July, 01 2009, 10:53am EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Bryan Hirsch, +41 76 547 3476
Susan Cavanagh, +41 78 626 4490
Big Tobacco Attempts to Smuggle Loopholes Into Global Tobacco Treaty
Ratifying countries criticized for collaboration with Philip Morris International and British American Tobacco
GENEVA
Today NGOs released an expose highlighting new tobacco industry
tactics to undermine implementation of the global tobacco treaty,
formally known as the World Health Organization Framework Convention on
Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC). The report comes at the midpoint of an
eight-day negotiating meeting on a protocol to the FCTC on illicit
tobacco trade, where tobacco giants such as Philip Morris International
(PMI), British American Tobacco (BAT) and Japan Tobacco (JT) have a
strong presence. The document, produced by Corporate Accountability
International and the Network for Accountability of Tobacco
Transnationals (NATT), criticizes FCTC Parties such as Lebanon and the
Philippines for collaborating with tobacco corporations and falling
short of commitments under the treaty.
FCTC Article 5.3 obligates treaty Parties to "protect [public
health] policies from commercial and other vested interests of the
tobacco industry in accordance with national law." Guidelines for the
implementation of this measure were adopted at the third Conference of
Parties (COP) last November in Durban, South Africa (full text
available online: https://www.who.int/fctc/guidelines/article_5_3.pdf).
"In November, ratifying countries unanimously adopted rigorous
guidelines to protect public health policy against tobacco industry
interference," explains Kathryn Mulvey, International Policy Director
for Corporate Accountability International. "Now, Big Tobacco is trying
to get governments to ignore their obligations under the treaty and
make exceptions to these new rules. We urge the international community
to reject the tobacco industry's attempts to subvert the FCTC and
derail the illicit trade protocol."
The tobacco corporations and civil society do seem to agree about
one thing: the protocol on illicit trade is precedent-setting. This is
the first high-profile tobacco control issue to be taken on at the
global level since last November, when three sets of implementation
guidelines were adopted - on banning tobacco advertising, promotion and
sponsorship; effective warning labels; and protecting against tobacco
industry interference. NGOs are calling on treaty Parties to follow
through on their commitments. Meanwhile the tobacco lobby is present
and visible at this week's negotiations in full force, seeking to
influence the content of the protocol to its own advantage and chip
away at the safeguards of Article 5.3.
PMI has invited delegates to attend private meetings at the
Intercontinental Hotel throughout the week. In contrast to the previous
two negotiating sessions, this week the public gallery has been packed
full of tobacco industry lobbyists. On Monday there were more than
forty people in the gallery.
Twenty-three of the twenty-eight people willing to identify
themselves were from the tobacco industry, including twelve from BAT,
seven from JT, one from Imperial Tobacco, and one from the Tobacco
Institute of South Africa.
The FCTC Article 5.3 guidelines instruct ratifying countries to
"Establish measures to limit interactions with the tobacco industry and
ensure the transparency of those interactions that occur"
(Recommendation 2). But last month Lebanon played host to British
American Tobacco's (BAT) two-day conference on illicit trade, where
Lebanese Minister of Finance Dr. Mohammed Shateh and other high-level
public officials from the region reportedly met with BAT behind closed
doors to discuss taxes, smuggling and other policy issues.
The guidelines also recommend that treaty Parties, "Reject
partnerships and non-binding or non-enforceable agreements with the
tobacco industry" (Recommendation 3). But last month Philippines
customs authorities signed a Memorandum of Understanding with Philip
Morris Philippines, through which the corporation will presumably gain
access to law enforcement personnel and customs data. (This is the same
corporation that was accused by Thailand two years ago of exploiting
customs procedures and evading taxes by understating the value of
exports.)
The guidelines begin with the principle that 'There is a fundamental
and irreconcilable conflict between the tobacco industry's interests
and public health policy interests" (Principle 1) and urge Parties to
avoid conflicts of interest for government officials and employees
(Recommendation 4). Yet PMI reports meeting with 2,800 government
agencies and 8,000 government employees to promote its system for
tracking and tracing cigarette products.
