Thursday, August 08, 2013

RWJF commits $10,000,000.00 to promote Obamacare

And just as RWJF, a 501(c)3, illegally funded lobbyists to get smoking bans enacted; now RWJF is funding a campaign to promote the much hated legislation coming out of Obama's presidency....Obamacare:

Of course CTA readers know the real reason that Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) funds these anti-choice, rent seeking initiatives is that it creates big profits for the drugs and medical devices manufactured and sold by their parent entity ........the Johnson & Johnson Co. (J & J)

It's not much of a stretch to speculate that the $10,000,000.00 by RWJF to promote Obamacare is another case of 'pay for play' or quid pro quo; as Obamacare will promote sales of Johnson & Johnson healthcare products. RWJF has strong financial ties to J & J, indeed RWJF was founded by J & J's own Robert Wood Johnson.

Sunday, July 07, 2013

QuitPlan deceives Minnesotans ....again

New ads by QuitPlan claim "smoking is expensive, but QuitPlan is free.." Nothing could be further from the truth.

In reality 300 million taxpayers are funding QuitPlan programs in the form of Obama's "Stimulus Funds" ARRA.

Hennepin county alone received $156,407,326.56 in stimulus funds from the ARRA (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) to give "free" alternative tobacco products such as Nicoderm, Nicotrol, Nicorette, Commit, etc. to smokers in hopes of getting them to quit their habit:

Further research finds that US taxpayer money goes directly back to the companies who benefited most from smoking ban legislation...companies like Glaxo Smith Kline who distributes Nicoderm:

And as a reminder, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation funded groups like American Lung Assoc., American Cancer Society, etc to lobby lawmakers for smoking ban legislation that would increase product sales (Nicoderm, Nicotrol, Nicorette, Commit, etc) of their parent company Johnson & Johnson Co. 

Meanwhile, smoking bans destroyed businesses & livelihoods across the nation.....prior to 2008: 

Friday, December 28, 2012

Anti-smoking Corruption: New report indicates liberal lawmakers who support smoking cessation funding & policies, do so to for personal profit

Over the past four years as he repeatedly pressed for federal funding to stop smoking, [Iowa Democratic Senator Tom] Harkin has owned between $50,001 and $100,000 in stock in health products maker Johnson & Johnson, which makes the popular anti-smoking product Nicorette.....He’s hardly alone. A half-dozen senators who have been among the most vocal advocates for federal funding for smoking cessation — including Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, and Majority Whip Richard J. Durbin of Illinois — have direct or indirect investments in companies that make anti-tobacco products.

Meanwhile the corrupt, liberal anti-smoking politicians have destroyed tens of thousands of businesses and hundreds of thousands of jobs:

3,382 UK pubs closed after nationwide smoking ban  

South Dakota's smoking ban, just one month old, has already cost the state, charities, and local hospitality businesses millions of dollars in lost revenue  

1,000-2,000 US bars & restaurants closed after various smoking bans were enacted
Nearly 300 Mpls / St. Paul bars & restaurants closed after smoking bans were enacted  

Casino revenue losses in Colorado & Las Vegas after smoking bans

Economies worldwide were decimated by corrupt policies that would have made Adolph Hitler proud (socialist
leader Hitler was first to impose nationwide smoking ban):

Wednesday, November 14, 2012

RWJF & anti-tobacco groups profit from bloated, wasteful taxpayer funded Obama 'stimulus' money
(type 'American Lung Association' or 'American Cancer Society' in Recipient Name box at link above for taxpayer money that went to these 2 organizations who promote alternative (J&J/RWJF) nicotine products)

The crime is that RWJF and their partner Johnson & Johnson Company profit from the tobacco cessation programs funded by we the taxpayers (Obama's 'stimulus money'). Programs which pay for J & J alternative tobacco products such as Nicoderm, Nicotrol, Nicorette, etc. thru QuitPlans and other programs, and RWJF profits from those same J & J sales as one of the single largest shareholders of J & J stock. 

It's taxpayer theft by RWJF and their grantees.


Applebee's and Papa John's warns Obamacare will lead to reduced hours / job cuts:

Significant numbers of businesses across country plan mass job cuts thanks to Obamacare and Obama's promise of tax hikes:

Tuesday, September 25, 2012

3 ways RWJF violates ethics if not legal business practices

1) Lobbying by a tax exempt organization

RWJF, a tax exempt organization, has provided $446+ million to organizations and urged them to advocate for policy changes (lobby). Even as HHS inspector general has declared grants by tax exempt organizations used for lobbying is illegal.

2) RWJF makes a profit from alternative nicotine products promoted by smoking ban lobbyists

Robert Wood Johnson Foundation owns nearly a billion of dollars in Johnson & Johnson stock, (see p 7 hyperlink) J & J manufactures or owns Nicoderm, Nicotrol,Nicorette, Commit, etc. drugs which RWJF openly promotes once/while smoking bans are enacted. Furthermore, RWJF was started by Johnson & Johnson founderRobert Wood Johnson, so the separation between RWJF and J & J is virtually non-existent.

