PMCCPMCCPMCC

Search tips
Search criteria 

Advanced

 
Logo of nihpaAbout Author manuscriptsSubmit a manuscriptHHS Public Access; Author Manuscript; Accepted for publication in peer reviewed journal;
 
Am J Public Health. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2012 April 8.
Published in final edited form as:
PMCID: PMC2882403
NIHMSID: NIHMS363363

“Our Reach Is Wide by Any Corporate Standard”: How the Tobacco Industry Helped Defeat the Clinton Health Plan and Why It Matters Now

Abstract

Contemporary health care reformers, like those who promoted the failed Clinton era plan, face opposition from multiple corporate interests. However, scant literature has examined how relationships between corporations and other stakeholders, such as think tanks and advocacy groups, shape health care reform debate.

We show how the 2 biggest US tobacco companies, Philip Morris and RJ Reynolds, and their trade association coordinated in mobilizing ideologically diverse constituencies to help defeat the Clinton plan. Unwittingly perhaps, some reform supporters advanced the tobacco industry’s public relations blitz, contributing to perceptions of public opposition to the plan.

As the current reform debate unfolds, this case highlights the importance of funding transparency for interpreting the activities of think tanks, advocacy groups, and “grass-roots” movements.

Health care reform is an Obama administration priority.1 The Clinton Health Care Security Act, the last federal attempt at comprehensive reform, failed to pass in 1994. That plan, introduced in September 1993,2 represented a compromise between constituencies favoring government-guaranteed universal coverage and those favoring free-market competition. It proposed universal coverage through “managed competition”: competing government-regulated private plans.2 To be funded through employer mandates, business and health care provider charges, and a 75-cent per pack tobacco excise tax,2 the plan initially received strong public support. However, ensuing compromises satisfied few, and criticisms that had begun months earlier continued: diverse constituencies intensified public relations and lobbying efforts.2,3 Ultimately, Congress abandoned the legislation; efforts to enact alternatives failed.2

Media coverage of Obama’s efforts suggests that, as for the Clinton plan, corporate influence and contention over financing pose challenges.2,410 Previous research on the Clinton plan’s demise faulted its complexity, divisions among reform supporters, and the administration’s failure to effectively communicate the plan’s features, enabling opposition to mobilize.3,1117 Although lobbying and advertising by multiple corporate interests also played important roles,13,1820 scant literature has examined how relationships between corporations and other stakeholders, such as think tanks, advocacy groups, and “grass-roots” movements, affected reform debates.

We explore how the 2 biggest US tobacco companies, Philip Morris and RJ Reynolds, and their now-defunct trade association, the Tobacco Institute, worked together to mobilize right-leaning think tanks and smokers’ rights, labor, and left-leaning public policy groups to help defeat the Clinton plan. Through a coordinated, nationwide initiative, the industry helped persuade policy makers that considerable public opposition existed to both a funding mechanism—a tobacco excise tax increase—and the plan as a whole. This case offers lessons for the current health care debate, highlighting the importance of funding transparency for interpreting activities of think tanks, advocacy groups, and “grassroots” movements and the need for advocacy organizations to consider how accepting corporate donations may compromise their agendas.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Between January 2008 and June 2009, we searched the Legacy Tobacco Documents Library (http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu), which includes more than 10 million internal tobacco industry documents obtained following the 1998 Master Settlement Agreement.21,22 Using snowball sampling,21,23 we identified documents dated 1992–1995, beginning with search terms including “Clinton plan” and extending to names of organizations and industry personnel. Searches produced approximately 7000 hits. Reviewing index entries and page content to exclude duplicate or irrelevant documents yielded a final sample of approximately 500 documents. We searched LexisNexis, NewsBank, and ProQuest Newspapers databases for related coverage on third-party allies and the Web sites of identified organizations.

We used an interpretive approach for data collection and analysis.24 Iteratively reviewing successive collections of documents, we summarized, discussed, and revised ongoing interpretations, considered emergent themes, and identified gaps. We continued until the last wave of data collection yielded no new information.2426 We organized documents chronologically, constructing timelines of events, and assembled a case history.24,26,27

FINDINGS

Although tobacco companies shared other industries’ concerns about the plan’s potential impact on businesses, the proposed excise tax spurred their activities.28,29 Tobacco companies had monitored health care legislation since at least the mid-1970s, when tobacco excise taxes were first proposed as a funding mechanism.30,31 Paid by consumers, excise tax increases result in declining cigarette sales, threatening tobacco company profits.3235 During the 1980s, federal and state legislators increasingly used excise taxes both as a politically popular alternative to other forms of taxation and as a health policy mechanism to reduce cigarette consumption.36 By 1992, more than 20 national and state health care reform bills were under development, several including cigarette tax increases.37

During the early 1990s, low public approval ratings and a negative image diminished Philip Morris’s credibility,38 limiting its options for publicly opposing health care reform. Given its vested interests in minimizing tobacco taxes and its concerns about tobacco control initiatives included in most health care legislation,28 Philip Morris sought to influence the health care reform debate through third parties. As Philip Morris’s Washington relations director Kathleen Linehan explained, “PM [Phillip Morris] has been and continues to work behind the scenes to achieve its strategic objectives and keeps its public visibility on the healthcare reform issue very low.”28 Likewise, RJ Reynolds sought to “explore existing organizations we might join/influence … [a] credible, non-tobacco voice for hearings and for generating information on issue to media, op-eds, letters, etc.”39 In March 1993, when the Clinton administration publicly suggested cigarette excise taxes to fund health care,40 the 2 companies joined forces to “develop a coordinated plan.”29

The resulting “PM/RJR Tobacco Task Force” included representatives from both companies, the Tobacco Institute, and 4 public relations firms (Figure 1).4143 Company and Tobacco Institute personnel held weekly meetings.44 Their work plan included soliciting support from credible “message carriers,”45 including tobacco farmers and industry suppliers (e.g., suppliers of seed, pesticides, and paper), think tanks, advocacy groups, smokers, other businesses, and organized labor.41,46 To appeal across the ideological spectrum, the task force initially selected 4 core arguments: excise taxes were unfair to the country’s 50 million smokers, were regressive for the poor, were likely to encourage a black market, and could result in more than 785000 tobacco-related jobs lost because of reduced cigarette sales.43,47 Later arguments attacked the Clinton plan more broadly, claiming it would create new bureaucracy and limit health care options.48,49

FIGURE 1
1993 Philip Morris documents (a) showing the Joint PM/RJR Tobacco Task Force concept and (b) listing the members of the Task Force and their roles for public relations and lobbying activities.

Task Force Responsibilities

Task force members created a liaison with third-party allies on the basis of the strengths of their preexisting contacts (Table 1). “Leveraging” relationships already established through its corporate contributions department, Philip Morris prioritized the funding of right-leaning think tanks and anti-tax organizations ideologically opposed to tax increases and government regulation, “strategically directing certain of our assets … consistent with Philip Morris’ positioning on the healthcare issue.”50 RJ Reynolds coordinated local-level “coalition-building,” hiring the Ramhurst Corporation, a firm started by former RJ Reynolds employees,5153 to work with local antitax groups, tobacco industry-affiliated businesses such as retailers, and smokers’ rights groups (SRGs). Since 1988, RJ Reynolds had organized hundreds of SRGs nationwide; by 1991, it had used SRGs to “respond to swiftly emerging issues” with “grassroots” action on 175 federal, state, and local level issues.54 The Tobacco Institute sought to mobilize labor unions and left-leaning policy organizations with whom it had already established relationships through its umbrella organization, the Labor Management Committee.41,55 The Labor Management Committee had been developing these relationships since its creation in 1984, persuading 5 unions to join its board,56 providing funding to labor-aligned policy organizations, and mediating most communications through paid consultants with preexisting union or policy group affiliations.36,5661 Joint membership of labor unions in this association conferred on it legitimacy and the appearance of autonomy.36,61,62 Previous research has examined the industry’s funding and tactical relationships with both independent SRGs and industry front groups for other legislative issues.51,52,6367

TABLE 1
Activities of Tobacco Industry Supported Groups

Whereas right-leaning think tanks funded by Philip Morris already opposed the Clinton plan, the Tobacco Institute faced the challenge of soliciting assistance from organizations considered to be key plan supporters.11 However, in response to earlier legislation proposing cigarette taxes, Tobacco Institute staff had already begun strategizing. In January 1992, Susan Stuntz, Tobacco Institute vice president of public affairs and Labor Management Committee treasurer, noted, “Although the labor movement and many interest groups have stood firmly against excise taxes as a mechanism for raising general revenues, many of these groups view healthcare financing as a fundamentally different issue.”37 Therefore, the Tobacco Institute sought to establish common ground by “encouraging” organizations to back “a comprehensive healthcare reform package that includes … funding through broad-based progressive taxes instead of regressive excise taxes” and by working with them to identify alternative funding.68

Media Outreach

The industry embarked on a media blitz with anti–excise tax messages and other criticisms of the Clinton plan. From 1993 to 1994, at least 28 tobacco industry–funded think tanks, antitax groups, labor organizations, and left-leaning organizations published studies or organized conferences (Table 1). Some, such as Americans for Tax Reform and Citizens for a Sound Economy, sponsored paid print and radio advertising and direct mail campaigns.69 Organizations garnered major US newspaper coverage through op-eds, interviews, and reports.7083 Targeting social conservatives who might otherwise support “sin taxes,” Philip Morris funded a 6-part miniseries on the Clinton plan by the Free Congress Foundation, aired on its National Empowerment Television network.8486 An Alexis de Tocqueville Institute critique of the Clinton plan brought author interviews on right-leaning radio, including a syndicated broadcast to 1000 religious stations.70,8789 Philip Morris also collaborated with the right-leaning Manhattan Institute, providing “off-the-record” input to one of its fellows, Betsy McCaughey, for her widely read Clinton plan critique published in The New Republic.69,90

To generate the appearance of “grassroots” opposition to excise taxes, RJ Reynolds’s Ramhurst coordinators worked with SRGs to hold press conferences and rallies, issue press releases, and conduct media interviews.91103 Consultants provided groups with petitions104106 and held training sessions on excise taxes, health care reform, and communicating with media.92,104,107115 SRGs received a briefing book containing talking points, media guides, and resources about speaking opportunities.110 To facilitate letter-writing campaigns, RJ Reynolds staff prepared 80 unique “Letters to the Editor” templates for SRGs and samples of letters to elected officials.116121 When Clinton formally announced the health care plan in September 1993,122 SRGs alone generated more than 300 media hits, including op-eds, talk show interviews, and press release coverage.92

