2 cigarette tax hikes in Europe backfire, plus how one Bulgarian city selfishly hurting their businesses w/total ban

I hardly am surprised to hear in 2 eastern European countries, cigarette tax hikes already have spurred a major shift toward black market sales. Bulgaria had a cigarette sales drop of 33%, according to their customs office. It also says towards the end of the article, that Romania both increased their cigarette tax, and their value-added tax. And speaking of the subject of a VAT, I certainly hope our country never adopts such a tax, since I have heard rumblings that it might be proposed in Congress in the future....

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE67Q2I020100827 (article also mentions how one town(Kyustendil), in Bulgaria stupidly kept the ban when the rest of the country went along with the smoking ban repeal, and how it's hurt bars, cafes, and restaurants in that town)

Bismarck's done deal of a smoking ban, behind the scenes of business owners

Every post, article, and comment I've been reading about Bismarck(ND) City Commission's "hearing" on their now-passed smoking ban just go to show it was a farce all along, and that a local smoke-free coalition obviously contacted the mayor and each commissioner to pressure them into supporting this unnecessary ordinance banning it in all bars and truck stops. On Tuesday this week, Bismarck's City Commission voted 4-1 in favor of an ordinance to ban smoking in all businesses. I'm laughing my butt off now obviously seeing they agreed to wait till November 1st at 1am to enforce it, probably to give bar patrons one last night they can smoke in a bar(Halloween)?

NEVER MIND that I heard Bismarck already had a local limited smoking ban in place banning smoking in restaurants, but exempting bars, truck stops, and I believe certain other adult businesses. A partial statewide smoking ban passed 5 years ago in that state, exempting bars, truck stops, and other age-restricted places(like truck stops, and if a restaurant has a physically separate bar area from the rest of the restaurant). It's obvious to me why the North Dakota Tobacco Free Coalition(IIRC, need to do a google check to be sure of the name of the group that is pursuing all these bar smoking bans suddenly in this state) is pressuring city councils throughout North Dakota all of a sudden to pass local smoking bans affecting bars, before the 2011 legislative session starts in North Dakota(where there obviously will be a hard push for a statewide bar smoking ban). If antis(theoretically speaking) were to get their statewide bar smoking ban in North Dakota passed in 2011, wonder how long it'll be before they try to bug cities there(namely Fargo, as they were the first city in that state to have a bar smoking ban) to ban smoking on outdoor patios?

I really hope the bar and truck stop owners in Bismarck consider collecting signatures to get this on the ballot, and have the backbone to ensure this gets on the ballot there, unlike Grand Forks(where there was a failed attempt to refer this issue to the ballot, before it took effect for Grand Forks bars just 11/2 weeks ago). If not, they should try in 2011 or 2012 to collect enough signatures to get this on the ballot. Devils Lake, ND's city commission had the right idea to refer this to the November 2010 ballot and let voters decide, since at least it gives residents a chance to stop such an unnecessary and silly law. And as evidenced in 2008, when both Kenosha, WI, and Amarillo, TX both voted down total smoking bans that were put on the ballot.

2 articles:
http://www.kxnet.com/custom404.asp?404;http://www.kxnet.com/news/618804.asp (this has the whole story and the video from a local TV newscast)
http://www.kxnet.com/custom404.asp?404;http://www.kxnet.com/news/618739.asp (published and broadcast just barely before the night of the hearing, in fact this was aired probably in the afternoon on the same TV station as the above article, before the hearing started in the evening)

And I dunno how I didn't catch this great article 6 months back, it's sad I only caught this article now(yay for google caching news articles that are now gone from the 'net). Never mind IIRC, someone on the Smokers Club forum may've posted this article here back in February, but I unfortunately missed it:
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:3Rzxg8yxZcAJ:www.bismarckpride.com/blogs/%3Fp%3D3199+bismarck+smoking+ban&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

From earlier, the article on the city commission in Devils Lake referring this issue to the November 2010 ballot, when antis bugged them to pass a bar ban:
http://www.devilslakejournal.com/newsnow/x1609353793/Voters-to-decide-smoking-ban-commission-opening

San Antonio bans smoking in all places, and didn't grandfather in restaurants w/vented smoking rooms(unlike Austin's ban)

