illinois

Jim has already let everyone know that we had an excellent Heartland Tobacco Summit IV meeting on the 15th. We had about 40 people present... far more than the few originally expected. It was really a lively and informative meeting with many good ideas and suggestions. Chicago and Illinois are not going to just sit back and take it, while these tobacco taxes and smoking bans continue to be implemented. I just spoke with a north side bar owner today. He and other bar owners in Chicago WANT to organize to begin fighting the Chicago ban...... That's where we need to come in...to help. Looks like I'll be going into the city again....and again.....after all!!!

Below is the basic Illinois New Action Plan I presented last Thursday......I hope you all agree that It's a good beginning!!!

Garnet

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


A New Illinois Action Plan Illinois Smokers Rights

A grassroots organization devoted to the promotion of limited
government, protection of personal property rights and
preservation of personal life style choices


Ms. Garnet Dawn
Midwest Regional Director
The Smokers Club, Inc.
Lake Bluff, IL 60044
garnetdawn@comcast.net

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Executive Summary

Illinois Smokers Rights is a new organization being formed in Illinois to provide communication methods and public representation for defenders of tobacco usage by developing strategies to inform and help individuals oppose increased economic and social persecution. We concentrate upon defense of personal life style choices and private property rights as presented in our United States Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Illinois Smokers Rights is currently an independent website domain functioning as a chapter within The Smoker’s Club, Inc., a national smokers rights organization based in New Hampshire.

Our goals for 2006 are to fight for fair and undiscriminatory taxing policies for the use of a legal product, promote reasonable consideration for smokers and non-smokers alike through proper ventilation of enclosed areas, and provide increased visibility for legitimate health studies based on sound science.

We plan to create new alliances within Illinois communities, colleges, newspapers, and private businesses to build a network of informed citizens on personal freedom issues. To date, we have employed the internet and e-mail contacts for visibility in addition to making occasional mailings of educational materials to politicians involved in the decision-making process concerning smoking bans and tobacco tax increases.

Planned activities include create a core of committed activists willing to study the issues and recruit others to join the cause, a newsletter, emailed calls to action, public speaking, media interviews, attendance at events, writing letters to editors and elected officials, hosting events, and meeting with elected officials. Illinois Smokers Rights expects to identify and help prepare additional spokespersons to communicate at an ever-growing number of venues.

Garnet Dawn Scheuer, the author of this proposal, has been active in smokers rights for the past two years, created the Illinois Smokers Group, a public Yahoo forum, the “Land of Lincoln Smokers Diary” blog, and the Illinois Smokers Rights website. She became Midwest Regional Director for The Smoker’s Club, Inc. in 2005.

Mission Statement

Illinois Smokers Rights is a new organization being formed in Illinois to provide communication methods and public representation for defenders of tobacco usage by developing strategies to inform and help individuals oppose increased economic and social persecution. We concentrate upon defense of personal life style choices and private property rights as presented in our United States Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Smokers in Illinois, as in other states, are under attack by policymakers, advocates, and special interest groups cloaking their true objectives in the language of public health. As a result, taxes on tobacco products have reached levels far beyond what is either fair or necessary to pay for whatever costs smokers impose on society. Restrictions on when and where smoking is allowed go far beyond health requirements and have become punitive.

The private property rights of restaurant and tavern owners are clearly threatened by smoking bans, pursued in the name of a mythical “right” to eat or drink in a smokefree environment in every privately owned establishment in the state, regardless of the preferences of the owners of those establishments or their customers.

In principle, we do not recognize that the state has the right to legislate the behavior of citizens when it comes to personal choice and lifestyle, regardless of the reason used to justify such interference. We stand tall for the rights of smokers and aim to represent them wherever matters of smoking policy are considered.

Organization

Illinois Smokers Rights is an independent website domain, functioning as a chapter within The Smoker’s Club, Inc., a smokers rights organization based in New Hampshire.

The Smokers Club, Inc. is a resource for state and local groups, a media clearinghouse for "the other side of the story," and an online community of smokers rights defenders.