Mobilizing the Political Right

Philip Morris and RJ Reynolds collaborated on tax increase alerts to 50 million US consumers in their databases, who reportedly sent approximately 50000 letters to Congress.29,44,123 For politically sympathetic elected officials (particularly those representing tobacco states), the companies shared lobbying responsibilities.41,44,69,124 To supplement direct outreach, Philip Morris organized grassroots lobbying by right-leaning think tanks.48 At Philip Morris’s request, for example, Heartland Institute staff met with 2 Republican congressmen “to encourage opposition to the Clinton plan and FET [Federal Excise Tax] hikes.”85 The Alexis de Tocqueville Institute distributed studies and op-ed pieces to Congress members through 4 “Dear Colleague” letters; 2 senators who served on its board entered Alexis de Tocqueville Institute pieces into the Congressional Record.70,125,126 Citizens for a Sound Economy helped organize protests at town hall meetings (sessions between elected officials and constituents).69,127

Mobilizing the Political Left

Labor Management Committee–funded organizations enjoyed credibility within Democratic Party circles, the Tobacco Institute noted in reports to member companies,128 and were well positioned to influence policy makers. Former personnel of some organizations had been appointed to high-ranking party and Clinton administration positions. Former Citizens for Tax Justice executive director David Wilhelm, for example, was appointed Democratic National Committee chair.128 Tobacco Institute personnel were initially concerned that left-leaning allies would be reluctant to criticize the Clinton plan. However, Tobacco Institute president Sam Chilcote reported in February 1993 that Wilhelm had informed Tobacco Institute staff that he advised the Citizens for Tax Justice executive director not to give Clinton a “honeymoon” period but to “keep the heat on the White House through the media,” because this empowered cabinet members who opposed excise taxes.128

Citizen Action also enjoyed a high profile among congressional staff and the Clinton administration.129,130 Tobacco Institute staff noted that Citizen Action personnel visited the White House regularly to discuss health care.131 Citizen Action also lobbied the House Ways and Means Committee, arguing that excise taxes would hurt the middle class,128 and held a briefing opposing excise tax health care funding for 300 house members, staff, labor unions, and interest groups.128

Mobilizing “Grassroots” Movements

To influence policy makers and public opinion about excise taxes in general and the Clinton plan specifically, RJ Reynolds’s Ramhurst coordinators met with existing SRGs, helped create at least 20 new ones,99,107,113,132137 trained leaders, and coordinated statewide coalition meetings in at least 44 states (see Table 1).51,52,114,133,137140 Coordinators also held “smokers’ rights meetings” in regions lacking formal groups; participants signed petitions or wrote letters to congressmembers.99,133,141144 Coordinators were urged to maintain a variety of SRG activities targeting elected officials:

We won’t make an impression with congressmen with one or two blow-out events. Rather we will make our point by hitting his/her office with a barrage of letters one week, petitions the next, a well-designed questionnaire the next, some media hits next, steady opposition made known via town meetings and other personal visits ….145

By February 1994, SRGs had reportedly made at least 20 000 phone calls to Congress members, sent 100 000 letters, and attended 140 town hall meetings nationwide.92 In reports to RJ Reynolds, Ramhurst characterized several meetings as confrontational.107,115,146,147 In April 1993, for example, Minnesota Smokers’ Coalition members attended a town hall meeting with Senator Paul Wellstone (D, MN), presented 50000 petition signatures, and solicited his position on cigarette taxes. When the senator affirmed support for the tax, “what should have been a friendly town meeting in his home town turned hostile and Wellstone abruptly ended the meeting and left ….”107 A Ramhurst coordinator reported learning that Congressman Tim Johnson (D, SD) had described his town hall meetings in late 1993 as

not only the worst 4 weeks of his political career but the worst 4 weeks of his life …. Our groups should be commended for their efforts for being in his face everywhere he went …. He certainly will be thinking about the political ramifications of supporting the presidents [sic] plan as it is now.147

SRG members met with elected officials locally, expressing home state opposition.93,94,101,107,109,137,144,148155 In April 1994, SRGs in North and South Dakota organized a 2-week program targeting Senate Finance Committee members Tom Daschle (D, SD) and Kent Conrad (D, ND).150 Groups submitted formal resolutions against excise taxes to the senators’ offices and activated phone trees.101,150 Ultimately, one group met with Senator Daschle,136 and another received a response from Senator Conrad’s office indicating “he wants to get a healthcare bill passed that has no new taxes.”101 By June 1994, Ramhurst reported, Conrad had expressed opposition to the entire Clinton health plan during 3 town meetings attended by “hostile” crowds.115

SRGs also targeted events where the Clintons were promoting health care reform. In September 1993, 2 Florida-based SRGs and “volunteers from RJR [RJ Reynolds] field sales” staged a protest outside the building where ABC’s Nightline program was conducting a town hall meeting with President Clinton, drawing coverage from rival media.91,156 A Ramhurst coordinator organized an antitax rally at the site of a Kansas City health care forum attended by Hillary Clinton and Senator Bob Dole,157 and a Kentucky SRG burned an effigy of the first lady at a rally attended by elected officials of both parties.154,158,159

Promoting Alternatives

In a strategy to either minimize the proposed excise tax increase or defeat the Clinton plan altogether, Philip Morris funded right-leaning policy organizations to organize conferences critiquing the plan and promoting free-market alternatives.69 Philip Morris also “worked with” the National Center for Policy Analysis and the Heritage Foundation in the development and promotion of alternative health care proposals.69

The Tobacco Institute provided funding and public relations support to left-leaning groups pressuring the Clinton administration toward a single-payer plan.160176 By early 1994, the Clinton plan’s most significant left-leaning rival, the McDermott-Wellstone single-payer plan, was supported by more than 90 congress members.177179 Although an insufficient number for bill passage, it constituted a powerful minority.179 At the Labor Management Committee’s request, several left-leaning groups requested appearances before the House Ways and Means Committee in November 1993, opposing “regressive elements of the Clinton plan including tobacco taxes.”180 Public relations firm Ogilvy, Adams, & Rinehart, hired by the Labor Management Committee,160,181,182 met with organizations to help them prepare and publicize their statements.180,183185 In testimony, Citizen Action, the Coalition of Labor Union Women, the A. Philip Randolph Institute, the Labor Council for Latin American Advancement, and the National Council for Senior Citizens mitigated support for the Clinton plan by framing it as an acceptable but temporary alternative to single payer.186 All explicitly criticized the tobacco excise tax.186

Ironically, whereas the Clinton plan proposed a 75-cent per pack tax increase, a $2 per pack increase was added to the single-payer legislation in early 1994.187 Citizen Action had initially claimed it would not support legislation with a cigarette tax increase188 but continued to endorse McDermott-Wellstone, limiting its support for the Clinton plan.189192 Although in one respect this conflicted with the Tobacco Institute’s agenda, support for rival plans still served tobacco industry interests by maintaining divisions among left-leaning constituents, helping defeat the Clinton plan; indeed, the Tobacco Institute continued to fund Citizen Action the following year.193,194

Epilogue

By September 1994, the Clinton plan was “dead.”20 Although multiple factors accounted for its defeat, the tobacco industry credited itself with a significant role. According to Philip Morris’s Linehan, the

industry was confronted with a multitude of healthcare reform proposals, the majority of which relied heavily on increased tobacco excise taxes …. With the valuable assistance of tobacco growers, industry suppliers, third-party activists and congressional allies, the industry worked to defeat these tax proposals.195

Philip Morris viewed its funding of right-leaning groups as money well spent. An internal company presentation commented, “The question is fairly asked, are we getting enough out of groups we support …. Our reach is wide by any corporate standard.”196 RJ Reynolds was similarly pleased with the SRGs’ results: “We chased ‘Clintoncare’ I all over the country and the ‘beast’ is currently hiding in a cave, somewhere inside a belt-way.”197 Although SRGs helped persuade elected officials that widespread public opposition to excise taxes existed, RJ Reynolds’s own data showed that in late 1994, 69% of Americans still supported increasing tobacco taxes to fund health care.198

Although taxes on tobacco, alcohol, and sugared soft drinks have been identified as potential funding mechanisms for current health care reform, to date they have not been included.199 Although the tobacco industry may, therefore, have little incentive to fund third-party allies to oppose present reforms, several organizations that received tobacco industry funding to help defeat the Clinton plan have publicly opposed elements of the current legislation.9,200207 None of these groups publicly disclose their funding sources through Web sites or annual reports.

In addition, as occurred with the Clinton plan, numerous opposing coalitions and “grassroots” groups have appeared.208 Patients United Now and Patients First were created by Americans for Prosperity,209211 formerly Citizens for a Sound Economy,212 the single largest recipient of Philip Morris funding to generate opposition to the Clinton plan.127,213,214 These and other groups have deployed similar tactics, including organizing protests at town hall meetings215 and hanging a Congress member in effigy,216,217 just as an SRG burned an effigy of Hillary Clinton.158 Several organizations claiming to represent grassroots or popular movements have ties with corporate interests across multiple industries, including FreedomWorks, another Citizens for a Sound Economy spinoff.218220 Conservatives for Patients’ Rights has disclosed that its founder, formerly chief executive officer of Columbia/HCA Health-care Company, contributed approximately $5 million but provided no details on the remaining 75% of its $20 million budget.221,222 Betsy McCaughey, to whom Philip Morris provided input for a Clinton plan critique, recently published articles opposing the current legislation,223225 just before resigning from a medical device corporation to “avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest.”226 Although media coverage has noted participation of industries or individuals with close industry ties in some coalitions,227229 not all articles make these ties explicit.230232

DISCUSSION

The tobacco industry’s success in mobilizing opposition to the Clinton plan among ideologically diverse constituencies underscores the challenge of overcoming corporate efforts to obstruct health care reform. By encouraging organizations to focus on points of contention, the tobacco industry fostered a climate in which inaction seemed preferable to the solidarity needed for reform legislation to pass. Key to the tobacco industry’s strategic alliances was its ability to keep these relationships largely hidden. Perceptions of these groups as autonomous and representing the “public interest” enhanced the credibility of the industry messages they carried.

These findings demonstrate the need for full disclosure of corporate funding sources in publications, congressional testimony, and lobbying. As Balbach and Campbell observed, “Acceptance of funding is less important than the transparent admission of funding sources.”36 Transparency is critical to the passage of health care reform legislation, because arguments advanced by interest groups should be evaluated in light of their corporate sponsors’ agendas. Although the tobacco industry may not have the same vested interests in influencing the health care reform efforts of the Obama administration, other industries appear to be using the same tactics.