I sadly was wrong about San Antonio's city council, in guessing how they would vote on this proposal. I should've anticipated the mayor(Julian Castro) would just remove the River Walk provision and the ones for other outdoor areas, just to get over the top with the swing council members he needed the support of to pass it. This San Antonio Current article published days before the vote on Thursday afternoon, ended up being 100% correct about the final vote:
http://sacurrent.com/news/story.asp?id=71441

The SA ban's effective date was delayed for 1 whole year, until August 19, 2011. One article, that included an interesting comment section(I especially couldn't help but go after anti-smoking zealot RBear's shameful comments):
http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/politics/council_adopt_tough_smoking_rules_101091934.html

Meant to post this in one of my comments on the mysanantonio article comment section and forgot, but the owner of one Dallas gay bar was so affected by the 2009 expansion of Dallas' city smoking ban to bars, that he is looking to sell the bar he owns, Illusions:
http://www.dallasvoice.com/the-smoking-ban-1-year-later-1020617.html

new Gallup poll: just 31% of Americans favor complete smoking bans including bars

And anti groups who do drives to collect enough signatures to get comprehensive smoking ban proposals onto general election ballots throughout the country still wonder why they often fail? Duh, it's because they don't give any leeway to privately-owned adult-only establishments that prohibit minors from entering or being employed in the first place the call they deserve to permit or ban smoking in their establishments. Just look at Amarillo, TX, and Kenosha, WI in 2008 as among many examples of past voter referendums where total bans failed EXACTLY due to this reason. (can't forget Kenosha also failed, since restaurants with 50% or more food sales that invested money to build ventilated smoking rooms to comply with an older 2000 ban wouldn't have been allowed to continue allowing smoking in those rooms)

And although Brentwood, MO's council was recently foolish enough to pass a ban, I wouldn't be surprised if the council members who voted in favor get voted out very soon in the next election, and/or a ballot drive to ease their smoking ban to mirror the Saint Louis County ban occurs. Anyway, here's the Gallup poll I'm referring to:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/141809/Americans-Smoking-Off-Menu-Restaurants.aspx

UCLA's disgusting firing of epidemiology researcher James Enstrom

James Enstrom was of course, one of 2 researchers that did an infamous 2003 British Medical Journal study which found no association between secondhand smoke and lung cancer and heart disease.

More info at Velvet Glove, Iron Fist, and 2 other articles:
http://velvetgloveironfist.blogspot.com/2010/08/james-enstrom-sacked-by-ucla.html
http://www.bakersfield.com/news/columnist/henry/x1415295919/Independent-thought-not-wanted-at-UCLA
http://ep-ology.blogspot.com/2010/08/ucla-school-of-public-health-votes-to.html

yay, once again found this very classic radio show clip, from the Kenosha, WI 2008 smoking ban debate

Vicki McKenna did a great smackdown of Smoke Free Wisconsin, and the anti group 'Breathe Free Kenosha'(the anti coalition who back in 2008, was pushing for the Kenosha City Council to expand their limited ban beyond restaurants with 50% or more food sales(unless they built a ventilated smoking room), to close all exemptions in their limited smoking ban) back in 2008, and was even linked from a post from the former Ban the Ban Wisconsin blog. (R.I.P. to that blog, as I was a regular poster on it!)

Anyway, enjoy this clip, in case you've never heard the pleasure of listening to McKenna's great rant against smoking bans in general, originally broadcast on Milwaukee AM radio station Milwaukee News/Talk 1130:
http://a1135.g.akamai.net/f/1135/18227/1h/cchannel.download.akamai.com/18227/podcast/MILWAUKEE-WI/WISN-AM/vm%208-11%20hour%202%20part%202.mp3?CPROG=PCAST&MARKET=MILWAUKEE-WI&NG_FORMAT=newstalk&SITE_ID=1176&STATION_ID=WISN-AM&PCAST_AUTHOR=WISN,_Milwaukee&PCAST_CAT=Talk&PCAST_TITLE=

'Kentucky Tonight' TV debate on NKY regional ban proposal

Just watched this earlier tonight, and it was quite interesting, particularly the 2 on the side of property rights(NKY Choice leader and blogger Ken Moellman, and Boone County Commissioner Cathy Flaig). Kenton County Commissioner Kris Knochelmann(just as disappointing as soon-to-retire Kenton Judge-Executive Ralph Drees, the biggest proponent of the NKY ban proposal by far) and NKY Action grassroots coordinator + head of American Lung Association of Kentucky, Betsy Berns Janes, represent the anti-smoking side, not surprisingly.

