US House E&C Cmte sends letter to DHHS Secretary Sebelius over use of CDC grants for lobbying

[Bill Godshall]

US House Energy and Commerce Committee sends letter to DHHS Secretary Sebelius over the use of CDC grants for lobbying
http://www.cspnet.com/sites/default...r to Secretary Sebelius (August 13, 2012).pdf

Congress Raises Serious Questions About Use of Federal Funds for Lobbying
http://www.cspnet.com/news/tobacco/...us-questions-about-use-federal-funds-lobbying

The letter to Sebelius not only criticizes CDC for giving grant funds for illegal lobbying purposes, but also requests lots of detailed information from DHHS on the spending of those CDC grants. This investigation by the House E&C Cmte could cause a lot of problems for Obama appointees at CDC and elsewhere in DHHS.

Please note that many of these CDC grants were spent on demonizing e-cigarettes and smokeless tobacco products, and lobbying for bans on their sales and use, as well as outdoor smoking bans at parks, beaches and other government property.

Here's an article and op/ed about this from July

7/10/12 article in The Hill revealing DHHS Inspector General "early alert" to CDC Director Tom Frieden
http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatc...ays-grants-may-have-illegally-funded-lobbying

7/23/12 op/ed by Jeff Stier in Roll Call urging Congress to investigate CDC grants spent for lobbying
http://www.conservativeblog.org/amy...ess-must-investigate-cdc-lobbying-grants.html

 

[Placebo Effect]

Much of the press coverage on CPPW programs has been about its anti-obesity (aka, soda taxes, bans, etc.) thanks to the well-funded beverage lobby taking the program on aggressively.

For those unfamiliar with the CPPW program and its implications for smoke-free tobacco products, please read this article I co-write with Jeff Stier -- The War on E-Cigarettes - Jeff Stier & Gregory Conley - National Review Online

I'll be encouraging Jeff, as well as my colleagues at CASAA and Bill, to send letters to these members of the E&C Committee offering to testify about the programs. I'll also be combing through the e-mails I've retrieved from FOIA requests to Seattle to see if any illegal lobbying may have taken place.

In short, CPPW tobacco money has paid for...

- E-cigarette usage bans in Seattle and Boston
- An unsuccessful attempt to ban dissolvable tobacco sales in Linn County, Iowa
- A ban on the sale of non-mint, menthol, or wintergreen tobacco products (including e-cigarettes) in Providence, Rhode Island.
- Mobile, Alabama received CPPW money, and not surprisingly, a proposed smoking ban there included e-cigarettes (they were later removed)

The Providence, Rhode Island ban was the most offensive, as there was not a single news article about the ban before it was enacted. As I recall, I spoke to the clerk of the Providence City Council and she was unaware of any press releases, news article, etc. from before the ban was passed.

If an e-cigarette store wanted to open in Rhode Island, all they would have to do to skirt the law is sell the flavored liquid and the nicotine separately. However, the complications of this will likely stop any entrepreneur from doing so.

 

[Fiamma]

US House Energy and Commerce Committee sends letter to DHHS Secretary Sebelius over the use of CDC grants for lobbying
http://www.cspnet.com/sites/default...r to Secretary Sebelius (August 13, 2012).pdf

Congress Raises Serious Questions About Use of Federal Funds for Lobbying
http://www.cspnet.com/news/tobacco/...us-questions-about-use-federal-funds-lobbying

The letter to Sebelius not only criticizes CDC for giving grant funds for illegal lobbying purposes, but also requests lots of detailed information from DHHS on the spending of those CDC grants. This investigation by the House E&C Cmte could cause a lot of problems for Obama appointees at CDC and elsewhere in DHHS.

Please note that many of these CDC grants were spent on demonizing e-cigarettes and smokeless tobacco products, and lobbying for bans on their sales and use, as well as outdoor smoking bans at parks, beaches and other government property.

It's about time someone noticed what the CDC is doing. Thanks Bill for the articles.

 

[Bill Godshall]

I've had meetings with and have been sending lots of info to staff of House E & C Cmte and Subcomittees exposing and criticizing the false and misleading statements and actions opposing tobacco harm reduction by Obama's FDA, CDC, US SG, DHHS, military services. And of course, I've also sent it to tobacco companies and their lobbyists in DC.

I've also been encouraging House E&C Cmte to introduce/support legislation, hold hearings, send letters to FDA's Hamberg and otherwise oppose these actions by Obama appointees.

The E&C Cmte's investigation and letters focusses on illegal lobbying (which is smart), and the 8/13 letter states:

These questions were submitted in response to numerous examples of CPPW grantees reporting information to CDC regarding lobbying activities for specific laws and policy goals, such as higher tobacco and sugar taxes, as well as zoning restrictions to halt restaurant construction.