Founded in 1994 in Massachusetts, its United Pro Choice Smokers Rights Newsletter is the only smokers’ rights newsletter dealing with various freedom topics. With over 350 weekly issues, the newsletter is the leading source of news and resources for smokers rights advocates in the U.S., attracting some 150 million yearly hits to the Club’s Web site. While there are no formal chapters or membership lists yet, the organization's reach firmly stretches across the U.S. and beyond its borders. The Action Committee functions as the core staff for the Club, while the USA Regional Directors respond to interview requests based on geographic location. Regional Directors are listed on the Club website, including a listing of individual states within each region and e-mail contact addresses for each director. The United States territories are divided into New England (Darlene Brennan), Mid-Atlantic (Michael J. McFadden), Southeast (Bob Pritchard), Midwest (Garnet Dawn), Assistant Midwest (David W. Kuneman), Southwest (Jack G. Ritchie Jr.) and Western (Sandy Sanden). An organizational chart appears at the end of this proposal.

The Club has organized and hosted annual smokers' rights conferences for several years, with the most recent event held in Las Vegas, Nevada at Caesar's Palace for three days in June of 2005. Plans are underway for the 2006 conference.

The Smoker's Club, Inc. has developed as a grassroots and voluntary organization. With the continued development of server capabilities, various new domains are already receiving Club support for their Web sites. In addition, training and assistance are available to cover all aspects of activism, computer use and Web page creation.

Goals

Our goals include:

¨ To identify more Illinois residents who support the right of adults to make personal lifestyle choices and accept responsibility for the consequences, as well as the private property rights of those who operate public facilities that are friendly to smokers. The first step to effective defense of smokers rights is to identify and organize our defenders.

¨ To help our allies communicate with one another and organize action plans with other advocates.

¨ To promote better understanding of the medical science of smoking and exposure to secondhand smoke. Our goal is not to deny that there are health consequences of the smoking habit, but to counter the exaggerated fears being promulgated through the media by often self-interested advocates.

¨ We need to change public opinion toward smokers so that it is no longer acceptable to support any tax and any new regulation by saying smokers are too stupid or too addicted to know what they are doing. The public needs to be reminded about basic principles of individual liberty and limited government which ought to be brought to bear on this issue but so seldom are.

We plan to create new alliances within Illinois communities, colleges, newspapers, and private businesses to build a network of informed citizens on personal freedom issues. To date, we have mainly employed the internet and e-mail contacts for visibility in addition to making occasional mailings of educational materials to politicians involved in the decision-making process concerning smoking bans and tobacco tax increases.

In 2006 and beyond we will fight for fair and undiscriminatory taxing policies for the use of a legal product, promote reasonable consideration for smokers and non-smokers alike through proper ventilation of enclosed areas, and provide increased visibility for legitimate health studies based on sound science.

About Garnet Dawn

Ms. Garnet Dawn became involved with smokers rights two years ago. She created the Illinois Smokers Group, a public Yahoo forum for smokers feeling isolated by growing social stigma while facing increased tax discrimination with nowhere to communicate or exchange their ideas, objections, questions and information.

Garnet also created the “Land of Lincoln Smokers Diary, a blog, and the Illinois Smokers Rights website in 2005 and became Midwest Regional Director for The Smoker’s Club, Inc. In her Midwest Regional Director capacity, Scheuer responds to media interview requests from newspapers, radio and television to present smoking advocate and personal property rights viewpoints, representing Illinois Smokers Rights and The Smoker’s Club, Inc.

In 2005, Garnet has been quoted by Milwaukee M Magazine, newspapers in Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, Wyoming and New Jersey; been a guest on Las Vegas and Wisconsin public radio programs; interviewed on radio news in Arizona and Ohio, taped by university students and appeared in a debate on Channel 26, “North Halsted,” on Chicago public television. She also attended the “2005 National Conference on Tobacco or Health” in Chicago in May 2005 and the International Smokers Rights Conference in Las Vegas, Nevada in June.