"This report is a powerful reminder to FCTC Parties that the tobacco
industry is not and cannot be a partner in tobacco control
initiatives," said Laurent Huber, Director of the Framework Convention
Alliance (FCA). "The FCTC is motivated by a desire to protect human
health and the tobacco industry is motivated by profit which inherently
undermines human health, therefore the two are in direct opposition."
View the full report Clearing the Smoke-Filled Room: An Expose on
How the Tobacco Industry Attempts to Undermine the Global Tobacco
Treaty and the Illicit Trade Protocol online:
English: https://www.stopcorporateabuse.org/sites/default/files/INB3%20English%20F...
Spanish: https://www.stopcorporateabuse.org/sites/default/files/INB3%20Spanish%20F...
French: https://www.stopcorporateabuse.org/sites/default/files/INB3%20French%20FI...
Corporate Accountability stops transnational corporations from devastating democracy, trampling human rights, and destroying our planet.
(617) 695-2525LATEST NEWS
Progressives Say Military Budget Should Be Cut as Biden Floats $30 Billion Increase
"There is simply no reason for taxpayers to continue to pay for outrageously high budgets rife with waste, fraud, and abuse," said Rep. Pramila Jayapal.
Mar 10, 2023
Progressive lawmakers on Thursday voiced dismay that President Joe Biden is requesting a nearly $30 billion increase in U.S. military spending just months after the Pentagon failed its fifth consecutive audit, admitting it could not properly account for more than half of its trillions of dollars in assets.
Biden's budget framework for fiscal year 2024 calls for $886 billion in overall military spending—up from the current level of $858 billion—with $842 billion going to the Pentagon. More than half of the $1.7 trillion of discretionary spending in Biden's proposal is reserved for the military, which would get $170 billion for weapons procurement and $38 billion for nuke modernization.
Defense Newsreported that the president's budget would boost spending on "new drones, combat jets, hypersonic missiles, and submarines."
Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said in a statement late Thursday that the president's Pentagon blueprint requests "$26 billion more than Congress allocated in the previous budget—which itself was $63 billion more than the $773 billion the President requested for FY2023."
"This is a never-ending cycle of increased funds without accountability," said Jayapal. "There is simply no reason for taxpayers to continue to pay for outrageously high budgets rife with waste, fraud, and abuse. A recent CBO study confirmed that the Pentagon could cut $100 billion per year without compromising on national defense. This is long overdue. Progressives in Congress have been at the frontline of this fight for decades, and we will continue to push for sensible, targeted defense policy that prioritizes our national security over profit-hungry military contractors."
Given that roughly half of the Pentagon's annual budget has historically gone to military contractors such as Lockheed Martin and Raytheon, the National Priorities Project (NPP) noted Thursday that around 25% of Biden's total discretionary budget would likely wind up in the coffers of private companies.
"This military budget represents a shameful status quo that the country can no longer afford," said Lindsay Koshgarian, NPP's program director. "Families are struggling to afford basics like housing, food, and medicine, and our last pandemic-era protections are ending, all while Pentagon contractors pay their CEOs millions straight from the public treasury."
Led by Reps. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) and Mark Pocan (D-Wis.), progressive lawmakers have been working for years to enact modest cuts to the Pentagon budget and redirect the savings toward healthcare, education, and other social investments.
But those efforts have repeatedly fallen short in the face of bipartisan opposition.
In 2022, Lee's proposal to cut $100 billion off the military budget's top line was defeated by an overwhelming vote of 78-350, with 141 House Democrats joining nearly every Republican in voting no. (NPP points out that $100 billion would be enough to send every U.S. household a $700 check or hire a million elementary school teachers.)
In a statement Thursday, Lee said she is "disappointed" that the president's new budget "continues the regressive trend of increasing our bloated, wasteful defense budget year after year with little oversight." Last month, Lee and Pocan reintroduced legislation that would reduce the U.S. military budget by $100 billion.
Top Republicans, meanwhile, signaled Thursday that they will try to pile more money on top of Biden's historically large military budget request as they simultaneously pursue cuts to Medicaid and food benefits.
Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Ala.), chair of the House Armed Services Committee, lamented that Biden's budget "proposes to increase non-defense spending at more than twice the rate of defense."
"The president’s incredibly misplaced priorities send all the wrong messages to our adversaries," said Rogers. "On the House Armed Services Committee, we are focused on building an NDAA that provides our warfighters with the capability and lethality to deter and, if necessary, defeat the grave threats facing our nation."
Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) sent a similar message, calling Biden's military budget request "woefully inadequate" and a "serious indication of President Biden's failure to prioritize national security."
But analysts argue that ballooning military spending does little to bolster U.S. national security. As William Hartung of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft wrote Thursday, "We can make America and its allies safer for far less money if we adopt a more realistic, restrained strategy and drive a harder bargain with weapons contractors that too often engage in price gouging and cost overruns while delivering dysfunctional systems that aren’t appropriate for addressing the biggest threats to our security."
"The Congressional Budget Office has crafted three illustrative options that could ensure our security while spending $1 trillion less over the next decade," Hartung noted. "A strategy that incorporates aspects of these plans and streamlines the Pentagon budget in other areas could be sustained at roughly $150 billion per year less than current levels."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Progressives Praise Biden Budget for Investments in 'Widespread Prosperity and Economic Growth'
"As President Biden's budget lays out—we can invest in America, expand the social safety net, fight income inequality, and do it all while lowering taxes for working people—if we simply require the wealthiest Americans to pay their fair share," said one advocate.
Mar 09, 2023
While blasting the White House's proposed $886 billion in military spending as "madness," progressives on Thursday also praised portions of U.S. President Joe Biden's fiscal year 2024 budget for sizable social investments that could lead to "broader opportunity, greater economic and health security, lower levels of hardship, and a nation where everyone can thrive."
"No one in the White House seriously believes that Congress will adopt it in its current form," Politiconoted of Biden's blueprint. "It's a messaging exercise. And as such, the White House sees no downside whatsoever to throwing out things that will never pass the Republican-controlled House. The fight is the point."
Still, the scope of the budget—which includes significant funding for the climate, childcare, democracy, education, healthcare, housing, violence prevention, and more, made possible in part through tax hikes for wealthy individuals and corporations—was celebrated by the likes of Sharon Parrott, president of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP).
"President Biden's budget is driven by what we know works: investments in the people who keep our economy running."
"President Biden's 2024 budget invests in people and communities and creates a 21st century tax system that supports these investments to build toward an economy that works for everyone," Parrott said. "It lays out an agenda that would move us closer to a nation where everyone—regardless of their background, identities, or where they live—has the resources they need to thrive and share in the nation's prosperity."
Erica Payne, the founder and pesident of the Patriotic Millionaires, declared that "President Biden's proposed budget is the most ambitious tax plan we've seen from a president in decades—and a clear emphasis of the values that he and the Democrats stand for: investing in our country, fighting off corporate profiteering, protecting the social safety net, and doing so all while reducing our nation's budget deficit."
"The wealthiest Americans and corporations can easily afford to pay more—and hundreds of patriotic millionaires and billionaires are ready and eager to do their part to make sure all Americans can thrive," Payne added. "Let's be clear: As President Biden's budget lays out—we can invest in America, expand the social safety net, fight income inequality, and do it all while lowering taxes for working people—if we simply require the wealthiest Americans to pay their fair share."
The president's proposals to help American families include expanding the child tax credit from $2,000 per kid to $3,000 for those ages six and above, and to $3,600 for children under six; enabling states to increase childcare options for millions of kids; and funding a federal-state partnership that provides high-quality, universal, free preschool.
The budget also calls for boosting prevention services to reduce the number of children entering foster care as well as changes to the adoption tax credit to better serve families with lower incomes and those who choose legal guardianship.
Biden advocates for $59 billion in funding and tax incentives to increase the affordable housing supply; $10 billion to remove barriers to affordable housing developments; and $10 billion to address racial and ethnic homeownership and wealth gaps. The president proposes providing $4.1 billion for the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program—and allowing states to use some of that money to provide water bill assistance to poor households, since a related program expires at the end of 2023.
Along with fighting for billions of dollars to ease hunger, the administration aims to pour money into high-poverty school districts as well as improve the affordability of higher education by increasing the discretionary maximum Pell Grant by $500, expanding free community college, and subsidizing tuition for students from families earning less than $125,000 enrolled historically Black, tribally controlled, or minority-serving institutions.
