Attention! 46 States took the money and ran!

[beebopnjazz]

Ten years later, tobacco deal going up in smoke - The Red Tape Chronicles - msnbc.com

Redtape seems to be investigative type reporting/fact-finding site. This article is very interesting and shows that 46 states sold their "share of the BT structured settlement" for pennies on the dollar, which is one of the reasons there is absolutely no incentive to put BT out of business and, in fact, protect BT's interest.

 

[Brewster 59]

Ten years later, tobacco deal going up in smoke - The Red Tape Chronicles - msnbc.com

Redtape seems to be investigative type reporting/fact-finding site. This article is very interesting and shows that 46 states sold their "share of the BT structured settlement" for pennies on the dollar, which is one of the reasons there is absolutely no incentive to put BT out of business and, in fact, protect BT's interest.

How shocking to find the govt to be both liars and crooks. The same thing kinda happened with the California State lottery with the money supposedly going into the education system but somehow not finding its way there.
Kinda opens ones eyes to why the govt is trying to shut down all viable reduced harm alternatives to smoking. Once again the govt is shortsighted in thinking that smokers will just pay what ever they are told to pay.

 

[harmony gardens]

Ten years later, tobacco deal going up in smoke - The Red Tape Chronicles - msnbc.com

Redtape seems to be investigative type reporting/fact-finding site. This article is very interesting and shows that 46 states sold their "share of the BT structured settlement" for pennies on the dollar, which is one of the reasons there is absolutely no incentive to put BT out of business and, in fact, protect BT's interest.

If you want to get even madder,,, I'm sure you do,,, This payment is already built into the wholesale cost of a cigarette (what the BT companies charge for a pack of cigarettes) and then they put extra taxes on top of that.

 

[doots]

It's all about the money..... Everything..

 

[harmony gardens]

The amount of scandal built into this is so incredible. The states claim they are tying to recover the costs of money they pay for the health of smokers, sell the payment below market value and earmark a certain amount to promote people quitting. Something that could have made sense, ( a tax on cigarettes that would be pooled to treat smoking related illnesses) turns into nothing for the state, and extra financial burdens for smokers, but no money for the treatment of smokers. The scandal that could put the cherry on the sundae, would be for them to outright ban tobacco, which would then be them accepting money on these future payments and cutting the source of the payments.

To add insult to injury,,, smokers end up being the target of smear campaigns paid for by the professional anti tobacco lobbyists. Then, when a safer alternative comes up, these same professionals want to ban it.

 

[Bill Godshall]

States that securitized their future tobacco settlement payments have little or no financial incentive to protect cigarette companies (as they've received their money regardless if cigarette companies go bankrupt or otherwise renige on future settlement payments).

Besides, if states appropriated more settlement funds on programs to reduce smoking, those funds would be used to further misinform the public that e-cigarettes and smokeless tobacco products are not SAFE alternatives to cigarettes, and to falsely claim that smokefree alternatives are being target marketed to children.

Although I led PA's campaign to appropriate lots of settlement funds for smoking prevention, cessation and control programs more than a decade ago, I've been very disappointed with most of those programs because they spread lots of anti-tobacco misinformation and propaganda (inlcuding telling the smokers and the public that smokefree alternatives are not safe alternatives to cigarettes).

As long as abstinence-only anti-tobacco prohibitionists are in charge of running federal/state/local government anti-tobacco programs, public health will benefit if funding for their programs is cut or eliminated.

 

[beebopnjazz]

"...Because these states have essentially borrowed against future payments from the tobacco industry, they are now dependent on the continued vitality of cigarette sales. If Big Tobacco stumbles, states will be on the hook for these massive, billion-dollar loans. In other words, David and Goliath are now allies."

"'An incentive not to put tobacco out of business'

The irony is that the states and some smaller governmental bodies need tobacco firms to make their payments every year because, to varying degrees, they are on the hook to pay off bondholders if the cigarette companies default. Some, including New York and California, have directly guaranteed their tobacco bond debt with general revenue in order to secure more favorable rates. Others have an implied obligation not to let their bonds default, lest their credit ratings be tarnished."

The states are in bed with BT / the FDA is in bed with BP
For all we know BT has a deal with the FDA - that once the dust has settled BT will start producing their own pharm grad nic - with the help of BP of course, and make their own version of the e-cig - but their version will have 1000s of additives to make it more addictive and poisonous to the vapers - the more things change, the more they remain the same.

Don't forget the govenrment agencies actually killed innocent people during prohibition - by poisoning liquor - they are not above using any means. They all need to be exposed.

 

[Brewster 59]

States that securitized their future tobacco settlement payments have little or no financial incentive to protect cigarette companies (as they've received their money regardless if cigarette companies go bankrupt or otherwise renige on future settlement payments).

Besides, if states appropriated more settlement funds on programs to reduce smoking, those funds would be used to further misinform the public that e-cigarettes and smokeless tobacco products are not SAFE alternatives to cigarettes, and to falsely claim that smokefree alternatives are being target marketed to children.

Although I led PA's campaign to appropriate lots of settlement funds for smoking prevention, cessation and control programs more than a decade ago, I've been very disappointed with most of those programs because they spread lots of anti-tobacco misinformation and propaganda (inlcuding telling the smokers and the public that smokefree alternatives are not safe alternatives to cigarettes).

As long as abstinence-only anti-tobacco prohibitionists are in charge of running federal/state/local government anti-tobacco programs, public health will benefit if funding for their programs is cut or eliminated.

Actually Bill, from what I read in the article is if BT is financially unable to make the payments then the State is on the hook for the bonds that were issued. I do agree that with the uneducated people running the programs having them shutdown is not a bad thing but what about the money that was suppose to help sick smokers? What makes me mad is the money was taken from smokers and is not being spent for the purposes that it was suppose to be spent on. The money was spent before it was collected and the States sold their settlements for less that half value.

 

[Dkrom68]

I just cant believe there is any wrong doings by our beloved government and big tobacco. I always thought they were honest and for the people.