Garnet is a native of Illinois. She was born in Chicago and raised in suburban, Northbrook, Illinois. After graduation from Glenbrook North highschool, she relocated to southern California and then Phoenix, Arizona for several years before returning to Illinois. She was employed by Advance Transformer Co., Chicago; Soiltest, Inc., Lake Bluff; and Liquid Controls Corporation, Lake Bluff in purchasing capacities from 1985 to 1995.

During 1995 she became involved in the Fort Sheridan Joint Planning Committee. Upon the dissolution of the FSJPC, she entered employment with Lake Forest branch of A.G. Edwards and Sons, Inc., from 1996 into 2000. Over the past five years, Garnet has been devoting time to family, family real estate, traveling and become active in smokers rights.

Programs
Anticipated programs of Illinois Smokers Rights in 2006 include the following:

1. Build a bigger list of members and allies beginning with e-mail addresses and contact information currently developed by Illinois Smokers Rights, The Heartland Institute, and other sympathetic organizations. Currently this list contains more than 200 names. We will add new allies from college libertarian groups, letter writers to newspapers, chambers of commerce, and restaurant, bar, bowling alley and private club owners and managers.

2. Host regular meetings for smokers and interested parties to discuss public relevant smoking issues. Each month, members and allies will be invited to come together to share ideas, plot strategy, and perhaps to hear speakers. These will initially be located in Chicago and its North Shore suburbs, areas under heavy threat from smoking bans in 2006 and is also the home location of Illinois Smokers Rights.

3. Launch a bi-weekly e-newsletter containing selected Illinois and national news topics for interested readers. The newsletter will alert members to pending legislation and new research and commentary on issues important to smokers.

4. Launch calls for action to the growing list of allies and supporters with links to “letter-to-the editor” editors, elected officials, and regulators to respond to current pending local, state and federal legislation. (Many environmental groups currently enable their e-mail newsletter readers to petition legislators with pre-written letters about pending laws by entering only basic personal information. We expect to follow their lead.)

5. Create a Speakers Bureau of smokers rights advocates willing to appear at hearings, meetings, and conferences in Illinois. Potential speakers will need to be trained to avoid making claims that cannot be supported by sound research. Potential speakers are identified below.

(Important disclaimer: Several speakers’ names appear here without the knowledge of their bearers, as are they not aware of this business plan proposal. Bios can be supplied upon request.)

The speakers’ travel expenses and honoraria would need to be determined, but costs would be reasonable. We will create a demand for our speakers through mailings and follow-up phone calls to local chambers of commerce, community clubs, and through political contacts.

Possible Speakers Bureau Members
Jim Blogg, Illinois
Terry Gray, Kentucky
Sue Jeffers, Minnesota
Michael McFadden, Pennsylvania
Jonathan Pinard, New York
Gary Nolan, Ohio
Mark Wernimont, South Dakota
Samantha Phillipe, New Hampshire.

6. Increase hard copy postal mailing of educational materials and pertinent information beyond currently compiled lists of city and state political officials. The Heartland Institute has offered use of its complete lists of state and local elected officials and extensive media lists. For example, a selected mailing of copies of Michael McFadden’s Dissecting Antismokers’ Brains and/or a customized version of his 25-page report, Why You Should Fight A Smoking Ban may generate attention among reporters and elected officials.

7. An expanded op-ed and news release program will put defenses of smokers into the hands of Chicago and other Illinois newspapers on a frequent basis. We will create a regular schedule for these submissions and post them on the Illinois Smokers Rights and The Smoker’s Club, Inc. Web sites. Ms. Dawn has an extensive reference file of letters sent to editors in the past two years that can serve as a resource for this effort.

8. Produce new pro-smoker literature for distribution by mail or by hand at public events. We have produced a “Stop the Chicago Smoking Ban” two-sided flier and have linked it on Illinois Smokers Rights and The United Pro Choice Smokers Rights Newsletter for easy printing by individual smoking advocates. In addition to internet on-line availability of smoker’s rights fliers, in 2006 we plan to have professionally printed quantities of these educational tools available for distribution to interested businesses, groups and residents.