Skocpol2 has argued that single-payer supporters considered the Clinton plan an acceptable compromise but believed they could gain further concessions from the president by leveraging their endorsements, in some cases by publicly criticizing the plan. Left-leaning groups helped diminish public understanding of and support for the Clinton plan, albeit unintentionally.2 They failed to comprehend their role in a broader, but weak, coalition for universal health coverage that required unconditional support from all members to enact legislation.2

As one newspaper described in May 1993,

Groups like Citizen Action, the National Council of Senior Citizens and unions are being counted on as front-line troops whose money and members will help balance well-funded industry public relations campaigns against particular elements.233

Instead, perhaps unwittingly, they participated in an industry public relations campaign, accepting support from the tobacco-funded Labor Management Committee and ongoing “assistance” from its public relations firms, prioritizing the tax issue and “progressive” health care financing at the expense of universal coverage and other Clinton plan elements. As Tobacco Institute personnel described, “Institute funding provided the necessary seed money to … move our issues to the top of these groups’ agendas … or where we disagreed, it helped to move antitobacco issues to the bottom ….”131

Whether these groups genuinely believed they shared common ground with the industry on promoting progressive tax structures or made a strategic decision to promote the industry’s messages in exchange for funding and public relations assistance, this concession to corporate interests proved costly. Organizations should recognize that relationships with corporations pose conflicts of interest in the health care arena because (1) the primary function of the corporate entity is to maximize profits, regardless of social consequences,234 and (2) many corporate practices deployed to maximize profits, from selling harmful products to lobbying against public health regulations, actually promote disease.235

Our study has limitations. Because of the archive’s volume and types of litigation requests, there may be additional, unretrieved relevant documents. Our analysis of policy and advocacy organizations was limited to those receiving tobacco industry funding during 1992–1994 that were explicitly identified in documents as assisting industry efforts to oppose the Clinton plan. It is possible that the industry collaborated with additional organizations. Internal industry documents strategically classified think tanks and advocacy groups as either right leaning or left leaning; similar classifications appear in the media and academic literature, but this dichotomy cannot capture the full spectrum of beliefs among such groups.

To enable both the public and policy makers to critically evaluate arguments about prospective health care legislation, public disclosure of all corporate contributions to think tanks and public interest groups attempting to influence public opinion is vital. The media should investigate funding sources of interest groups that appear when major legislation is pending. Proponents of universal health coverage should decline donations from corporations in health-damaging industries234,235 or any other industry whose broader agenda may pose conflicts of interest.

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by National Institutes of Health fellowship funding (grant CA113710) and the National Cancer Institute (grant CA120138).

Footnotes

Reprints can be ordered at http://www.ajph.org by clicking the “Reprints/Eprints” link.

Contributors

L. E. Tesler conducted the Tobacco Industry and newspaper document searches, analyzed documents, wrote the first draft, and revised successive drafts. R. E. Malone analyzed documents and reviewed, edited, and revised all drafts. Both authors originated the study.

Note. R. E. Malone owns one share each of Philip Morris (Altria), Philip Morris International, and Reynolds American stock for research and shareholder advocacy purposes.

Human Participant Protection

No institutional review board approval was required for this study.

Contributor Information

Laura E. Tesler, Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, School of Nursing, University of California, San Francisco.

Ruth E. Malone, Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, School of Nursing, University of California, San Francisco.