If nothing else, these actions by the House E&C Cmte have probably halted the blatently illegally lobbying activities by CDC grant recipients.

 

[Bill Godshall]

DHHS has been funding the MS Health Dept to lobby for smokefree workplace legislation (that included e-cig use bans), which failed earlier this year in the MS legislature, and I suspect these same folks are now using the federal funds to lobby for local ordinances (see relate thread on Moss Point).

Project Summary

The Mississippi State Department of Health (MSDH) Office of Tobacco Control (OTC) will utilize funding to engage in a two-year campaign that will result in the passage and implementation of a comprehensive, statewide smoke-free air law.

I cannot believe DHHS would fund a grant containing that statement, and yet it appears on the first sentence of the grant.


It also looks like DHHS has been funding (probably illegally) the University of Kentucky to lobby for laws that ban smoking and e-cig use.

Project Title
An Intervention for Promoting Smoke-free Policy in Rural Kentucky
Project Summary

The purpose of the parent grant is to test the effects of a community intervention on smoke-free policy outcomes in rural underserved communities. The intervention combines assessment of community readiness with tailored, evidence-based dissemination and implementation strategies. Rural residents are more likely to be exposed to secondhand smoke than those living in urban areas, reflecting a major rural-urban disparity in smoke-free laws.

From 3Q2011 report

Data collection for Phase 1 is complete. During Phase 1, we conducted 11 focus groups in Lawrence (32 participants), Rowan (37) and Breckinridge Counties (13) with 82 total participants. Phase 1 data analysis and manuscript preparation are in process. Phase 1 findings have been incorporated into standard practice for parent grant Treatment counties. Guidance documents on branding and development of smoke-free media campaigns were developed and shared with the Media Treatment communities. These documents provide a menu of evidence-based options for media messaging and brand logos based on the community's goals and stage of readiness. Three rural communities (Rowan, Monroe, and Ohio)were selected for Phase 2. Monroe and Rowan, the media treatment counties, both implemented media campaigns which included messages regarding health effects of SHS exposure for workers and personal stories. In addition, they both used messages tailored to their communities whic h spotlighted local data. Ohio County is the media control county receiving standard practice for public education. Four direct-mail postcard mailings were completed in Rowan County. The fourth mailing took place during the last week of May. Posters were distributed to local businesses. Paid media channels also included a movie theater advertisement, newspaper ads, billboards, and giveaways (fans). The fourth postcard mailing in Monroe County took place during the second week of June. In addition, the Monroe campaign included posters, billboards, a newspaper ad, yard signs, and t-shirts. Campaign evaluation (RDD telephone survey) started on July 23, 2011. Data collection in Ohio County is complete (n = 500); preliminary data analysis is underway. Data collection in Monroe and Rowan Counties is in progress (280 participants in each county). We are working with a web designer to upload the most effective messages/ads on our website to share with advocates.This project is complete.

 

[Bill Godshall]

And a DHHS grant to Idaho Health Dept

Project Summary

Project Filter continues to work with the local public health districts to implement smoke-free initiatives in parks, tot-lots and playgrounds.

Project Filter has contracted with the seven local public health districts to work with cities to adopt smoke-free parks. Signage has been purchased. As of February 3, 2012, 30 Idaho cities (including Boise, Idaho's largest city) have implemented smoke-free initiatives for city parks. Most have implemented completely smoke-free initiatives, while others have adopted a footage initiative around playgrounds and tot-lots, picnic shelters, and bleachers. Project Filter completed this project on February 3, 2012.

 

[VapApe]

I have said this before and I will say it again.

Many thanks till your better paid Bill.

 

[Bill Godshall]

And a DHHS grant to the North Carolina Health Dept

Project Summary

North Carolina, with the leadership of the Tobacco Prevention and Control Branch (TPCB) in NC DPH, will build support for comprehensive statewide policies for smoke-free workplaces and public places by January 2012. TPCB will serve as a resource for both seasoned and new partners to build public, media, and legislative support for a comprehensive smoke-free law.

The NC legislature enacted a smokefree workplace law in 2011.

 

[Bill Godshall]

And a DHHS grant to the Los Angeles County Health Dept.

Project Summary

Implement a coordinated community action plan comprised seven interventions, including multi-faceted public education campaign, and the implementation of a variety of evidence-based interventions at the city and county-level including comprehensive smoke free outdoor air policies, smoke free multi-unit housing policies, point of purchase marketing restrictions, cigarette .... litter free policies, a policy and smoking cessation initiative targeting schools, and smoking cessation initiatives targeting social service agencies.