"Time and again, President Joe Biden delivers on his promise to fight for American families, his commitment to fairness for all Americans, and his belief that everyone should have the freedom and opportunity to build a better life. This budget reflects those priorities and values by helping people continue to rebuild," said American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten, who highlighted various proposed investments in education and major federal programs.
In terms of healthcare, Biden pushes for putting billions of dollars into tackling cancer, increasing funds for veterans exposed to environmental hazards, and providing $471 million for reducing maternal mortality and morbidity rates, especially among Black, American Indian, and Alaska Native women. He also wants to expand coverage of mental health benefits and make historic investments in the behavioral health workforce.
The president advocates for making healthcare premium cuts permanent and providing Medicaid-like coverage to individuals in states that have not expanded their programs under the Affordable Care Act. There are also provisions to cut prescription drug costs, improve Medicaid home and community-based services, and expand the National Health Service Corps as well as programs that train and support nurses.
Biden would also extend the solvency of the Medicare trust fund by at least 25 years. In addition to investing in Social Security Administration staff, a White House fact sheet says that the Biden administration "looks forward to working with the Congress to responsibly strengthen Social Security by ensuring that high-income individuals pay their fair share."
Max Richtman, president and CEO of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, said that "while the conservatives' approach is to 'cut, cut, cut!' earned benefits for future generations of retirees, President Biden's budget would fortify Medicare for the future by asking the wealthy to pay their fair share."
"Instead of 'kicking the can down the road' as some previous administrations and Congresses have done, the president's budget confronts the trust fund shortfall head-on—without burdening beneficiaries," Richtman continued. "In a society with massive wealth inequality, the wealthy can afford to pay a little more. Future seniors cannot afford benefit cuts."
While welcoming Biden's efforts to protect Medicare, Lisa Gilbert, executive vice president of Public Citizen, also suggested that "looking ahead, the administration should crack down on Medicare Advantage plans that profit by cherry-picking healthy seniors and restricting care for enrollees; expand dental, vision, and hearing benefits for Medicare enrollees; work with Congress to cap out-of-pocket expenses for seniors; and take a bolder stand against Big Pharma greed by expanding drug price negotiation to bring down the prices of more drugs sooner and cover all Americans, not just people on Medicare."
On the climate front, the budget proposes spending $4.5 billion on clean energy, $16.5 billion on climate science and clean energy innovation, and over $24 billion on conservation and to help build communities' resilience to devastating storms, drought, extreme heat, floods, and wildfires. The administration also pushes for investing nearly $2 billion in environmental justice efforts.
A coalition of over a dozen green groups stressed in a joint statement Thursday that "as our country deals with inflation, high energy prices, public health crises, biodiversity loss, and climate change, it is now more important than ever that Congress fully funds the agencies responsible for addressing these critical issues."
Varshini Prakash, executive director of the youth-led Sunrise Movement, said that "President Biden's proposed budget—especially its investments in clean energy, jobs, and an end to oil and gas subsidies—is the kind of thing young people in this country want to see ahead of 2024."
"But President Biden has the power to act on climate and issues important to our generation without having to go through a Republican House," she noted. "He can reject the Willow Project, which goes against his own agenda to stop the climate crisis, and can do everything in his executive authority, like declaring a climate emergency and invoking the Defense Production Act, to jump-start our transition to clean energy."
Given the current conditions in Congress—with Republicans controlling the House and a Senate where the president's agenda is often thwarted by not only the GOP but also right-wing Democrats and a new Independent—Biden is certainly in for a battle.
That's especially the case considering that, as CBPP's Parrott noted, "the president's budget priorities stand in stark contrast with the emerging House Republican agenda—an agenda that pushes more tax cuts for the wealthy and profitable corporations, and holds the economy hostage by demanding deep spending cuts in areas like K-12 schools, healthcare, medical research, college tuition help, and help buying groceries as the price for raising the debt limit."
"Taken together, this emerging agenda would increase hardship and narrow access to opportunity; widen already large differences in outcomes by race, ethnicity, and geography; and hurt the country as a whole," Parrott warned of GOP lawmakers' priorities.
ProsperUs coalition spokesperson Claire Guzdar argued that "President Biden's budget is driven by what we know works: investments in the people who keep our economy running. Lowering costs for families, strengthening Medicare and Social Security, and delivering investments in healthcare, housing, and climate are key to widespread prosperity and economic growth."