References

1. Pear R. The New York Times. Dec 12, 2008. Health care policy is in the hands of an ex-senator; p. A28.
2. Skocpol T. Boomerang: Clinton’s Health Security Effort and the Turn Against Government in US Politics. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc; 1996.
3. Hoffman B. Health care reform and social movements in the United States. Am J Public Health. 2003;93(1):75–85. [PubMed]
4. Pear R. The New York Times. May 14, 2009. Democrats to develop pitch to sell health plan; p. A16.
5. Pear R. The New York Times. May 30, 2009. 2 Democrats spearheading health bill are split; p. A7.
6. Pear R. The New York Times. May 12, 2009. 45 centrist Democrats protest secrecy of health care talks; p. A16.
7. Pear R. The New York Times. May 27, 2009. Antitrust laws loom as hurdle in Obama effort to overhaul health care; p. A12.
8. Pear R. The New York Times. May 21, 2009. Tax proposals draw critics in talks on financing health insurance; p. A18.
9. Pear R. The New York Times. May 28, 2009. Warring sides on health care carry their fight to TV and radio ads; p. A14.
10. Pear R. The New York Times. Jun 4, 2009. Obama open to mandate that people own coverage; p. A17.
11. Clymer A, Pear R, Toner R. New York Times. Aug 29, 1994. The health care debate: What went wrong? How the health care campaign collapsed—A special report; for health care, Times was a killer; p. A1.
12. Blendon RJ, Brodie M, Benson J. What happened to Americans’ support for the Clinton health plan? Health Aff (Millwood) 1995;14(2):7–23. [PubMed]
13. Hansen O, Ortmans J, Norton C, et al. Lawmakers’ views on the failure of health reform: a survey of members of Congress and staff. J Health Polit Policy Law. 1996;21(1):137–151. [PubMed]
14. Heclo H. The Clinton health plan: historical perspective. Health Aff (Millwood) 1995;14(1):86–98. [PubMed]
15. Bilheimer LT, Colby DC. Expanding coverage: reflections on recent efforts. Health Aff (Millwood) 2001;20(1):83–95. [PubMed]
16. Gottschalk M. The missing millions: organized labor, business, and the defeat of Clinton’s Health Security Act. J Health Polit Policy Law. 1999;24(3):489–529. [PubMed]
17. Koch JW. Political rhetoric and political persuasion: the changing structure of citizens’ preferences on health insurance during policy debate. Public Opin Q. 1998;62(2):209–229.
18. Swenson P, Greer S. Foul weather friends: big business and health care reform in the 1990s in historical perspective. J Health Polit Policy Law. 2002;27(4):605–638. [PubMed]
19. West DM, Heith D, Goodwin C. Harry and Louise go to Washington: political advertising and health care reform. Health Aff (Millwood) 1996;21(1):35–68. [PubMed]
20. Nathanson CA. The skeptic’s guide to a movement for universal health insurance. J Health Polit Policy Law. 2003;28(2–3):443–471. [PubMed]
21. Malone RE, Balbach ED. Tobacco industry documents: treasure trove or quagmire? Tob Control. 2000;9(3):334–338. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
22. Balbach ED, Gasior RJ, Barbeau EM. Tobacco industry documents: comparing the Minnesota Depository and internet access. Tob Control. 2002;11(1):68–72. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
23. MacKenzie R, Collin J, Lee K. [Accessed July 7, 2009];The tobacco industry documents: an introductory handbook and resource guide for researchers. 2003 Available at: http://repositories.cdlib.org/tc/surveys/dochbook2003/
24. Marshall C, Rossman G. Designing Qualitative Research. 3. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 1999.
25. Patton MQ. Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. 3. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2002.
26. Yin R. Case Study Research Design and Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 1994.
27. Hill M. Archival Strategies and Techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications; 1993.
28. Linehan K. PM participation in health care coalitions. Philip Morris; Jun 1, 1992. [Accessed June 15, 2009]. Bates no. 2046799264/9266. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/sob62e00.
29. Fuller C. Report on the RJR PM Tobacco Task Force. Philip Morris; Mar 10, 1993. [Accessed April 17, 2009]. Bates no. 2048603223/3225. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/wlb72e00.
30. Tobacco Institute. [Accessed June 26, 2009];Comments regarding penny-a-pack cigarette tax increase. 1975 January; Bates no. TI04380735-TI7. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/iwe19a00.
31. Tobacco Institute. [Accessed June 26, 2009];Pending cigarette tax increase would require smokers to pay entire cost for improving the health care delivery system. 1976 February 19; Bates no. TIOK0000750/0751. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/sef02f00.
32. Yang JS, Novotny TE. Policy coherence in US tobacco control: beyond FDA regulation. PLoS Med. 2009;6(5):e1000079. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
33. US Department of Health and Human Services. Reducing Tobacco Use: A Report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta: US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health; 2000.
34. Warner KE. The economics of tobacco: myths and realities. Tob Control. 2000;9(1):78–89. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
35. Warner KE. Cigarette taxation: doing good by doing well. J Public Health Policy. 1984;5(3):312–319. [PubMed]
36. Campbell R, Balbach ED. Mobilising public opinion for the tobacco industry: the Consumer Tax Alliance and excise taxes. Tob Control. 2008;17:351–356. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
37. Stuntz SM. Earmarked excise taxes and health care reform. Tobacco Institute; Jan 3, 1991. [Accessed April 27, 2009]. Bates no. TIMN0352267/2271. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/yjo52f00.
38. Smith EA, Malone RE. Thinking the “unthinkable”: why Philip Morris considered quitting. Tob Control. 2003;12(2):208–213. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
39. Reynolds RJ. [Accessed June 29, 2009];Health care excesses issue action plan: background. 1992 November 5; Bates no. 512689050/9053. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/bjg33d00.
40. Associated Press. The Clinton administration would delay implementing some of its health care plans. Philip Morris; Mar 9, 1993. [Accessed April 17, 2009]. Bates no. 2048603226. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/xlb72e00.
41. Nicoli D. PM/RJR taskforce FET plan. Philip Morris; May 27, 1993. [Accessed April 17, 2009]. Bates no. 2046936205/6361. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/las81f00.
42. Morris Philip. [Accessed June 10, 2009];Concept. 1993 March 25; Bates no. 2048583297/3325. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/wfq36e00.
43. Morris Philip. [Accessed June 10, 2009];PM/RJR Tobacco Task Force. 1993 March; Bates no. 2048583231/3254. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/gmt81f00.
44. Morris Philip. [Accessed January 23, 2009];The federal excise tax strategy. 1993 June 8; Bates no. 2046985164/5170. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/avh87e00.
45. Morris Philip. [Accessed August 8, 2008];FET campaign national briefing book. 1994 February; Bates no. 2074070000/0092. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/qpb76c00.
46. Morris Philip. [Accessed January 23, 2009];PM/RJR task force projects. 1993 April 2; Bates no. 2048583035/3087. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/eoh92e00.
47. Morris Philip. [Accessed June 10, 2009];Timeline—federal excise taxes. 1993 March 22; Bates no. 2048603233/3235A. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/qxt66e00.
48. LinehanK. Board presentation—March 30, 1994. Philip Morris; Mar 30, 1994. [Accessed August 8, 2008]. Bates no. 2062526450/6455. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/nrt47d00.
49. Reynolds RJ. [Accessed January 7, 2009];Action guide for opposing the federal excise tax increase on cigarettes. 1993 December; Bates no. 518727899/7977. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/fnt92a00.
50. Marden R. REM monthly report, 940200. Philip Morris; Feb, 1994. [Accessed August 6, 2008]. Bates no. 2078212289/2291. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/irs75c00.
51. Apollonio DE, Bero LA. The creation of industry front groups: the tobacco industry and “Get Government Off Our Back” Am J Public Health. 2007;97(3):419–427. [PubMed]
52. Carter SM. Mongoven, Biscoe & Duchin: destroying tobacco control activism from the inside. Tob Control. 2002;11(2):112–118. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
53. Jones Mother. comeback strategy: Marlboro’s man. RJ Reynolds; May, 1996. [Accessed January 31, 2008]. Bob Dole & Big Tobacco’s. Bates no. 522626931/7045. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/lem60d00.
54. Reynolds RJ. State government relations legislative counsel briefing book 1990–1991 (900000–910000) RJ Reynolds; 1991. [Accessed May 20, 2009]. Bates no. 507591790/1870. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/dtj24d00.
55. Payne MT. PM/RJR task force status. RJ Reynolds; Mar 22, 1993. [Accessed April 17, 2009]. Bates no. 512534535/4541. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/wlm33d00.
56. Balbach ED, Barbeau EM, Manteufel V, et al. Political coalitions for mutual advantage: the case of the Tobacco Institute’s Labor Management Committee. Am J Public Health. 2005;95(6):985–993. [PubMed]
57. Tobacco Institute. [Accessed April 28, 2009];Labor Management Committee coalitions. Bates no. TNWL0050258/0281. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/alf07d00.
58. Mather O. Savarese Associates. Resource assessment for targeted states. Tobacco Institute; Feb 26, 1988. [Accessed February 4, 2009]. Bates no. TITX0034850/4855. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/itw32f00.
59. Tobacco Institute. [Accessed February 5, 2009];Public relations division report annual meeting. 1985 December 12; Bates no. TI04351157-TI251. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/dng19a00.
60. Daniels JC. Anderson Byers Inc. In the Superior Court of the State of Washington in and for the County of King, No 96-2-15056-8sea, videotaped deposition of Joe C Daniels. Tobacco Institute; Jun 4, 1998. [Accessed February 5, 2009]. Bates no. TINY0001142/1297. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/qds22f00.
61. Balbach ED, Herzberg A, Barbeau EM. Political coalitions and working women: how the tobacco industry built a relationship with the Coalition of Labor Union Women. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2006;60(suppl 2):27–32. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
62. Campbell RB, Balbach ED. Building alliances in unlikely places: progressive allies and the Tobacco Institute’s coalition strategy on cigarette excise taxes. Am J Public Health. 2009;99(7):1188–1196. AJPH.2008.143131. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
63. Morley CP, Cummings KM, Hyland A, et al. Tobacco Institute lobbying at the state and local levels of government in the 1990s. Tob Control. 2002;11 (Suppl 1):i102–i109. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
64. Givel MS, Glantz SA. Tobacco lobby political influence on US state legislatures in the 1990s. Tob Control. 2001;10(2):124–134. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
65. Cardador MT, Hazan AR, Glantz SA. Tobacco industry smokers’ rights publications: a content analysis. Am J Public Health. 1995;85(9):1212–1217. [PubMed]
66. Smith EA, Malone RE. ‘We will speak as the smoker’: the tobacco industry’s smokers’ rights groups. Eur J Public Health. 2007;17(3):306–313. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
67. Muggli ME, Forster JL, Hurt RD, et al. The smoke you don’t see: uncovering tobacco industry scientific strategies aimed against environmental tobacco smoke policies. Am J Public Health. 2001;91(9):1419–1423. [PubMed]
68. Chilcote S. Letter to Charles H Mullen. Tobacco Institute; Jan 27, 1992. [Accessed April 28, 2009]. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/tqj03f00. Bates no. TIMN0031149/1153.
69. Morris Philip. [Accessed April 10, 2008];Tobacco strategy. 1994 March; Bates no. 2022887066/7072. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/dtv34e00.