Commissioner Knochelmann makes the claim in this debate that Kenton and Campbell Fiscal Courts will likely vote on the NKY ban proposal within 60-90 days(depending if minute differences between what some favor in these talks get resolved), despite that the Boone Fiscal Court pulled out of the talks in late July. And never mind that the same rhetoric back around May and June was also being said about when such a vote would happen! I guess we'll see what happens, within the next few months.

Enjoy(go down to 'links' on this page, and 'watch this program online'):
http://www.ket.org/tvschedules/episode.php?nola=KKYTO+001736&cd=1

And of course, the latest draft version of this NKY ordinance that was leaked in early August(as a Microsoft Word document):
http://news.cincinnati.com/assets/AB16200684.DOC

kinda surprising newspaper editorial: an M.D. proposes tactics similar shaming smokers should be used to fight obesity

Is it really any wonder anymore why Dr. Michael Siegal got sick of the anti-smoking movement years ago, and now has a regular blog exposing how fraudulent each of their claims relating to the supposed benefits of smoking bans(when in reality, bans do nothing except piss off freedom-minded non-smokers and smokers, and trample over the livelihood of entrepreneurs and patrons to gather in establishments that permit smoking in some way)? This doc is advocating in an editorial to the Hartford Courant that the same tactics used in the anti-smoking movement also be used to fight obesity. I'm sorry, but I all but cannot agree with this editorial. Such taxes(i.e. soda taxes) will only further irritate people on the side of freedom who fight these unnecessary laws regulating habits people have that may be deemed as 'unhealthy, and that one should be greatly discouraged at any cost from doing'. I'm so greatly sick of people with the mindset of wanting to control how others live.

I'll reluctantly give this doc, Dennis Gottfried, credit that he dedicated a whole paragraph in the middle of this article to mentioning a 2003 British Medical Journal study that stated secondhand smoke is an irritant, but not life-threatening. Bravo to you for mentioning this study, Dr. Gottfried, although the thought of the term 'second hand eating' is still a little frightening and weird to me, considering how sick to death I am of the term 'second hand smoke'.

Well, I'll stop typing any further, and allow you to read this editorial from Dr. Dennis Gottfried for yourself. It's definitely one of the stranger editorials I've read in awhile, and the more I think about his editorial, the more I must say: screw him!

http://www.courant.com/news/opinion/hc-op-anti-smoking-obesity-0815-20100815,0,1621099.story

2 last articles on Grand Forks

http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/287831/ (article copy-and-pasted below, since INFORUM has a history of quickly removing news articles after they're published on their site)

Published August 14 2010
Grand Forks bars to go smoke-free at midnight
Audra Goulet said she imagines spending time with friends at Grand Forks bars will still be about the same – even after a big change that goes into effect tonight.

By: Ryan Johnson, Forum Communications Co., INFORUM

Audra Goulet said she imagines spending time with friends at Grand Forks bars will still be about the same – even after a big change that goes into effect tonight.

Liquor establishments in the city will become a little less hazy at midnight, a result of a 4-3 vote by the Grand Forks City Council to ban smoking in bars, truck stops and bowling alleys.

Goulet said being a smoker makes many people incorrectly assume she’s upset about the ban.

“I’m actually kind of looking forward to it because I’ll smoke less probably,” she said. “I think it’s probably a good thing.”

Goulet and a friend, Jennifer Dotson, were spending their Friday night at Rumors, enjoying their last full night of being able to have a smoke while relaxing over drinks and conversation.

Dotson said she’s ready for the ban. She is a smoker, but she quickly admitted sitting in a smoky bar for a while is enough to make anyone “stink bad.”

“Some nights, you go out, and when you wake up ... you can still smell the smoke,” she said.

Having a cigarette during a night on the town will now just be a lot like it is when she’s home – Dotson doesn’t smoke inside her own house because she doesn’t want her 2-year-old daughter to be around it.