9. Plan and execute meetings with local and state elected officials, beginning with Lake and Cook counties, and reaching as many municipalities in the areas as may be considering smoking bans in 2006 as the result of the passage of The Illinois Clean Air Act Amendment in 2005.

10. Contribute toward the legal defense of individuals for breaking unconstitutional smoking ban ordinances and resisting the retroactive collection of Illinois sales taxes from persons who purchased cigarettes online.

11. Place advertising in Internet news sources, radio, and alternative newspapers to promote informal member meetings and protests in Chicago and the North Shore suburbs, including pro-smoking give-away items for attendees. We have already been approached by “The Onion”, but lacked the funds to take advantage of their circulation through advertising. In this vein, we would like to explore the possibility of creating public service announcement type ads and having them aired at no charge.

12. Create inexpensive free promotional items, such as pens and matchbooks featuring an Illinois Smokers Rights logo to help build a sense of membership and pride among our supporters. The Illinois Smokers Rights Web site currently has a link, under The Smokers Club, Inc., with Cafe Press for the sale of a variety of Illinois smoking logo items.

Conclusion

Smoking bans and discriminatory tobacco taxes are a growing threat to our individual liberty and private property rights. Passage in December 2005 of the Chicago smoking ban and implementation starting in January 2006 of the Illinois Indoor Air Act - Home Rule are clear evidence that the battle is going on here in Illinois.

It is imperative that more people come to understand that attacks on the legal rights of smokers are also threats to everyone’s rights under the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights. Until now, smokers rights activists have lacked the organization and the resources to combat the well-funded public health advocacy groups that dominate the public debate.

We can begin to reverse the trends toward ever-more abusive government regulation of smokers lifestyles. Only through activities including research, writing, meeting with other activists, and communicating with Illinois’ elected officials will we be effective.

To become part of this exciting new project, please contact:
______________________________
Garnet Dawn - The Smoker's Club, Inc. - Midwest Regional Director
The United Pro Choice Smokers Rights Newsletter - http://www.smokersclubinc.com
Illinois Smokers Rights - http://www.illinoissmokersrights.com/
mailto:garnetdawn@comcast.net - Respect Freedom of Choice!



Dec 17, 2005
Madison County Decision
Phillip Morris Wins in Illinois; Another slap at jackpot justice


"It's a terrible, sad day for consumers in Illinois," said Jeffrey
Cooper, whose law firm, Simmons Cooper, is based in East Alton,
Illinois, and represents individuals with personal injury claims
against tobacco companies.
Well, hold on there, Mr. Cooper. It's not as bad as it sounds. With you losing your case and your despicable clients not getting the $10 billion they wanted to make them rich without having to work for it, consumers won't have to pay higher prices for their cigarettes. Sounds like a great day for consumers to me.

Jim
jimbl@forces-illinois.org
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/12/16/business/tobacco.php

Phillip Morris Wins in Illinois
DECEMBER 16, 2005

The tobacco industry has won a major victory in its battle with
tobacco litigation lawyers.

The Supreme Court of Illinois on Thursday threw out a $10 billion
judgment against Philip Morris USA in a class-action suit that had
accused the company of deceiving smokers in a marketing campaign for
its "light" cigarettes with lower levels of tar and nicotine.

In a 4 to 2 decision, the court ruled that the use of "light" and
"low tar" for cigarettes was authorized by the Federal Trade
Commission and that Philip Morris could not be held liable for such
marketing.

The decision paves the way for an expected restructuring of Philip
Morris's parent company, Altria, and a spinoff of its Kraft Foods
division. Louis Camilleri, Altria's chief executive, has said the
company is likely to pursue a restructuring once major litigation
hurdles have been cleared.

An analyst, David Adelman of Morgan Stanley, said, "I think this is
one of the most important decisions in the history of tobacco
litigation."

Philip Morris still faces two other significant legal challenges,
but analysts say the Price case in Illinois, so called after its
lead plaintiff, Sharon Price, had been the most formidable,
primarily because of its $10 billion award. "This was the big risk
to the company, both psychologically and financially," said Marc
Greenberg, an analyst at Deutsche Bank.