70. Carey M. ADTI on the Clinton health care plan. RJ Reynolds; Nov 7, 1994. [Accessed August 8, 2008]. Bates no. 515245516/5519. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/kqo80d00.
71. Stelzer I. There is no health care crisis. Tobacco Institute; Jan 25, 1994. [Accessed August 11, 2008]. Bates no. TI16741130/1131. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/dtr76d00.
72. Will GF. Newsweek. Feb 21, 1994. Came the revolution … p. 74.
73. Lambro D. The Washington Times. Feb 5, 1994. Clinton’s plan needs reform to get healthy; p. A1.
74. Kurtz H. The Washington Post. Feb 4, 1994. The scholar who raised Clinton’s bile; Elizabeth McCaughey enjoys healthy bite; p. C1.
75. McCaughey E. Price controls on health care. The Wall Street Journal. 1993 November 22;:A14.
76. McCaughey E. Health plan’s devilish details. The Wall Street Journal. 1993 September 30;:A18.
77. Chilcote S. Tobacco Institute. Memorandum to the members of the executive committee. Lorillard; Feb 2, 1993. [Accessed June 16, 2009]. Bates no. 87680255/0256. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/sym13c00.
78. Pear R. The New York Times. Sep 7, 1994. Health care debate to shift to federal employees’ plan; p. A1.
79. Wolf R. USA Today. Sep 12, 1994. A little bit of health reform is getting a longer look; p. 4A.
80. Hasson J. USA Today. Jul 12, 1994. Congress’ insurance in limelight; p. 8A.
81. Furchtgott-Roth D. Clinton’s radical health plan. The Wall Street Journal. 1993 November 17;:A23.
82. Priest D. The Washington Post. Jul 18, 1993. Amid hisses, Clinton aide hears call for another kind of health care; p. A4.
83. Priest D. The Washington Post. May 7, 1993. Central health care: ‘undo-able’ but no longer on political fringe; p. A11.
84. Fuller CL. Monthly report—000500. Philip Morris; Jun 13, 1994. [Accessed April 9, 2008]. Bates no. 2040410833/0839. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ouf04e00.
85. Morris Philip. FET update 1/28/94. Philip Morris; Jan 28, 1994. [Accessed April 23, 2008]. Bates no. 2046554465/4467. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/oim57d00.
86. Borelli T. 000100 Activity report. Philip Morris; Jan 31, 1994. [Accessed March 20, 2008]. Bates no. 2046585284/5285. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/aqb03e00.
87. Carey M. Health care tax increase. Philip Morris; Feb 28, 1994. [Accessed August 5, 2008]. Alexis de Tocqueville Institution. Bates no. 2073011682. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/lat57c00.
88. America E. Clinton’s health plan: the biggest tax increase in history? Philip Morris; Feb, 1994. [Accessed August 5, 2008]. Bates no. 2073011681. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/mat57c00.
89. Carey M. Health care tax increase. Philip Morris; Feb 22, 1994. [Accessed August 5, 2008]. Bates no. 2073011671/1673. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/sat57c00.
90. McCaughey E. The New Republic. Feb 7, 1994. No exit: what the Clinton plan will do for you; p. 21. [PubMed]
91. Ogburn TL. Public issues update September 20–September 24, 1993 (930920–930924) RJ Reynolds; Sep 24, 1993. [Accessed April 14, 2009]. Bates no. 515195313/5319. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ija71d00.
92. Reynolds RJ. Highlights: FET opposition programs. [Accessed January 7, 2009];RJR/external relations. 1993 Bates no. 513217604/7606. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/xig23d00.
93. Ogburn TL. Public issues update September 27–October 1, 1993 (930927–931001) RJ Reynolds; Oct 1, 1993. [Accessed April 15, 2009]. Bates no. 515195324/5328. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/jja71d00.
94. Reynolds RJ. [Accessed April 14, 2009];RJR memorandum. 1993 Bates no. 515799413. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/eli92d00.
95. Fackler R. Weekly report. RJ Reynolds; Sep 29, 1993. [Accessed April 15, 2009]. Refvwo929. Bates no. 515195239/5240. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/zed03d00.
96. Ogburn TL. Public issues update July 19–July 23, 1993 (930719–930723) RJ Reynolds; Jul 23, 1993. [Accessed April 15, 2009]. Bates no. 515195272/5277. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/hja71d00.
97. Reynolds RJ. [Accessed April 15, 2009];Public issues update October 11–October 15. 1993 October 15; Bates no. 515195329/5332. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/efd03d00.
98. Griscom TC. Following are the activities in our external relations department for the week of January 31 through February 4, 1994 (940131–940204) RJ Reynolds; Feb 8, 1994. [Accessed January 7, 2009]. Bates no. 511425805/5812. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/dej38c00.
99. Reynolds RJ. [Accessed May 15, 2009];Public issues update March 1, 1993–March 5, 1993 (930301–930305) 1993 March 5; Bates no. 515190639/0643. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/pqd03d00.
100. Griscom TC. Following are the activities in our external relations department for the weeks of April 11–22, 1994 (19940411–19940422) RJ Reynolds; Apr 25, 1994. [Accessed April 20, 2009]. Bates no. 519858853/8860. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/szk97c00.
101. Hyde T. Public issues update May 9–13, 1994 (940509) (940513) RJ Reynolds; May 13, 1994. [Accessed April 20, 2009]. Bates no. 512766817/6824. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/xda71d00.
102. Hyde T. Public issues update May 23–27, 1994 (940523–940527) RJ Reynolds; Jun 2, 1994. [Accessed April 20, 2009]. Bates no. 512572125/2129. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/gda71d00.
103. Hyde T. Public issues update August 22–23, 1994 (940822–940823) RJ Reynolds; Aug 27, 1994. [Accessed April 20, 2009]. Bates no. 511398624/8626. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/yxp44a00.
104. Caldeira S. Weekly field memo. RJ Reynolds; Feb 25, 1993. [Accessed April 15, 2009]. Bates no. 515190598/0602. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/oqm10d00.
105. Ellis J. FET actions. RJ Reynolds; Jul 25, 1994. [Accessed April 20, 2009]. Bates no. 532052478/2479. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/eiu36a00.
106. Phillips MW. FDA petition program. RJ Reynolds; Oct 13, 1994. [Accessed April 21, 2009]. Bates no. 532053410/3415. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/qjm96a00.
107. Ogburn TL., Jr Public issues update April 26–30, 1993 (930426–930430) RJ Reynolds; Apr 30, 1993. [Accessed April 14, 2009]. Bates no. 515195347/5353. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ffd03d00.
108. Griscom TC. Following are highlights of activities in our external relations organization for the week of April 19–23, 1993 (930419–930423) RJ Reynolds; Apr 23, 1993. [Accessed April 14, 2009]. Bates no. 512688213/8219. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/zrg33d00.
109. Ogburn TL. Public issues update April 19–23, 1993 (930419–930423) RJ Reynolds; Apr 23, 1993. [Accessed April 15, 2009]. Bates no. 515195341/5346. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/kja71d00.
110. Smith M. Review: Pr1—1993 (930000)—Mark D Smith. RJ Reynolds; 1993. [Accessed April 15, 2009]. Bates no. 512015582/5587. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/eqh43d00.
111. Griscom TC. Following are highlights of activities in our external relations organizations for the week of March 22–26, 1993 (930322–930326) RJ Reynolds; Mar 29, 1993. [Accessed April 15, 2009]. Bates no. 512688259/8264. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/isg33d00.
112. Griscom TC. Following are highlights of activities in our public relations department for the week of May 17–21, 1993 (930517–930521) RJ Reynolds; May 21, 1993. [Accessed April 15, 2009]. Bates no. 512688493/8498. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/cig33d00.
113. Ogburn TL. Public issues update July 12–July 16, 1993 (930712–930716) RJ Reynolds; Jul 16, 1993. [Accessed April 16, 2009]. Bates no. 515195267/5271. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/gja71d00.
114. Reynolds RJ. [Accessed April 16, 2009];Public issues 1994 (940000) Plans. 1994 Bates no. 512531446/1488. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/wtm33d00.
115. Hyde TN. Public issues update June 4–10, 1994 (940604–940610) RJ Reynolds; Jun 10, 1994. [Accessed January 7, 2009]. Bates no. 512572114/2119. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/fda71d00.
116. Reynolds RJ. [Accessed April 14, 2009];Letters to the editors FET. 1992 Bates no. 512692912/3032. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/jcg33d00.
117. Fackler R. Weekly report Robert Fackler 06-30-93(930630) RJ Reynolds; Jun 30, 1993. [Accessed April 16, 2009]. Bates no. 515195225/5226. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/wed03d00.
118. Reynolds RJ. [Accessed April 16, 2009];Smokers’ rights action guide. (2). 1994 January; Bates no. 525722395/2414. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/dnk03c00.
119. Reynolds RJ. Leadership manual. [Accessed April 16, 2009];Smokers’ rights. 1994 Bates no. 518570842/0997. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/suk72d00.
120. Smith M. Your memo/job values. RJ Reynolds; Jan 13, 1994. [Accessed April 20, 2009]. Bates no. 512015576/5578. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/dqh43d00.
121. Griscom TC. Following are the activities in our external relations department for the week of January 24–28, 1994 (940124–940128) RJ Reynolds; Jan 31, 1994. [Accessed January 7, 2009]. Bates no. 511425813/5817. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/now43d00.
122. Chicago Sun-Times. Sep 24, 1993. Speech draws large TV audience; p. 6.
123. Morris Philip. [Accessed June 9, 2009];Outline for issues presentation to management committee for 940330 breakfast before board meeting. 1994 March 4; Bates no. 2022816043/6060. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/wph04e00.
124. Fuller CL. 000800 Monthly report. Philip Morris; Sep 16, 1993. [Accessed April 10, 2008]. Bates no. 2041424327/4336. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/jau93e00.
125. Allard W. Dear colleague letter to members of US House of Representatives. Philip Morris; Mar 8, 1994. [Accessed August 5, 2008]. Bates no. 2073011693. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/cat57c00.
126. Conda C. Facsimile transmission. Philip Morris; Mar 8, 1994. [Accessed August 5, 2008]. Bates no. 2073011692. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/dat57c00.
127. Fuller CL. 000200 Monthly report. Philip Morris; Mar 17, 1994. [Accessed April 10, 2008]. Bates no. 2041424310/4316. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/eau93e00.
128. Chilcote S. Tobacco Institute. Memo from Sam Chilcote to Kathleen Linehan. Philip Morris; Feb 9, 1993. [Accessed January 8, 2009]. Bates no. 2046786669/6677. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/uex45d00.
129. Fleishman H. Dole tops Mitchell in legislative effectiveness say top congressional aides; Clinton reelection support surprisingly low; no middle class tax cut expected. Tobacco Institute; Feb 4, 1993. [Accessed April 13, 2009]. Bates no. TIOK0014647/4651. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/xma02f00.
130. Priest D. The Washington Post. Feb 6, 1993. White House to stump for health plan—“campaign manager” sought in bid go build support for program; p. A1.
131. Chilcote S. Remarks by Samuel D Chilcote, Jr for executive committee. Tobacco Institute; 1994. [Accessed April 13, 2009]. Bates no. TCAL0157268/7281. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/cbh86d00.
132. Hennes BM. Weekly activity report. RJ Reynolds; Mar 31, 1993. [Accessed April 14, 2009]. Bates no. 515190542/0545. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/gqd03d00.
133. Hyde T. Public issues update August 29–September 2, 1994 (940829–8) RJ Reynolds; Sep 2, 1994. [Accessed April 20, 2009]. Bates no. 512572035/2039. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/yqa71d00.
134. Ogburn TL., Jr Public issues update May 3–7, 1993 (930503–930507) RJ Reynolds; May 7, 1993. [Accessed April 15, 2009]. Bates no. 512688187/8193. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/wrg33d00.
