CDC grants may have been used illegally to lobby for anti-tobacco legislation at state/local level

[Vocalek]

HHS inspector general: Health grants could have illegally funded lobbying - The Hill's Healthwatch

Federal healthcare grants might have been illegally used for political lobbying, according to the Health and Human Services Department’s inspector general.

The inspector general said grants administered by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) might have been used for lobbying efforts — and that the CDC might have led recipients to believe lobbying was appropriate, despite a federal ban on using grant money for political activism.

 

[Vocalek]

I give you this quote from Judge Napolitano:

Although we have explored at length how man-made law must be subject to the Natural Law, perhaps the best indication of the falsehood of Positivism is that, deep down, we know that the transgression of our natural rights is wrong. We do not simply disagree with it, but feel a sense of visceral outrage that one human would try to treat us as inferior and subject to his will; it is antithetical to our selfhood. Thus it is in our human nature not just to yearn for freedom, but to recognize when those yearnings are unnaturally restricted.

It Is Dangerous to Be Right When the Government Is Wrong by Andrew P. Napolitano

Since the quote refers to "positivism" which I had not previously heard of, I figured I should include the explanation of what it is:

Positivism

Positivism teaches that law is whatever is affirmatively put forward by human lawmakers. To a Positivist, the law is whatever the lawgiver/lawmaker says it is. Consequentially, under Positivism all of our rights are granted to us by the government, and they can be taken away at the discretion of the government. The central feature of Positivism is that an act is considered a law simply if it was lawfully enacted and is enforceable. In other words, laws are those commands which people can be coerced into obeying. Thus, Positivists would contend that Hitler’s Final Solution, regardless of its morality, can be described as law. By contrast, Positivists expressly disclaim that there is any "higher law" with which human law must conform if it is to be truly considered a law. As discussed earlier, Positivism can be a very tempting legal philosophy, given that if government systematically disparages our rights, then as a practical matter it appears as if we do not in fact possess those rights. It is also tempting because, in a free society, whether a democracy or a republic, the majority in the government, the majority of those who write the law, have their way with no constraints. "The majority rules" is a popular, populist, and Positivistic taunt. It is also destructive of freedom.

 

[NorthOfAtlanta]

Why does this not surprise me, neither that CDC may have gone wink wink or that the ANTZ did not think they had to use the grant for what the proposal stated.

 

[laurel099]

*sigh* Not surprising at all

 

[EddardinWinter]

Why should they bother to follow the rules? Those rules are not as important as their intentions. They will claim they were just doing what was best for the children to explain their wrongdoing (and blame big tobacco or big business or some other created evil). Disgusting.

 

[Placebo Effect]

And lets not forget what CPPW money has paid for

- King County, Washington and Boston's e-cig indoor use ban
- Providence, Rhode Island's flavored tobacco (including e-cigs) ban
- Linn County, Iowa's attempt to ban dissolvable tobacco
- Mobile, Alabama, which recently tried to include e-cigs in a smoking ban, received CPPW tobacco prevention money, but I'm not sure how much the local health department had to do with their inclusion.