Greenberg said that if Philip Morris is able to win a favorable
ruling in the long-running Engle case in Florida, he thinks the
company could go through with a sale of Kraft by the middle of next
year.

Altria had no comment on Thursday's decision other than to say it
was "gratified" by the outcome. Currently, Altria owns 87 percent of
Kraft's stock.

The ruling adds to an increasingly favorable litigation outlook for
Philip Morris and is likely to cripple a whole class of cases. While
new tobacco suits are being filed every month, many have been
dismissed. This year, more than 135 suits naming Philip Morris have
been tossed out by courts.

Plaintiff lawyers characterized Thursday's ruling as one based on
narrow legal grounds relating to government regulation. They point
out that a lower Illinois court found in 2003 that Philip Morris's
Marlboro Lights and Cambridge Lights cigarettes were not healthier
than regular cigarettes and, in fact, were more toxic. That ruling
was overturned Thursday.

"It's a terrible, sad day for consumers in Illinois," said Jeffrey
Cooper, whose law firm, Simmons Cooper, is based in East Alton,
Illinois, and represents individuals with personal injury claims
against tobacco companies.

God grants liberty only to those who love it,
and are always ready to guard and defend it.
- Daniel Webster





http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-0512160329dec16,0,1189750.story

Another slap at jackpot justice - Madison County Decision
December 16, 2005

On Thursday the Illinois Supreme Court took another welcome slap at a long out-of-control civil justice system in this state. In a 4-2 ruling, the court nixed a $10.1 billion judgment against Altria Group's Philip Morris and sent the giant class action back to a Madison County court with orders to dismiss it. Philip Morris did not defraud consumers in marketing its "light" cigarettes, the court ruled.

Think what you will of tobacco and the companies that sell it. This is a judgment that should please the citizens of Illinois. For the second time in four months, the state Supreme Court has dismissed huge class actions on the grounds that no consumer fraud occurred. In August, the court ruled for State Farm in an insurance case involving parts used to fix cars after accidents.

For too long, Illinois has been a magnet for plaintiffs' lawyers looking for a friendly venue in which to press class-action cases that overreach the bounds of law and common sense. This practice of exploiting Illinois' court system to win egregious awards is variously called forum-shopping or jackpot justice. Citizens have been catching on to the scam. That largely explains why, last spring, public pressure forced state legislators to pass medical malpractice reforms.

The suit against Philip Morris was brought on behalf of more than 1 million smokers who had bought Philip Morris' Marlboro and Cambridge "light" brands over decades. A Madison County judge had ordered the company to pay $10.1 billion after ruling that its use of the terms "light" and "lowered tar and nicotine" misled consumers into thinking they were buying safer cigarettes. The plaintiffs claimed no health injury; they sought damages for the alleged deception.

But the Supreme Court ruled that the Federal Trade Commission "could, and did, authorize" tobacco companies to use such terms; therefore, Philip Morris committed no fraud even if those terms may be misleading.

The majority opinion by Justice Rita Garman did not rule on whether the class should have been certified in the first place but did raise doubts about it. "We question whether it can reasonably be said that the words `light' and `lowered tar and nicotine' actually deceived more than a million people for decades," she wrote.

Justice Lloyd Karmeier, concurring, stated that for a consumer fraud claim to be upheld, plaintiffs must prove they suffered actual damages. He cited Sharon Price, the smoker in whose name the case was brought. She continued to smoke light cigarettes even after "this litigation alerted her" to the fact they were no safer than regular cigarettes. Price paid no more per pack and testified that switching to lights didn't cause her to buy more. Where was the economic harm?

Justices Charles Freeman and Thomas Kilbride dissented. Freeman accused the majority of holding such lawsuits to "different standards in an effort to reduce the perception that the Illinois court system serves as a playpen for the disingenuous class action practitioner."

Well, we're for any action that reduces Illinois' perception as a playpen for disingenuous lawyers. But the majority isn't holding class actions to different standards. Rather, it is insisting they comply with the state's consumer fraud laws. If you don't like those laws, wrote Garman, talk to the General Assembly. Case dismissed.