135. Ogburn TL. Status report—period ending 2/5/93(930205) RJ Reynolds; Feb 5, 1993. [Accessed May 15, 2009]. Bates no. 512688392/8398. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/jtg33d00.
136. Hyde T. Public issues update May 2–6, 1994 (940502–940506) RJ Reynolds; May 13, 1994. [Accessed April 20, 2009]. Bates no. 512572130/2136. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ara71d00.
137. Hyde T. Public issues update May 16–20, 1994 (940516–940520) RJ Reynolds; May 21, 1994. [Accessed April 16, 2009]. Bates no. 512575653/5659. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ksj33d00.
138. Hyde TN. Public issues status, w/e 6/24/94(940624) RJ Reynolds; Jun 24, 1994. [Accessed January 7, 2009]. Bates no. 512572103/2107. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/eda71d00.
139. Ogburn TL., Jr Public issues update March 1, 1993–March 5, 1993 (930301–930305) RJ Reynolds; Mar 5, 1993. [Accessed April 17, 2009]. Bates no. 512688327/8331. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/tsg33d00.
140. Griscom TC. Following are the activities in our external relations department for the week of January 3–7, 1994 (940103–940107) RJ Reynolds; Jan 10, 1994. [Accessed April 21, 2009]. Bates no. 511425831/5836. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/bej38c00.
141. Griscom TC. Following are the activities in our external relations department for the week of July 18–22, 1994 (940718–940722) RJ Reynolds; Aug 1, 1994. [Accessed April 20, 2009]. Bates no. 511382881/2887. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/phz43d00.
142. Hyde T. Public issues update August 15–19, 1994 (940815–940819) RJ Reynolds; Aug 19, 1994. [Accessed April 20, 2009]. Bates no. 512572046/2049. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/dmn30d00.
143. Hyde T. Public issues update September 12–16, 1994 (940912–940916) RJ Reynolds; Sep 19, 1994. [Accessed April 20, 2009]. Bates no. 512572029/2034. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/cmn30d00.
144. Hyde T. Public issues update April 18–22, 1994 (940418–940422) RJ Reynolds; Apr 22, 1994. [Accessed April 20, 2009]. Bates no. 512766831/6837. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/yda71d00.
145. Goodyear D. By now I’ve had a chance to talk with each of the nine folks on our team. RJ Reynolds; Jul 20, 1994. [Accessed January 7, 2009]. Bates no. 531099081/9084. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/hqs46a00.
146. Griscom TC, Annese B. Following are the activities in our external relations department for the week of February 14–18, 1994 (940214–940218) RJ Reynolds; Feb 23, 1994. [Accessed July 31, 2008]. Bates no. 511423306/3311. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/jtw43d00.
147. Fackler R. Refwo922 Weekly report. RJ Reynolds; Sep 22, 1993. [Accessed April 16, 2009]. Bates no. 515195237/5238. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/yed03d00.
148. Griscom TC. Following are highlights of activities in our external relations organization for the week of May 3–7, 1993 (930503–930507) RJ Reynolds; May 10, 1993. [Accessed April 14, 2009]. Bates no. 512688175/8178. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/urg33d00.
149. Griscom TC. Following are highlights of activities in our external relations department for the week of November 29–December 3, 1993 (931129–931203) RJ Reynolds; Dec 6, 1993. [Accessed January 7, 2009]. Bates no. 512696738/6745. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/nzf33d00.
150. Hyde T. Public issues update April 25–29, 1994 (940425–940529) RJ Reynolds; May 5, 1994. [Accessed April 20, 2009]. Bates no. 512572137/2143. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/hda71d00.
151. Griscom TC. Following are the activities in our external relations department for the week of August 8–August 12, 1994 (940808-940812) RJ Reynolds; Aug 16, 1994. [Accessed April 21, 2009]. Weekly report. Bates no. 511425640/5646. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/tnw43d00.
152. Griscom TC. Following are the activities in our external relations department for the week of January 17–21, 1994 (940117–940121) RJ Reynolds; Jan 25, 1994. [Accessed January 7, 2009]. Bates no. 511425818/5824. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/cej38c00.
153. Griscom TC. Following are the activities in our external relations department for the week of March 28 through April 8, 1994 (940328–940408) RJ Reynolds; Apr 17, 1994. [Accessed January 7, 2009]. Bates no. 511423297/3305. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/itw43d00.
154. Griscom TC. Following are the activities in our external relations department for the week of July 4–July 8, 1994 (940704–940708) RJ Reynolds; Jul 8, 1994. [Accessed April 20, 2009]. Weekly report. Bates no. 511425673/5681. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ynw43d00.
155. Hyde TN. Public issues update July 11–15, 1994 (940711–940715) RJ Reynolds; Jul 19, 1994. [Accessed January 7, 2009]. Bates no. 512572089/2093. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/dda71d00.
156. Mashek J. Boston Globe. Sep 24, 1993. Clinton sells plan town-meeting style; p. 12.
157. Griscom TC. Following are highlights of activities in our external relations department for the week of October 25–29, 1993 (931025–931029) RJ Reynolds; Nov 1, 1993. [Accessed April 14, 2009]. Bates no. 511423320/3326. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ltw43d00.
158. Associated Press. Tobacco rights activists burn effigy of first lady. Philip Morris; Aug 29, 1994. [Accessed May 21, 2009]. Bates no. 2046440576. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/xbw87d00.
159. Lawrence K. Owensboro Messenger-Inquirer (KY) Sep 1, 1994. Effigy sparked fire-storm of attention for tobacco advocate; p. 1A.
160. Ogilvy Savarese J, Adams, Rinehart TI. March activity report. Tobacco Institute; Apr 29, 1993. [Accessed January 7, 2009]. Bates no. TI01480783/0787. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/har30c00.
161. Kennedy E. The Buffalo News. May 12, 1993. Single-payer health insurance is answer; p. C2.
162. Powell S. Times Union. Albany, NY: Mar 24, 1993. Woman tells Gore health concerns; p. B7.
163. Chilcote S. Letter to members of the executive committee. Philip Morris; Mar 22, 1993. [Accessed April 13, 2009]. Bates no. 2070038507/8512. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/sfq16c00.
164. Ogilvy Savarese J, Adams, Rinehart TI February activity report. Tobacco Institute; Mar 15, 1993. [Accessed August 15, 2008]. Bates no. TI01480799/0804. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/dar30c00.
165. George C. Taxes and social costs. Tobacco Institute; Jun, 1993. [Accessed May 1, 2009]. Bates no. TI14580156/0158. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/toj86d00.
166. Associated Press. Press of Atlantic City. NJ: May 17, 1993. Citizen action rallies in N.J. for national health-care plan; p. A4.
167. Strategy Group. May report. Tobacco Institute; Jun 22, 1993. [Accessed May 12, 2009]. Bates no. TIILBC0010987/0996. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/xjj22f00.
168. George C. Taxes and social costs. Tobacco Institute; May, 1993. [Accessed May 12, 2009]. Bates no. TI14580124/0126. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/foj86d00.
169. Ogilvy Savarese J, Adams, Rinehart Labor Management Committee May activity report. Tobacco Institute; Jun 15, 1993. [Accessed February 13, 2009]. Bates no. TI01480738/0739. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/nar30c00.
170. Stainer H. Plain Dealer. Cleveland, OH: May 2, 1993. 500 Women gather to battle over health plan proposal; p. 6B.
171. Merrill L. The Record. New Jersey: Jan 26, 1993. Torricelli urged to back health-care bill—activists rally in Hackensack; p. A3.
172. Ogilvy Savarese J, Adams, Rinehart TI January activity report. Tobacco Institute; Feb 12, 1993. [Accessed January 7, 2009]. Bates no. TI01480811/0814. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/zzq30c00.
173. Tobacco Institute. Tobacco Industry Labor Management Committee national strategy. Lorillard; Jan, 1994. [Accessed August 15, 2008]. Bates no. 93795131/5139. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/mui60e00.
174. Tobacco Institute. [Accessed May 12, 2009];The Tobacco Institute 1993 budget public affairs division. 1992 October 6; Bates no. TI16681190/1262. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ams76d00.
175. Radell M. The Tobacco Institute 1994 budget—public affairs division. Tobacco Institute; May, 1993. [Accessed May 12, 2009]. Bates no. TI38950053–TI115. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/bpm09a00.
176. Sears L. Strategy group. March report. Tobacco Institute; Apr 12, 1993. [Accessed February 19, 2009]. Bates no. TNWL0051799/1807. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/vbf07d00.
177. Sword D. Evansville Courier. IN: Jan 28, 1994. McCloskey calls single-payer best option yet; p. A3.
178. Byrd J. The Washington Post. Jul 17, 1994. What about single-payer? p. C6.
179. Hasson J. USA Today. Feb 24, 1994. Single-payer backers courted by Clinton; p. 8A.
180. Ogilvy Shulman E, Adams, Rinehart Ways and Means Committee witness list. Tobacco Institute; Nov 11, 1993. [Accessed January 7, 2009]. Bates no. TI02850950. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/twt30c00.
181. Savarese J. TI September activity report. Tobacco Institute; Oct 15, 1993. [Accessed January 7, 2009]. Bates no. TI01622940/2942. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/fcs30c00.
182. Ogilvy Savarese J, Adams, Rinehart Labor Management Committee December activity report. Tobacco Institute; Jan 15, 1993. [Accessed June 18, 2009]. Bates no. TI01480819/0820. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/xzq30c00.
183. Ogilvy, Adams, Rinehart Update on southern and national activities by labor, agriculture and LMC Allies. Tobacco Institute; Nov, 1993. [Accessed January 7, 2009]. Bates no. TI02850959/0963. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/mwt30c00.
184. Woodson W. Ways & Means hearing developments. Tobacco Institute; Nov 5, 1993. [Accessed January 7, 2009]. Bates no. TI02850956/0957. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/owt30c00.
185. Danowitz J, Savarese J. Update on southern and national activities by labor, agriculture and LMC allies. Tobacco Institute; Nov 5, 1993. [Accessed January 7, 2009]. Bates no. TI02850958. Available at: http://legacy.ucsf.edu/tid/nwt30c00.
186. Morris Philip. —Briefing book—tobacco taxes and health care financing. Philip Morris; Feb, 1994. [Accessed February 13, 2009]. Bates no. 2077420547/0691. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/zwm62c00.
187. Tobacco Institute. [Accessed May 12, 2009];At the federal level. 1994 February 4; Bates no. TI11710759–TI75. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/lbw09a00.
188. Chilcote S. Tobacco Institute. [Accessed January 8, 2009];Tobacco held in reserve for health care reform proposal. 1993 March 10; Bates no. TI06092251/2257. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/klx30c00.
189. Ivins M. Press-Telegram. Long Beach, CA: Mar 7, 1994. Fighting for the single-payer plan; p. B5.
190. Reifenberg A. The Seattle Times. Mar 8, 1994. House set to move on health—Clinton renews push for his reform plan; p. A4.
191. Turner D. The Buffalo News. Jul 24, 1994. Clinton’s fatal mistake: rejection of single-payer experts say concept could save health plan; p. A1.
192. Pear R. Business groups and labor unions attack Clinton on health plan. The New York Times. 1994 February 4;:A19.
193. Tobacco Institute. [Accessed February 6, 2009];TILMC proposed 1995 budget. 1995 Bates no. TI16680950/0953. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/xks76d00.
194. Tobacco Institute. Goals & objectives for 1995 public affairs division. the Tobacco Institute; 1995. [Accessed April 13, 2009]. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/hks76d00. Bates no. TI16680870/0878.
195. Linehan K. Wrap-up of the 103rd Congress. Philip Morris; Oct 25, 1994. [Accessed September 3, 2008]. Bates no. 2047945859/5881. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/qpz42e00.