“I think it would actually be better at a bar,” Dotson said about the ban. “Yeah, I like to smoke and drink, but it’s not really going to bother me to go outside.”

Goulet said the change could help smokers decide to quit. And she thinks it won’t take long before the ban seems like it’s always been in place.

“Just like in Minnesota, they’re going to get used to it,” she said. “I was just amazed how long it took Grand Forks and North Dakota to get there.”

East Grand Forks and all other Minnesota cities went smoke-free several years ago as the result of a statewide indoor smoking ban for most public places.

North Dakota passed a ban around the same time, but that did not include bars – a type of business that was exempt in Grand Forks until now.

Mac Pesch, manager of Rumor’s, said his establishment plans to put containers outside to keep the littering to a minimum. And the bar might build a smoke hut this fall to give smokers a place to get out of the weather.

Pesch said the ban could hurt Rumors’ gaming or even the overall business. But he also saw this type of change as something that was almost inevitable.
============================
This is very insane, this city council(erm commission, or whatever it's called) only approved this proposal on a 4-3 vote, and didn't try the route of letting that city do a referendum vote on this ban? And ahem, I initially forgot North Dakota's smoking ban doesn't include enclosed bar areas within bowling alleys that only adults can enter, similar to the truck stop exemption that allows smoking in enclosed rooms with their own ventilation.

2nd article, which just spells out the rules. you're probably better not clicking on the URL for this one, so I'm just copying-and-pasting the Grand Forks smoking ban rules, including a silly 15 foot radius rule around building entrances that'll likely not be enforced, if the 21/2 year old statewide ban in Illinois is any indication how this smoking ban will play out in Grand Forks bars:
For the smokers

- No smoking in any workplace or public place except hotel rooms, hospital rooms and nursing homes if management allows. Also, no smoking in tobacco shops except the ones licensed before March 1, which are grandfathered in.

- No smoking within 15 feet of any door into any workplace or public place, except the places above.

This probably doesn’t mean you have to bring a tape measure with you all the time. City Attorney Howard Swanson told council members earlier this week the intent is just to keep the smoke from wafting into the building and police officers will not be measuring where you stand when you smoke anymore than they’d pull you over for driving 26 in a 25 mph zone.

- You can still smoke on the patio or a wind screen outside a bar, provided the bar serves only alcohol there, but not food.

- If you break the law, you can be fined $100 on the first violation and $500 on the second if it’s within a year of the first offense. If it’s a year after the first, the fine would be only $200.

For the businesses

- You have to post signs banning smoking in a conspicuous place. No particular design is required, but the signs must be pretty clear. Public health has some you can have ranging from straight forward — “This is a smoke-free establishment” — to somewhat jubilant — “Proud to be smoke free!” Call (701) 787-8100 for your sign.

- If someone wants to smoke on your premises, public health advises you to be understanding but firm. You might say, for example: “The local ordinance no longer allows smoking inside here. I’m sorry, but you’ll have to step outside to smoke.”

The point, the department says, is to emphasize that it’s the law and your business could be fined for not complying. Public health also advised trying to spread the word about how bad second-hand smoke is using facts such as: “Secondhand smoke has been proven to cause lung cancer and heart disease and has been linked to asthma and other serious respiratory problems” or “Secondhand smoke contains more than 60 cancer-causing compounds.”

- If they insist on breaking the law, call the police at (701) 787-8000.

- If you want to build a shelter for employees or customers to smoke in, it can have a roof, but only enough walls to cover 50 percent of the perimeter. In other words, it can’t be fully enclosed. People inside would end up in a smoky room all over again.
================
Yawn, I see this smoking ban has a snitch line that goes to Grand Forks Police for enforcement? Why couldn't they(Grand Forks City Commission) have instead referred this issue to voters for a November referendum, or just require exterior signage and disclosure on job applications/interviews on whatever their indoor smoking policy was, so that job patrons and applicants can vote accordingly whether they favor a business' smoking policy or not?

smoking ban developments in 2 North Dakota cities, while a 3rd begins enforcement of its ban