"President Biden must now fight to enact this budget and continue to reject dangerous calls for austerity and cuts to programs that strengthen our communities and our economy," Guzdar added.
A U.S. Senate Budget Committee hearing for the president's proposal is scheduled for the morning of March 15.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Likely to Face Criminal Charges Over Stormy Daniels Hush Money: Report
One legal expert called the report "huge news" indicating that an indictment of the former president is "imminent."
Mar 09, 2023
Former U.S. President Donald Trump may soon face criminal charges in connection with the payment of hush money to the adult entertainer Stormy Daniels, The New York Times reported Thursday, citing four unnamed "people with knowledge of the matter."
According to the Times, prosecutors with the Manhattan district attorney's office extended an offer for Trump to testify next week before a grand jury considering the evidence in the prospective case against the twice-impeached ex-president, who is seeking the Republican nomination for 2024.
As Times reporters William K. Rashbaum, Ben Protess, and Jonah E. Bromwich noted:
Such offers almost always indicate an indictment is close; it would be unusual for the district attorney, Alvin L. Bragg, to notify a potential defendant without ultimately seeking charges against him.
In New York, potential defendants have the right to answer questions in the grand jury before they are indicted, but they rarely testify, and Mr. Trump is likely to decline the offer. His lawyers could also meet privately with the prosecutors in hopes of fending off criminal charges.
Any case would mark the first indictment of a former American president, and could upend the 2024 presidential race. It would also elevate Mr. Bragg to the national stage, though not without risk.
At issue is a $130,000 payment made to Daniels—an adult film star who claims she had an affair with Trump—by former fixer Michael Cohen during the last days of the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Trump subsequently reimbursed Cohen for the payment. Cohen has not yet testified before the grand jury, but is expected to do so on an undetermined date.
"Trump has faced an array of criminal investigations and special counsel inquiries over the years but has never been charged with a crime, underscoring the gravity of Mr. Bragg's inquiry," the Times trio wrote.
The journalists further asserted that "Bragg could become the first prosecutor to charge Mr. Trump, but he might not be the last," noting that the Fulton County District Attorney's Office in Georgia is investigating whether the former president interfered in the 2020 election.
"And at the federal level, a special counsel is scrutinizing Mr. Trump's effort to overturn the election results, as well as his handling of classified documents," the reporters added.
Mark Pomerantz—one of two prosecutors involved with the Manhattan district attorney's investigation of the ex-president who resigned in protest last year—wrote in his new book, People vs. Donald Trump: An Inside Account, that "we developed evidence convincing us that Donald Trump had committed serious crimes" involving his finances and business practices.
"As we put the facts together, many of us came to believe that we had enough evidence to convict him, and we could present a solid case in court that would lead to a guilty verdict," Pomerantz related.
He continued:
I believe that Donald Trump is guilty of numerous felony violations of the penal law in connection with the preparation and use of his annual statements of financial condition. His financial statements were false, and he has a long history of fabricating information relating to his personal finances and lying about his assets to banks, the national media, counterparties, and many others, including the American people.
Asked in a recent CBS "60 Minutes" interview what he would advise Bragg in regard to Trump, Pomerantz replied: "This was a righteous case. You should bring it. It's important. And if you made the wrong decision, make a better decision."
Bragg retorted that "after closely reviewing all the evidence from Mr. Pomerantz's investigation, I came to the same conclusion as several senior prosecutors involved in the case, and also those I brought on: More work was needed. Put another way, Mr. Pomerantz's plane wasn't ready for takeoff."
Separately, a New York jury last December found two subsidiaries of the Trump Organization, Trump's company, guilty on all counts of criminal tax fraud. The former president's organization was subsequently ordered to pay a $1.6 million penalty for what a judge called "systemic, egregious fraud."
Also last December, the former congressional committee that investigated the January 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol by supporters of the Trump's "Big Lie" unanimously voted to recommend federal criminal charges against the former president and some of his associates in connection with the insurrection. Given Trump's 2024 presidential run, U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland has appointed a special counsel.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular
SUPPORT OUR WORK.
We are independent, non-profit, advertising-free and 100%
reader supported.
reader supported.