196. Morris Philip. [Accessed August 5, 2008];Tobacco strategy review. 1994 March 22; Bates no. 2022887003/7033. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/jrc78e00.
197. Federal excise tax—1995(19950000) RJ Reynolds; Nov 2, 1994. [Accessed April 20, 2009]. Bates no. 528347741/7744. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ckd75a00.
198. Reynolds RJ. [Accessed April 20, 2009];The 1995–1997 (950000–970000) strategic plan. 1994 April; Bates no. 513252342/2371. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/adf23d00.
199. Calmes J. The New York Times. Jun 26, 2009. Obama and Congress clash on how to pay for health care; p. B1.
200. Americans for Tax Reform. [Accessed July 14, 2009];Raft of new tax increases in House Democrat health care bill spells trouble for taxpayers. 2009 Available at: http://www.atr.org/userfiles/071409la-housedembill.pdf.
201. Kesler C. The new new deal. Claremont Review of Books. 2009;IX(2):3.
202. Emanuel J. Kennedy unveils government-run health care bill. [Accessed July 14, 2009];Health care news. 2009 Available at: http://www.heartland.org/full/25644/Kennedy_Unveils_GovernmentRun_Health_Care_Bill.html.
203. Heritage Foundation. [Accessed July 14, 2009];Fix health care policy. 2009 Available at: http://fixhealthcarepolicy.com/
204. Entin SJ. [Accessed June 14, 2009];IRET congressional advisory #256: excise taxes ill-suited for health care funding. 2009 Available at: http://iret.org/pub/ADVS-256.pdf.
205. McQueen MP. Jobless can’t afford to extend health coverage. The Wall Street Journal. 2009 January 24;:B2.
206. Pipes SC. Health “reformers” ignore facts. The Wall Street Journal. 2009 March 6;:A15.
207. Douglas W. Charlotte Observer. NC: Jul 15, 2009. Health plan would tax rich–Democrats want to move fast on reform. Republicans say small business would suffer; p. 7A.
208. Kristof ND. The New York Times. Jun 11, 2009. This time, we won’t scare; p. A31.
209. Lazarus D. Los Angeles Times. Aug 9, 2009. Playing on fears in health debate; p. B1.
210. Spellman D. Joplin Globe. MO: Sep 7, 2009. Health care protest goes mobile.
211. Scott W, editor. Laurinburg Exchange (NC) 1A. Sep 5, 2009. Rally to oppose health reforms; p. 2A.
212. McCaslin J. The Washington Times. Oct 28, 2003. Nation inside the belt-way; p. A5.
213. Morris Philip. [Accessed April 30, 2008];940000 PMMC contributions to DC—area public policy organizations. 1995 Bates no. 2078212149. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/uej50b00.
214. Nicoli DDPN. January miles report. Philip Morris; Dec 1, 1994. [Accessed May 2, 2008]. Bates no. 2048624653/4655. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/iyv72e00.
215. Herszenhorn DM, Stolberg SG. The New York Times. Aug 4, 2009. Health plan opponents make their voices heard; p. A12.
216. Stolberg SG. The New York Times. Aug 9, 2009. Where have you gone, Joe the citizen? p. WK1.
217. Dionne EJ. The Washington Post. Sep 3, 2009. The real town hall story; p. A19.
218. Eggen D, Rucker P. The Washington Post. Aug 16, 2009. Loose network of activists drives reform opposition; p. A1.
219. Weisman J. The Washington Post. Jul 23, 2006. With insurance policy comes membership—unbeknown to some, those signing up with firm are joining conservative group; p. A5.
220. MSNBC. [Accessed September 7, 2009];The Rachel Maddow Show for Monday. 2009 August 17; Available at: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32461660/ns/msnbc_tv-rachel_maddow_show/
221. Rutenberg J. The New York Times. Apr 2, 2009. Health critic brings a past and a wallet; p. A1.
222. Eggen D. The Washington Post. May 11, 2009. Ex-hospital CEO battles reform effort—ads cite long waits in Canada and Britain; p. A1.
223. McCaughey B. GovernmentCare’s assault on seniors. The Wall Street Journal. 2009 July 23;:A15.
224. McCaughey B. Obama’s voodoo health economics. The Wall Street Journal. 2009 June 5;:A15.
225. Rutenberg J, Calmes J. The New York Times. Aug 14, 2009. Getting to the source of the “death panel” rumor; p. A1.
226. Dwyer J. The New York Times. Aug 26, 2009. Distortions on health bill, homegrown; p. A16.
227. Haberkorn J. The Washington Times. May 25, 2009. New ads ramp up battle on reform—key legislators to be targeted; p. A8.
228. Cillizza C. The Washington Post. Jun 15, 2009. Foes of health-care plan off to a slow start; p. A2.
229. Fram A. Lewiston Morning Tribune (ID) Jul 7, 2009. Television advertising war begins over health overhaul: ads aim to influence lawmakers as detailed health bills emerge from Congress; p. A5.
230. Montgomery R. Anniston Star (AL) Jul 12, 2009. Groups on all sides of health care debate pepper airwaves; p. 7.
231. McNulty T. Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (PA) Jul 2, 2009. Obama collects health care diagnosis—president’s supporters share horror stories while hoping for overhaul; p. A1.
232. Adams K. The Virginian-Pilot. Norfolk, VA: Jun 14, 2009. Forum’s theme: government not the solution for health care; p. B4.
233. Bowman L. Mobile Register (AL) May 9, 1993. Hillary Clinton woos plan’s opponents: Mrs. Clinton works to diffuse opposition by meeting with potential foes; p. 19.
234. Wiist WH. Public health and the anticorporate movement: rationale and recommendations. Am J Public Health. 2006;96(8):1370–1375. [PubMed]
235. Freudenberg N. Public health advocacy to change corporate practices: implications for health education practice and research. Health Educ Behav. 2005;32(3):298–319. [PubMed]
236. Morris Philip. [Accessed August 8, 2008];FET status report 001211–001217. 1994 December 17; Bates no. 2063393972/3973. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/lbn97d00.
237. Smith M. De Tocqueville follow-up. RJ Reynolds; Sep 27, 1994. [Accessed August 8, 2008]. Bates no. 515245526. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/lni01d00.
238. Bartlett B. Taxes in the Clinton health plan. Philip Morris; Mar 3, 1994. [Accessed August 5, 2008]. Bates no. 2073011687/1689. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/gat57c00.
239. American Health Line. Jul 26, 1994. Learning curve: has the public been adequately informed?
240. Mitchell ML, Thau R. The New York Times. Jul 24, 1994. Don’t hand the young the health bill; p. F9.
241. American Health Line. Feb 22, 1994. Roll call: special section looks at health reform.
242. American Health Line. Oct 18, 1993. Roll call: special section offers diverse opinions.
243. Philp A, Roff P. Americans for Tax Reform. A taxpayer’s guide to health care: a comparison of the 7 major plans. Philip Morris; 1993. [Accessed May 29, 2009]. Bates no. 2040223373/3378. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ubt20b00.
244. Norquist GG. Ten things every taxpayer needs to know about the Clinton health care package—revised 931118. Philip Morris; Nov 18, 1993. [Accessed May 29, 2009]. Bates no. 2040223379/3380. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/nud00b00.
245. Morris Philip. [Accessed May 29, 2009];Enough is enough: wasteful spending (bucket) 1993 March; Bates no. 2048603269. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/jxt66e00.
246. Americans for Tax Reform. Let’s shut off new tax increases to stop wasteful government spending. Philip Morris; Dec, 1993. [Accessed May 29, 2009]. Bates no. 2073010011. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ehs57c00.
247. Reynolds R. Status report—FET—media relations. Philip Morris; Oct, 1993. [Accessed May 29, 2009]. Bates no. 2072212145/2158. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ogs47c00.
248. Wartzman R. Truth lands in intensive care unit as new ads seek to demonize Clintons’ health-reform plan. The Wall Street Journal. 1994 April 29;:A16.
249. Weisskopf M. The Washington Post. Aug 26, 1994. Invisibly, tobacco firms back campaign against higher cigarette taxes; p. A10.
250. Americans for Tax Reform. Action form. Philip Morris; Apr, 1994. [Accessed May 29, 2009]. Bates no. 2073974888. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/jyy42c00.
251. Norquist GG. Letter to Americans for Tax Reform members. Philip Morris; Apr, 1994. [Accessed May 29, 2009]. Bates no. 2073974886/4887. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/kyy42c00.
252. Americans for Tax Reform. How much longer can this go on? Philip Morris; Dec, 1993. [Accessed January 9, 2009]. Bates no. 2073010010. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/fhs57c00.
253. Irastorza H. FET campaign interim report. Philip Morris; Mar 25, 1994. [Accessed May 29, 2009]. Bates no. 2073974569/4899. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/xsy42c00.
254. Bartlett B. How to quadruple federal revenue. Philip Morris; Mar 7, 1994. [Accessed August 5, 2008]. Bates no. 2073011690. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/fat57c00.
255. Parrish S. Sea Island presentation. Philip Morris; Apr 11, 1994. [Accessed May 29, 2009]. Bates no. 2048310347/0358. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ylc87e00.
256. Broder DS. The Washington Post. Jun 5, 1994. Health care reform and political survival: in last homeward swing before decisions are due, legislators face grueling pressures; p. A17.
257. Riley K. The Washington Times. Jun 5, 1994. Harnessing health care: struggle to curb costs gains but reformers want controls; p. A14.
258. Lambro D. The Washington Times. Feb 9, 1994. Health care reform plan jarred by rule that holds business premiums are taxes; p. A11.
259. Manegold C. The New York Times. Jul 17, 1994. The health care debate: the campaign; using TV to create skewed window on nation; p. A1.
260. Hasson J. USA Today. Jul 22, 1994. Big names board the bus, join cross-country caravan of supporters; p. 5A.
261. McCastlin J. The Washington Times. Feb 16, 1994. Less government; p. A6.
262. Pear R. The New York Times. Sep 24, 1993. Clinton’s health plan: principles; experts’ grades: ‘A’ in security, ‘C’ in simplicity, ‘D’ in savings; p. A18.
263. Johnson D. The New York Times. Jul 10, 1994. The health care debate: the heartland; a moderate Democrat from Omaha caught in the middle on health care; p. A18.
264. McNamee M, Dunham R. Bus Week. Aug 24, 1994. A medicine show a minute in Washington; p. 27.
265. Borelli T. New project. Philip Morris; Apr, 1993. [Accessed May 29, 2009]. Bates no. 2046662829/2837. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/blz55e00.
266. Trafford A. The Washington Post. Aug 9, 1994. The bus stops here; 600 citizens pressed for change in a grueling cross-country trek. But did their message get through? p. Z8.
267. Price J. The Washington Times. Jul 29, 1994. Reform riders on rough road; Clinton’s bus caravan runs into some healthy opposition; p. A3.
268. Balz D, Trafford A. The Washington Post. Aug 2, 1994. Clinton warns against reform “fearmongers” Gephardt health bill struggles for support; p. A10.
269. Riley K. The Washington Times. Jul 2, 1993. Medical rationing opposed; groups unite, fight health plan; p. A5.
270. Balz D, Broder DS. The Washington Post. Oct 10, 1993. Players in health care debate mobilize consultants, lobbyists; p. A4.
271. Izumi LT. Sin taxes are sinful. Philip Morris; Oct 10, 1993. [Accessed August 27, 2008]. Bates no. 2074070089. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/mpb76c00.
272. Federal excise tax status report compilation 000321 to 000325. Philip Morris; Mar 21, 1994. [Accessed April 10, 2008]. Bates no. 2078845735/5736. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ocz67c00.
273. Mitchell DJ. Heritage Foundation. The economic and budget impact of the Clinton health plan. Philip Morris; Jan 13, 1994. [Accessed August 5, 2008]. Bates no. 2073011656/1665. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/wat57c00.
274. Lambro D. The Washington Times. Jul 4, 1994. Dole’s stock turns blue chip with alternative health plan; chances in ’96 might improve; p. A13.
275. Hallow R. The Washington Times. Mar 4, 1994. GOP split at retreat on health reforms; forcing insurance purchase is issue; p. A8.
276. Moss J. The Washington Times. Dec 16, 1993. GOP health plan touted for choice; Nickles proposal has 24 backers; p. A4.