From the 2Q2011 report
http://www.recovery.gov/Transparenc...ctSummary508.aspx?AwardIDSUR=90812&qtr=2011Q2

TRUST had smoke-free outdoor area efforts underway in 10 cities and smoke-free multi-unit housing efforts in 8. The Carson and Hermosa Beach City Councils took first step in adopting a comprehensive outdoor policy. The Huntington Park and Santa Monica City Councils took initial actions towards smoke-free housing policies that include smoke-free units. The City of Long Beach launched a Fresh Air Dining media campaign modeled after TRUST?s Fresh Air Dining LA campaign. TRUST met with City of San Fernando to provide technical assistance on outdoor air policies. TRUST initiated efforts to help fight predatory ?other tobacco products,? including small cigars. TRUST continued collaboration with American Academy of Pediatrics on housing and cessation efforts. TRUST continued to educate about the benefits of a $1 increase in the price of cigarettes and developed a Health Impact Analysis tool. TRUST also continued to educate local government and community leaders about the need to close exemptions in the current California Smoke-Free Workplace law.

 

[Bill Godshall]

And a DHHS grant to the Santa Clara Health Dept

Project Summary

The CPPW Tobacco Prevention and Control Program will utilize media and marketing to counter pro-tobacco influences, establish local tobacco retail licensing requirements, limit tobacco advertising near schools, advocate effectively for increasing the price of tobacco through evidence-based pricing strategies, and build significantly greater capacity for smoking cession services.

From 2Q2012 report

CPPW-T Prevention Accomplishments March 19 ? June 30, 2012 College/University Campuses ? Santa Clara Univ. Student Senate approved resolution to support a smoke-free campus. Draft proposal submitted to Univ. Coordinating Committee (UCC). Task force will study tobacco issues and present a report to UCC, Provost, and the President. ? San Jose St. Academic Senate approved a policy recommendation for a smoke-free campus and sent findings to President for a decision. Smoke-free Outdoor Areas ? San Jose City Council voted unanimously to adopt smoke-free areas in outdoor dining establishments, service lines, and outdoor common areas of multi-family residences. Impacts > 945,000 residents. ? Sunnyvale City Council adopted ordinance that makes all parks, trails, and other recreation areas smoke-free. Impacts > 140,000. ? Milpitas City Council approved smoke-free parks ban; moves forward with smoke-free worksites discussion. Impacts > 66,000. ? Morgan Hill City Council adopted comprehensive outdoor smoke-free policy with exemptions. Smoking is prohibited in: outdoor dining (unless on private property), entryways, public recreation areas, service lines, within 20 ft. of entryways, public events (w/ specified smoking area). Impacts > 37,000. Tobacco Product Excise Tax ? Prop. 29 for cancer research was not approved by residents of CA. ? > 60% of Santa Clara Co. residents voted ?yes?

If this isn't illegal lobbying with federal grant funds, I don't know what is.

BTW to "advocate effectively for increasing the price of tobacco through evidence-based pricing strategies" is to campaign for tobacco tax hikes, which is clearly lobbying.

 

[Bill Godshall]

And a DHHS grant to the Respiratory Health Association of Metropolitan Chicago
Project Summary

From 4Q2011 report

In addition, the Chicago Housing Authority has converted 4 of its communities to smoke-free to date, and recently committed to a fifth community which will be smoke-free in the near future.

We continued to work with officials from the Park District and Chicago Public Schools on pending policy changes, expected to be enacted in spring 2012.

Population-based strategies include public education and policies to prohibit vending and restrict tobacco advertising in retail outlets and in the community.

These quarterly reports look like those filed by lobbyists to their employers/contractors.

 

[Bill Godshall]

And a DHHS grant to Jefferson County (AL) Health Dept.

Project Summary
From 2!2012 report

3) A public hearing regarding a smoke-free ordinance was held for the City of Bessemer. 4) After holding a public hearing, the City Council for Birmingham unanimously voted to adopt a smoke-free ordinance.

There's another very recent thread on Bessemer, AL's recently enacted smoking ban, as well as an older thread on Birgmingham's ordinance (which initially banned e-cig use, that was later amended out before the law was enacted).

 

[Bill Godshall]

And the DHHS grant to King County (WA)

From 2Q2010 report at
http://www.recovery.gov/Transparenc...ctSummary508.aspx?AwardIDSUR=90028&qtr=2010Q2

Staff have also met with the King County Board of Health Tobacco Policy Committee in May and in June to develop county-wide tobacco policies to be implemented later in 2010. A package of policies will be brought to the Board of Health for a vote in fall of 2010. The CPPW Communications Team is finalizing a Strategic Communications Plan that includes the following elements: overview, an integrated communication campaign, audiences, current environment, tactical framework (research, campaign brand and message development, earned media, paid media and media partnerships, digital strategy, policymaker and grassroots outreach, and grantee capacity and coordination), assessment, budget and timeline.

