The November 6, 2007 election brought a stinging defeat to Oregon's cigarette tax increase. The proposal aimed to raise the state's cigarette tax by 84.5 cents a pack to pay for health insurance for about 100,000 additional poor Oregon children who currently have no coverage. Measure 50, as the tax was called, went down by a wide 60-40% margin.

Increasing cigarette taxes to fund health care is not a new idea, and tobacco industry efforts to defeat such measures aren't new either. What was new in this case was that tobacco interests poured a record $12 million into defeating Oregon's measure, making it the costliest election in Oregon's history. So stunning was the industry's effort that Oregon Governor Ted Kulongoski openly accused the tobacco industry of "buying the election" in his state.

Old Dog, No New Tricks

The tobacco companies trotted out their most formulaic and time-tested strategies to defeat Oregon's tax measure: They created front groups with grassrootsy-sounding names designed to push voters' emotional buttons. R.J. Reynolds formed Oregonians Against the Blank Check, and hired their longtime Oregon lobbying ally Mark W. Nelson to head the group. Philip Morris formed "Stop the Measure 50 Tax Hike," and funded it with money from their parent company, Altria Corporate Services. The companies then determined which populist-sounding messages pushed voters' buttons the hardest while omitting any mention of the subject of health. They then purchased vast quantities of advertising to push these messages relentlessly onto Oregon voters.

The Hygiene Council, a "think tank" created and funded by the cleaning products company Reckitt Benckiser, touts the need for "good hygiene practice" in the "home and community." Ruth Pollard reports that the council "is pushing products that contain the expensive -- and potentially damaging -- antibacterial additive, triclosan." Aside from promoting commonsense measures to prevent infections such as the washing of hands and appropriate preparation and refrigeration of foods, the council is enthusiastic about the chemical treatment of household surfaces. "Commonly touched surfaces should be regularly disinfected with products such as LYSOL Disinfectant Spray," the council states on its website. Peter Collignon, the director of infectious diseases at Canberra Hospital, believes that promoting the use of products containing triclosan was "a marketing exercise with no real benefit" that would "do nothing to stop multi-resistant bacteria in hospitals. If anything it may actually contribute to it." Triclosan products are used in hospitals as a disinfectant, particularly against staphlycoccus.

The New York Times today published an op-ed piece blasting research that tests the comparative effectiveness of pharmaceuticals. The piece failed to mention that its author, Peter Pitts, is a senior vice president at the PR firm of Manning, Selvage and Lee. Pitts has a history of flacking as an attack dog for the pharmaceutical industry and currently heads a pharma front group called the Center for Medicine in the Public Interest. Physician Roy M. Poses of the Foundation for Integrity and Responsibility in Medicine has written a critique of the "slippery slope" rhetoric in Pitts' editorial. "It is disappointing that a newspaper as influential as the New York Times would publish a health policy article without disclosing all the author's relevant financial interests, particularly one so relevant and direct," Poses adds. "Fostering more stealth health policy advocacy in ever more influential venues will just make the already confusing clamor about health care and its reform even muddier."

"A nonprofit group backed by the seafood industry urged pregnant women and nursing mothers to eat more fish than recommended by U.S. officials concerned that mercury contamination can hurt babies," reports Avram Goldstein. "The group, the National Healthy Mothers, Healthy Babies Coalition, said women who avoid seafood to limit exposure to mercury deprive their babies and themselves of essential nutrients. Women should eat at least the 12 ounces a week suggested as a maximum by the government, the coalition said today at a briefing in Washington." The report was funded with $74,000 from the National Fisheries Institute, a client of the Burson-Marsteller PR firm. Another food industry front group, the Center for Consumer Freedom, chimed in with a news release calling for environmental groups to apologize for creating "panic" about mercury in foods. Longstanding health organizations, including the American Academy of Pediatrics and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, responded to the report by re-emphasizing their advice to avoid excessive fish consumption.

Whitman and Rudy Giuliani near New York's Ground Zero, 2001"Was it wrong to try to get the city back on its feet as quickly as possible?" an exasperated Christine Todd Whitman asked members of Congress. The occasion was Whitman's first appearance before the House subcommittee investigating her handling of New York air quality issues post-9/11, when she headed the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

"Absolutely not," she continued. "Safety was first and foremost, but we weren't going to let the terrorists win."

There are many critics of the EPA's response to the admittedly unprecedented attacks. In August 2003, the EPA's own inspector general reported that there was not "sufficient data and analyses" to claim -- as Whitman did on September 18, 2001 -- that New York's air was "safe to breathe." The inspector general also found that EPA statements were confusing even to experienced toxicologists, and may have contributed to low rates of respirator use among Ground Zero workers. In February 2006, federal judge Deborah Batts called Whitman's statements post-9/11 "misleading" and "conscience shocking." In June 2007, the Government Accountability Office identified serious, continuing problems with how Whitman's EPA addressed indoor contamination in lower Manhattan.