277. Henderson K. Christian Science Monitor. Mar 29, 1994. Health-care reform raises questions of individual rights; p. 3.
278. McNamee M. Bus Week. Apr 4, 1994. How big a bite will health reform take out of the paycheck? p. 28.
279. Liu J. The Washington Times. May 17, 1994. Tried and true health care reforms.
280. Turlinksi A. The Washington Times. Jan 23, 1994. How the Clinton plan will hurt the elderly; p. B2.
281. Devine D. The Washington Times. Jan 6, 1994. GOP snookered on health care? p. A17.
282. USA Today. Nov 16, 1993. Latest health plan offers tax credits; p. 4A.
283. Rich S. The Washington Post. Dec 5, 1993. Health care, minus U.S. cost curbs; Nickles bill would end employer-paid benefits; p. A19.
284. Feulner E. The Washington Times. Dec 7, 1993. Entitlement pie: slice for everyone? p. A14.
285. Mitchell DJ. The Wall Street Journal. Dec 23, 1993. The president’s costly budget-buster; p. A10.
286. Tumulty K. Los Angeles Times. Mar 16, 1994. Panel OKs key piece of Clinton health proposal; p. A1.
287. National Center for Policy Analysis. Brief analysis: do higher cigarette taxes make sense? Philip Morris; 1994. [Accessed July 1, 2009]. Bates no. 2041403042/3043. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/xts93e00.
288. National Center for Policy Analysis. Briefing book on health care. Philip Morris; Aug 16, 1994. [Accessed July 1, 2009]. Bates no. 2070054862/4866. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/tml47d00.
289. Marden RE. Memo on draft of National Center for Policy Analysis backgrounder on excise taxes. Philip Morris; Aug 15, 1994. [Accessed July 1, 2009]. Bates no. 2041403040. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ppl05e00.
290. Editorial. The Washington Times. Jul 15, 1993. A proposal for medical savings; p. G2.
291. Goodman J. USA Today. Sep 22, 1993. Butt out of health care; p. 12A.
292. Du Pont P. The Washington Times. Mar 21, 1994. Coming to terms with health care; p. D3.
293. Goodman J. The Washington Times. Apr 26, 1994. Health plan’s maladies; p. A17.
294. Beck M, Rosenberg D, Miller S, et al. Newsweek. Jun 27, 1994. Rationing health care; p. 30.
295. Du Pont P. The free-market health proposal. The Wall Street Journal. 1994 July 1;:A12.
296. Matthews MJ. Medisave accounts: the ethical health reform. The Wall Street Journal. 1993 September 16;:A20.
297. Forbes. All power to the patients. Philip Morris; Jun 21, 1993. [Accessed July 1, 2009]. Bates no. 2046936815/6816. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/umt92e00.
298. Powrel VI, Sullum J. The rule of Lawton. Philip Morris; Sep, 1994. [Accessed June 1, 2009]. Bates no. 2072055087/5088. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/vif08d00.
299. Tobacco Merchants Association of the U.S. Inc. Executive summary. RJ Reynolds; Oct 28, 1993. [Accessed June 1, 2009]. Bates no. 517127978/7985. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/gip82d00.
300. Marotta G. The Washington Times. May 3, 1993. Taxgate … with new shackles; p. E1.
301. Bennett CG. Tax Foundation. Facsimile to David Nicoli. Philip Morris; Mar 15, 1994. [Accessed August 5, 2008]. Bates no. 2073011702. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/vzs57c00.
302. Tax Foundation. Taxes in Clinton health care plan don’t stop at cigarette excise. Philip Morris; Feb 24, 1994. [Accessed August 5, 2008]. Bates no. 2073011700/1701. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/wzs57c00.
303. Foster JD. Tax Foundation. Facsimile to David Nicoli. Philip Morris; Feb 25, 1994. [Accessed August 5, 2008]. Bates no. 2073011699. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/xzs57c00.
304. Tomb H. Tax Foundation 000415 op-ed. Philip Morris; Apr 15, 1994. [Accessed August 22, 2008]. Bates no. 2078845666/5669. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/rry67c00.
305. Morris Philip. [Accessed June 1, 2009];FYI: Clinton’s proposal for “sin taxes” may stumble by turning too many Americans into saints. 1993 April 14; Bates no. 2046786663/6665. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/fvc03e00.
306. Foster JD. The Washington Times. Jun 3, 1994. Whither health care now? p. A19.
307. Hill N. A Philip Randolph Institute. On behalf of the A. Philip Randolph Institute, I am writing to communicate to the members of the House Ways and Means Committee our opposition to the Health Subcommittee’s proposal to raise the tobacco excise tax by $1.25 per pack to fund health care reform. RJ Reynolds; Apr 8, 1994. [Accessed June 18, 2009]. Bates no. 513217296/7298. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/sic11d00.
308. Savarese J. Tobacco Industry Labor Management Committee activities March 1–June 10, 1994. Tobacco Institute; Jun 10, 1994. [Accessed January 7, 2009]. Bates no. TICT0009959/9964. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/gna42f00.
309. Savarese J. Labor Management Committee activities November 1993–April 1994 (931100–940400) RJ Reynolds; Apr 25, 1994. [Accessed February 4, 2009]. Bates no. 513205391/5394. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ita71d00.
310. Stuntz S. Encouraging labor groups to interact with appropriate members of Congress. Tobacco Institute; Jun 7, 1993. [Accessed May 4, 2009]. Bates no. TI11220824. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/mxh40c00.
311. McQueeney J. The Daily Oklahoman. Dec 26, 1993. Senior groups critical of Clinton health care reform bills; p. 14.
312. Lipman H. Times Union. NY: Feb 11, 1993. Health reform pushed; p. B2.
313. Foster A. State resident takes plea for health reform to Washington. Wisconsin State Journal. 1993 March 24;:2B.
314. Silvers AR. Health: mission: girls grandma meets Gore. Milwaukee Journal. 1993 March 24;:B1.
315. Fritz S. Journal Star. Peoria, IL; Sep 27, 1993. Health plan includes inequality—proposal far short of ensuring the same quality of care for all; p. A1.
316. Germond J, Witcover J. The Sun. Baltim, Md: Oct 8, 1993. Single-pay liberals aim at Clinton’s health plan—on politics; p. 2A.
317. Woodson W. Witnesses scheduled to testify to Ways & Means Committee. Tobacco Institute; Nov 11, 1992. [Accessed April 14, 2009]. Bates no. TI02850953. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/rwt30c00.
318. ChilcoteWays S. Means Committee hearing on financing Clinton administration health care plan. Tobacco Institute; Nov 16, 1993. [Accessed April 14, 2009]. Bates no. TI02850895/0897. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/vwt30c00.
319. Harris TC. FET plan. RJ Reynolds; Mar 5, 1993. [Accessed February 19, 2009]. Bates no. 512720302/0303. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/itv61d00.
320. Savarese J. Memo from Jim Savarese to Bob Reese, Tommy Payne, Dick White and Walter Woodson on Citizens for Tax Justice. Philip Morris; Apr 21, 1994. [Accessed February 5, 2009]. Bates no. 2047597653. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/txw45d00.
321. Ogilvy Savarese J, Adams, Rinehart Labor Management Committee March activity report. Tobacco Institute; Apr 27, 1993. [Accessed January 7, 2009]. Bates no. TI01480788/0790. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/gar30c00.
322. Ogilvy Dratch G, Adams, Rinehart Coalition of Labor Union Women convention. Tobacco Institute; Nov 15, 1993. [Accessed January 7, 2009]. Bates no. TI01620619/0621. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/jzr30c00.
323. Chilcote S. I would like to report the following new activity with regard to our efforts, and efforts by allies, to discourage inclusion of cigarette excise taxes in the financing component of President Clinton’s health care program, still scheduled to be released in May. RJ Reynolds; Mar 22, 1993. [Accessed February 4, 2009]. Bates no. 508771913/1918. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ayy83d00.
324. Ture NB. Health “puritans” assailed Clinton’s big sin tax error. Philip Morris; Sep 27, 1993. [Accessed August 27, 2008]. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/lpb76c00. Bates no. 2074070088.
325. Nicoli D. [Accessed January 23, 2009];Funding of Lulac health care study. 1993 January 22; Bates no. 2046030182/0183. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/oub03e00.
326. Morris Philip. [Accessed January 23, 2009];Speech on PM’s strategies to oppose federal excise tax increase in Clinton health plan. 1993 Bates no. 2077421889/1898. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ooe76c00.
327. Morris Philip. [Accessed January 23, 2009];Washington report. 1993 March 29; Bates no. 2070199311/9315. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/bmx01b00.
328. Nicoli DP. LULAC meeting at the White House. Philip Morris; May 20, 1993. [Accessed January 9, 2009]. Bates no. 2073553828/3829. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/tvr42c00.
329. Hendrie PJ, McGeehan P. The Record. New Jersey; Apr 16, 1993. Miracle pill or bitter remedy? U.S. sales tax debated; p. A1.
330. Sharma-Jensen G. Study predicts spiraling health costs. The Milwaukee Journal. 1993 November 22;:C8.
331. Miles MA. Ferocious defense. Philip Morris; Mar 7, 1994. [Accessed August 5, 2008]. Bates no. 2022887001/7002. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/lio87e00.
332. Morris Philip. [Accessed August 25, 2008];930000 Corporate contributions report for PM USA NYO. 1993 Bates no. 2073010053/0054. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/sgs57c00.
333. Morris Philip. [Accessed April 10, 2008];SET SWOT analysis 950000. 1994 October; Bates no. 2044700812/0815. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/glq18d00.
334. Nicoli D. Letter to Victoria Hughes, vice president for development of Citizens for a Sound Economy. Philip Morris; Mar 7, 1994. [Accessed August 8, 2008]. Bates no. 2047993206. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/tki57d00.
335. Marden RE. Letter to Fred L Smith, Jr. Philip Morris; Jun 29, 1993. [Accessed August 22, 2008]. Bates no. 2046558316. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/pot72e00.
336. Borelli TJ. Letter to Fred Smith. Philip Morris; Jul 27, 1994. [Accessed August 22, 2008]. Bates no. 2046557955. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/plh36e00.
337. Weyrich PM. Letter to Dr Thomas Borelli. Philip Morris; Sep 23, 1994. [Accessed March 20, 2008]. Bates no. 2046563261/3262. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/bsw87d00.
338. Stuntz SM. re: Public affairs division 1994 budget request. Tobacco Institute; Sep 1, 1993. [Accessed January 7, 2009]. Bates no. TI14141110–TI92. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/pev09a00.
339. Tobacco Institute. [Accessed February 5, 2009];Attachment 1: Tobacco Institute contribution to Tobacco Industry Labor Management Committee summary. 1994 Bates no. TICT0002814/2817. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/hoc42f00.
340. Tobacco Institute. [Accessed February 12, 2009];Tobacco Industry Labor Management Committee summary of disbursements by vendor: twelve month period ended 19941231. 1995 March 16; Bates no. TI16370245/0246. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/oac86d00.
341. Reynolds R. Public issues update March 7–11, 1994 (940307–940311) RJ Reynolds; Mar 11, 1994. [Accessed April 20, 2009]. Bates no. 512766882/6887. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/qwb33d00.
342. Rife T. 1991(910000) state plans Rocky Mountain Region—Idaho. Montana. Nevada. Utah. RJ Reynolds; 1991. [Accessed May 20, 2009]. Bates no. 512000822/0877. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/fzh43d00.
343. Rife T. Weekly report for May 22, 1991 (910522). Tim Rife. Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Utah. RJ Reynolds; May 22, 1991. [Accessed May 20, 2009]. Bates no. 507698251/8252. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/kwa71d00.
344. Synhorst T. Weekly report. RJ Reynolds; Apr 7, 1993. [Accessed April 17, 2009]. Bates no. 515190686/0688. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/uqd03d00.
345. Spangler TJ. Weekly report for Toby J Spangler. Week ending April 25, 1991 (910425) RJ Reynolds; Apr 25, 1991. [Accessed May 20, 2009]. Bates no. 507698396/8397. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/wyz14d00.