3) Promotes idea that taxpayer funds (Medicare, Medicaid) should be used to pay for the alternative drugs that RWJF profits from


Wednesday, September 12, 2012

RWJF (a 501(c)3 organization, IE. pays reduced taxes on assets) funding to force (lobby) smoke-free laws should draw closer scrutiny by the IRS

From RWJF's website: A Toolkit for Implementing Smoke-Free Laws
...builds upon more than 20 years of experience implementing smoke-free laws and compelling evidence that smoke-free laws are good for health and business...
The (RWJF) Foundation is an organization exempt from Federal taxation under Section 501(c)(3) and is a private foundation as described in Section 509(a) of the Internal Revenue Code....
And further, according to RWJF's own documents:

pg 3 (original exceprt before RWJF edited):

A second, related issue was that of lobbying. In state capitals across the country, the tobacco industry lobbied, and it lobbied hard. Lobbying by tobacco-control advocates would have to be done to counteract the actions of the tobacco industry. But federal law prohibits private foundations from
lobbying, and grantees cannot legally use Foundation funds for that purpose
. Legally, the Foundation’s grantees were allowed to use their own resources and matching funds raised privately to lobby. Federal regulations permit foundations to support projects that include lobbying, so long as
they support only the non-lobbying portion of the project. Thus, the Foundation’s conditions of grant expressly prohibited Foundation funds from being used for lobbying.

pg 4 excerpt:

To accomplish these goals, it (RWJF) sought applications from statewide coalitions made up of organizations such as the health voluntaries (the American Cancer Society, the American Heart Association, and the American Lung Association), state medical societies, hospital associations, and others. The coalitions were to conduct public education campaigns, strengthen prevention and treatment capacity, and advocate for tobacco-control policies (a.k.a. lobbying by CTA's definition). To encourage collaboration among the various organizations working on tobacco control within a state, the Foundation allowed only one coalition per state to apply.

Shows that RWJF realized they could not get caught lobbying directly......and that their grant funds couldn't be used by those surrogates who received RWJF money for lobbying activities......yeah right; I'm sure that happened.

Apparently the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, heir to the Johnson & Johnson / Nicoderm ($500 million annual pharmaceutical nicotine sales fortune), forgot to tell these 500+ closed Twin Cities bars and restaurants just how good those smoke free laws are for their businesses and employees. RWJF also seems to have forgotten to inform these additional 1,000+ closed establishments and tens of thousands of employess just how much they would prosper as well.

More than likely, the Robert Wood Johnson (RWJF) and Johnson & Johnson Company are more concerned with how much they will financially prosper......they have little or no concern regarding the damages caused by their smoke free laws.

This grant (update 9/18/12: has been removed by RWJF to cover-up clear violation) is an open admission by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation that they have supported and funded the lobbying efforts to pass smoking bans around the globe for 20+ years.......some might call this a clear violation of the IRS code as it applies to a 501(c)3 foundation.

At the very least RWJF's very close relationship with the Nicoderm manufacturer Johnson & Johnson (ALZA) makes these same lobbying efforts a rent seeking maneuver pure and simple. 

To become a tax-exempt organization, the organization must meet the requirements given by the IRS. Charitable organizations are not to be operated for private interest. The organization cannot support or endorse any political or legislative activities (such as lobbying, or funding lobbyists).

Read more:,,id=175254,00.html

The IRS Rules on Charitable Organizations |

Wednesday, July 11, 2012

Investigations begin: Healthcare grants provided to lobbyists appear to be a violation of federal law

and that the CDC (grant provider) might have led recipients to believe lobbying was appropriate, despite a federal ban on using grant money for political activism.

Some materials the CDC provided to grant recipients “appear to authorize, or even encourage, grantees to use grant funds for impermissible lobbying,” Levinson wrote.

Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) raised concerns in May about the grant program, which was designed to promote wellness and prevention. Collins questioned whether the grants had funded political activism, possibly in violation of federal law.

The HHS inspector general looked into the grants at the request of congressional staff and found the same red flags.

Now let's look at just one of the thousands of grants RWJF provided to lobbyists:

Two features about the program are significant: (1) the Foundation encouraged its grantees to be activists; (2) advocacy was emphasized to bring about policy change. The program relied heavily on three major health voluntary organizations: the American Cancer Society; the American Heart Association and the American Lung Association. They provided financial support and, in particular, funds to help lobbying efforts which the Foundation could not support directly. In addition to insight on the effects of advocacy, this chapter offers a window into the role of coalitions in bringing about social change.

So RWJF, a tax-exempt non-profit, provided $99,000,000.00 to the three aforementioned non-governmental organizations and instructed them to "be activists" to "bring about policy change" in other words lobby for legislative action. In the grant verbiage RWJF offers an explanation as to the reason for the grant, RWJF could not directly lobby (support directly) for change, but they felt they could funnel money to surrogate lobbyists and be in compliance. According to the HHS inspector that does not appear to be the case, and investigations / penalties could soon begin.......what say you RWJF?

Also visit our sponsors at bottom of webpage
  • Why a Non-Smoker Fights the Pro-Smoking Ban Lies
  • Is RWJF, a 501(c)3, violating IRS rules by funding pro-smoking ban lobbyists?
  • RWJF funds and promotes universal healthcare policies which are the basis for and primary objective of Obamacare
  • Boycott these special interests (J & J) who destroyed the hospitality industry & jobs
  • Is the smoking ban movement fueled by pharmaceutical nicotine interests?
  • Now that smoking bans have been implemented, what can be done?
  • How do smoking ban lobbyists profit from smoking bans?
  • Pharmaceutical interests project the alternative nicotine marketplace to be $4.6 billion +
  • WHO report secondhand smoke doesn't cause cancer
  • Do smoker's cost society more money than non-smoker's? NO
  • Do smoker's cost society more money than non-smoker's? Part 2
  • Why does UCSF researcher Stanton Glantz support smoking bans?
  • OSHA standards prove SHS is not a health hazard
  • Tired of the nanny-state, big, socialized, corrupt, government legislation coming out of our state and federal capitols these days? Vote Republican in November 2010 & 2012