The issue is more than academic. Since 2001, some 70 percent of Ground Zero workers -- tens of thousands of people, many without health insurance -- have had respiratory problems, including chronic illnesses, according to one medical study. Two deaths have been linked to World Trade Center dust, and reports of rare cancers are on the rise.

Yet in her Congressional testimony on June 25, 2007, Christie Whitman dismissed criticisms of her former agency as "misinformation, innuendo and outright falsehoods." Presumably, the nuclear power industry admires Whitman's rhetorical chutzpah.

"If I had to do it all over again, I don't think I would use the Ontario system," said Canadian cancer patient Lindsay McGreith. "I would get my wife to drive me to Buffalo, because I know in Buffalo you'd get looked after, whereas here you'd just sit for seven and a half hours. ... Our system is lousy." McGreith's comments are in a soundbite and B-roll video package (basically, an unassembled video news release) distributed by the PR firm MultiVu and funded by Health Care America, which is funded in part by pharmaceutical and hospital companies. It's part of an organized industry response to the Michael Moore movie "Sicko." Another MultiVu fake news video, which was funded by America's Health Insurance Plans, promotes a "public-private" health care system and decries Moore's single-payer proposal as an unpopular, "simplistic" and unrealistic "public takeover of the healthcare system."

From the SiCKO website"A multifaceted counteroffensive against Michael Moore's film about the health care industry" is beginning, reports Elizabeth Solomont. To counter the movie Sicko, "free market think tanks and the drug companies are already mobilizing. ... Several organizations staging responses to 'Sicko' receive funding from pharmaceutical companies, including the Manhattan Institute, the Heritage Foundation, and the Pacific Research Institute," notes Solomont, citing SourceWatch. "It definitely has to be rebutted," said the Pacific Research Institute's Sally Pipes. The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America's Ken Johnson called the film a "biased, one-sided attack." Health Care America, "whose Web site says it is funded in part by pharmaceutical manufacturers," held a conference call with reporters, "to discuss what Michael Moore left out of his movie." A press release from FreedomWorks says the conservative lobbying group will also weigh in, with its "nationwide grassroots army ... handing out information at movie theaters that exposes Moore's hypocrisy, points out the problems associated with government-run health care, and promotes the FreedomWorks solution of removing existing government barriers that prevent Americans from being able to use the free market to choose the care that suits their individual needs."

Two former food industry websites -- Best Food Nation and the Grow America Project -- are being merged and re-birthed as a new front group, the Center for Food Integrity (CFI). CFI's web domain was registered earlier this month by Charlie Arnot, who runs a small Missouri-based PR firm, CMA Consulting. CFI, which lists Monsanto as one of its supporters, states that it aims "to build consumer trust and confidence in the contemporary U.S. food system." Joseph Mendelson, the legal director of the Center for Food Safety, a consumer group, told Food NavigatorUSA.com that CFI is simply "a PR entity to try and battle regulations designed to create a safer food supply ... This is a way for it to promote its agenda under a green wash label." Mendelson also believes that the CFI's name was "chosen to try to distract attention from groups like ours and to confuse consumers." (Note: Mendelson is on the Center for Media and Democracy's Board of Directors.)

Bucking intense restaurant industry opposition, New York City has banned all added trans fats in restaurant food. The ban was passed by the city's Board of Health on December 6, 2006, and takes effect in July 2007. Donut makers get a one-year reprieve in order to find a substitute oil for the deep-fried dough. The board's action also included a requirement that restaurant chains post nutritional information. "We're not trying to take away anybody's ability to go out and have the kind of food they want in the quantities they want," said Mayor Michael Bloomberg. He said that health department estimates show that the ban on hydrogenated oils could save hundreds of lives annually. Dan Fleshler, spokesman for the National Restaurant Association responded, "We're deeply disappointed. We would prefer to do this voluntarily. Restaurants have been moving on their own in response to customer demand and eliminating trans fats." The Center for Consumer Freedom, a national front group for the restaurant and beverage industry, had vigorously fought the ban and immediately issued a statement headlined "Are Calories Next?", calling the ban "unprecedented in its paternalistic scope."

When PR Watch most recently caught a cell phone signal from Eric Schlosser, author of Fast Food Nation and the new Chew on This: Everything You Don't Want to Know About Fast Food, Schlosser was rushing from car to car in New York City, after London, which was just after Berkeley, where he was giving students a preview of the indie film version of "Fast Food Nation." We didn’t have the chance to ask him when he had time to eat. But we did use the time to speak with him about fast food, the U.S. childhood obesity epidemic, and the public relations industry’s techniques in attacking his work. Schlosser has been likened to a latter day Upton Sinclair—exposing the abattoirs and abuses in the meatpacking and calorie-packing processed food industry. If you haven’t read his books, you should, and here are a few reasons why you can’t just see the movie.