hm. that whole drama suggests that it would have been better to continue educating the public on tobacco use, and having the people drive the market regarding smoking/non-smoking private businesses.
what really pisses me off is that it feels like we are using ever more of our federal tax money to subsidize ever wealthier businesses.
and, i can't help but see this as racketeering on the part of the NAAGs by 'eliminating' competition.
perhaps it would be more prudent and/or civic minded if the NAAGs just let the whole process alone, let market share dictate to Big T instead of the other way around.
and as it trickles off, let it, so that the states can begin to wean themselves off that teat. more 'taxes' only means more money for all these bloated entities to screw up with.
Clearly, by my reading of this, there was a negotiation taking place.
Yes, of course, it was a settlement after all and the plaintiff states certainly want their money to continue to flow in. In this regard, they are doing what they should be doing and protecting taxpayers and not letting Tobacco get out of the agreement they signed on to.
The only troubling aspect is that the AGs may be working to limit rights of individual plaintiffs to bring damage suits and to snuff out smaller tobacco companies to protect the revenue to the states.
One problem has been is that some state legislatures have passed limits on appeal bonds for tobacco companies found liable.
This encourages tobacco firms to appeal endlessly and try to delay the case until the plaintiff dies. The states should not be doing this.
States understandably want to have Tobacco make payments under the MSA. However, the should not do this to the detriment of other injured people.
As Michael has already surmised payouts from the MSA are undoubtably lower than would be awarded by the courts.Big Tobacco wins everyway ,the AG's don't have to raise a finger to get their blood money but are clearly breaching their role as protectors of the public interest.This comes as no great surprise since money always takes precedent over everything else.How can public health succeed when the AG's must ensure a continued use of tobacco in order to get the highest available income ?
The only thing I know for sure is that all these shenanigans have a direct impact on me the smoker. It's MY money they are fleecing to prevent "the leading cause of death" in my state, which I would dearly love for you to prove to me. In my experience - old age is the "leading cause of death". Are you trying to tell me that non-smokers don't die???
One thing I'm pretty sure of is that the MSA hasn't "saved" one life but it sure has a negative impact on the quality of smoker's lives. Something "public health" people don't seem to care about.
Very informative, Mike. Thanks!
The weblink to that PM document doesn't work.
It's no secret that the MSA encouraged state AGs (via NAAG) to support state legislative efforts to preserve the then 99% cigarette market share among Participating Manufacturers.
And by ending payments to ALF if/when the Participating Manufacturers market share dropped, the MSA also offered financial incentives for public health advocates to endorse state legislation that protects the collective cigarette market share of Participating Manufacturers. Thankfully, I'm not aware of any health advocacy organizations that endorsed such legislation.
Most State AG's don't understand (and many don't care) that litigation benefitting Philip Morris, RAI and Lorillard does not protect the interests of any State because of its detrmental harm to public health.
And it appears that almost no State AG understands that state legislation to protect the collective cigarette market share of the largest cigarette companies doesn't necessarily protect the interests of their State, although its impact on public health is unknown.
The only thing I know for sure is that all these shenanigans have a direct impact on me the smoker.
Yes, they have designed a product that will reduce your life expenctancy and likely others around you.
and at the same time, you and all the other non-smokers get to profit by it!
you're welcome.
Eric burning tyres all of the time is sure gonna reduce your life expectancy far more than mine.
"Yes, of course, it was a settlement after all and the plaintiff states certainly want their money to continue to flow in."
Erik, was that it? Was that the purpose of MSA? That the states get money? Big Tobacco deceived the smokers and the state gets the cash they take from the smokers. Who needs a job if money can be earned so easily.
I forgot to mention, that in other parts of this world, they call them mafiosi.
Wasn't the whole RICO issue and punative damages which were being sought for the deceptive practices of the tobacco companies, and tobacco institute? Why should these apply to new comers to the industry?
benpal why call the AG's mafiosi that's being really discourteous to the mafia.At least the mafia doesn't proclaim to protect the citizens and do their best for them and con the voters to vote them into power. Walt your understanding is identical to mine but wasn't this whole thing kicked off by monica lewinsky's lollipop ? oh what's his name ,let's play at semantics Clinton.The whole thing was a con to be perpetuated ad infinitum ?
Actually, si, mafiosi do just that. Remember "protection rackets." Our governments have learned a lot from this group, created by alcohol prohibition, and sustained by drug prohibition and tobacco control. Much of the criminality that is the international image of the U.S. was created by our own governments' social activism.
"The weblink to that PM document doesn't work."
Would anyone happen to have that document? I am researching the tobacco industry and I believe that article may be helpful.
Thanks.
4 Visitors Online
Commenting by HaloScan