From 3Q2010 report at
http://www.recovery.gov/Transparenc...ctSummary508.aspx?AwardIDSUR=90028&qtr=2010Q3

The plan is a framework for communication research, campaign brand and message development, earned media, paid media and media partnerships, digital strategy, grassroots and policymaker outreach, and building grantee capacity and coordination. In September, the King County Board of Health adopted changes to code on smoking in public places and places of employment that closed loopholes in the existing code, and passed a resolution encouraging no-smoking policies in multi-family housing. The first Coalition meeting was held in September. 200 CPPW Coalition members attended the meeting, facilitated by the Prevention Institute. The Coalition objectives are to identify a shared agenda and to create networking and collaboration opportunities.

From 4Q/2010 report at
Project Summary

The King County Board of Health adopted regulations to restrict the sale of electronic smoking products to adults only, to ban free or heavily discounted samples of these products and to restrict the public use of products in alignment with the King County Code for Smoking in Public Places and Places of Employment.

 

[Fiamma]

What a snakepit you've uncovered.

I earnestly hope that your efforts bear loads of fruit with the committee. These are OUR tax dollars being spent AGAINST the public safety and welfare to the profit of big pharmaceutical companies. This MUST be stopped in its tracks.

Thank you for your diligence and perseverance in rooting out this information, and your tenacity in pursuing the bad guys.

 

[Placebo Effect]

Yet another find -- http://www.cspnet.com/news/tobacco/articles/stimulus-grants-used-lobby-tobacco-taxes

As one example of a possible violation, Briant cited a $10-million HHS/Center for Disease Control grant to the Philadelphia Department of Health. The grant included funds to promote adoption of an ordinance that would have required a graphic health warning poster to be placed next to each cash register in Philadelphia stores that sell tobacco products.

While e-cigarettes were excluded from this proposed (almost undoubtedly unconstitutional) ordinance, it still would have given the Department of Health the ability to lie about the risks of smokeless tobacco.

I was barred from speaking at the event because I was something like 10 minutes late with submitting my request to speak. I attended and tried to get added to the list when another speaker was unable to attend, but was told it was simply not possible. I channeled my inner Godshall and, after all the speakers went, simply stood up and made a 25 second statement. I was nearly thrown out. That was a fun night.

Wisely, the Philadelphia Board of Health did not pursue the ordinance any further.

 

[Hulamoon]

And a big Plus One from me too Bill

What a snakepit you've uncovered.

I earnestly hope that your efforts bear loads of fruit with the committee. These are OUR tax dollars being spent AGAINST the public safety and welfare to the profit of big pharmaceutical companies. This MUST be stopped in its tracks.

Thank you for your diligence and perseverance in rooting out this information, and your tenacity in pursuing the bad guys.

 

[VapApe]

Yet another find -- http://www.cspnet.com/news/tobacco/articles/stimulus-grants-used-lobby-tobacco-taxes



While e-cigarettes were excluded from this proposed (almost undoubtedly unconstitutional) ordinance, it still would have given the Department of Health the ability to lie about the risks of smokeless tobacco.

I was barred from speaking at the event because I was something like 10 minutes late with submitting my request to speak. I attended and tried to get added to the list when another speaker was unable to attend, but was told it was simply not possible. I channeled my inner Godshall and, after all the speakers went, simply stood up and made a 25 second statement. I was nearly thrown out. That was a fun night.

Wisely, the Philadelphia Board of Health did not pursue the ordinance any further.

Bravo Placebo bravo well done sir.

And you can always say I have been thrown out of a lot better places than this

 

[Bill Godshall]

The proposed Board of Health regulation in Philly died very quickly after I submtted written testimony to the board (which an old friend and public health colleague is on) pointing out that it (like a nearly identical regulation passed in NYC) violated the Federal Cigarette Labelling and Advertising Act (FCLAA), and that it would be struck down in federal court at great expense to the City if it was approved by the board.

I was shocked at the stupidity of the idiots who proposed it, as they appeared to know nothing about a federal tobacco law that has been on the books since 1965 (requiring warnings on cigarette packs).

 

[Bill Godshall]

NATO Supports Investigation of CDC Grants, sends press release to 100 large media outlets
http://www.cspnet.com/news/tobacco/articles/nato-supports-investigation-cdc-grants

Press release: NATO Supports House Committee Investigation of CDC Stimulus Grants
http://www.cspnet.com/sites/default/files/NATO Press Release on CPPW Funds (August, 2012).pdf

 

[Vocalek]

I had to open the PDF to find out that NATO stands for National Association of Tobacco Outlets.

I was wondering why the North Atlantic Treaty Organization was interested in this topic...