The city attorney(of all people, and NOT a city council member interestingly) was the one who introduced this proposal onto the Bismarck, ND City Council agenda for an August 24th hearing. I can't help but wonder if the North Dakota Tobacco Coalition very quietly contacted Bismarck's city attorney behind the scenes to place this onto the city council agenda, though none of the commissioners interestingly(and strangely) placed it on the agenda themselves? I think I don't need to mention what antis in North Dakota's state legislature will(inevitably) do at the start of their 2011 legislative session(introduce yet another proposal for a statewide bar smoking ban), regardless if Bismarck's City Commission is foolish enough to pass this proposal or not. Two articles below:
ttp://www.bismarcktribune.com/news/local/article_a21af782-a5ce-11df-8a65-001cc4c03286.html (includes a very stupid comment from Fargo's mayor pound-chesting about 'how great our city bar smoking ban is, blah blah blah'. already up to 57 comments at the time of me reading the article, wow!)
http://www.bismarcktribune.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/article_46636c44-a501-11df-b4af-001cc4c03286.html (w/comments section. the very first time I read this article, it was creepy I saw a North Dakota Tobacco Quitline banner ad above it!)

A second city, Devils Lake, chose a month ago to put a smoking ban proposal on the November ballot, instead of doing an up-or-down vote for or against the proposal when it was being debated on the Devils Lake city commission. I just wish Grand Forks had let their residents vote on the ban, instead of the Grand Forks city commission passing the ban without residents voicing their opinion on it(other than public testimony during the GF smoking ban hearings). The latter city begun enforcing their smoking ban in bars, and ended the former exemptions for bowling alleys and truck stops that invested money to build enclosed smoking bars/rooms, as of today. (all 3 exemptions are in the current North Dakota state smoking ban that's been in effect for 5 years)

Articles on Devils Lake and Grand Forks:
http://www.devilslakejournal.com/newsnow/x1609353793/Voters-to-decide-smoking-ban-commission-opening
http://www.grandforksherald.com/event/article/id/171998/
http://www.grandforksherald.com/event/article/id/171583/

I even found this comments page on Grand Forks Herald as to whether bars should begin enforcing the ban as of midnight yesterday(technically today) published during the middle of last week(pre-smoking ban), since the ban took effect as of today, 8/15/10. interestingly there is only 3 pages worth of comments, and not more: http://www.grandforksherald.com/event/chat/id/650/

More on Grand Forks in my next post, I will copy-and-paste 2 articles from a site that stupidly reverts articles way too quickly from free to paid articles.

San Antonio smoking ban update

This proposal is so sweeping, that I'd be very surprised if their council doesn't reject this proposal when it comes up for a vote later this week. Of course you never know, I was extremely surprised when Galveston passed an extremely sweeping smoking ban last year, and that Conroe, TX(to my surprise) revised their comprehensive smoking ban later to exempt bars. Check out the latest post about it on the blog Off the Kuff:

http://offthekuff.com/wp/?p=30351

final poll results for my July/August question

The question was, How long do you think till the first wave of smoking bans worldwide begin to be amended and/or repealed? I'll admit I only did one vote to this poll, that repeals would start to occur within 1-2 years(but I'll note I changed my vote from my initial one thinking they'd happen within 3-5 years).

Just hope the participation in these polls start to slowly increase over time, but special thanks to the 6 visitors to my blog who did participate in the poll! I will have a new poll up within the next few days, just haven't decided when I will officially submit the new poll and open it up to voting. Anyway:

There will start to be a wave of smoking ban repeals and/or amendments in 2011 and 2012. 5 (71%)
In the next few years(3-5 years). 2 (28%)
It'll be 5-10 years, before any massive waves of amending and/or repeals begin. 0 (0%)
The fight against smoking bans and tobacco prohibition will be a very tough one that lasts a long while, and gains no real momentum till the 2020s. 0(0%)

People will continue to buy the insane lies of anti-smokers, to the point that very few(if any) will be repealed or amended, and tobacco prohibition surpasses alcohol prohibition. It's all but completely hopeless to fight back against anti-smokers. 0(0%)

Reedsburg, WI bar owners prove that smoking bans(regardless if it's a local or statewide one) DO NOT work!

This is a very interesting and great article that shows these bars that went non-smoking, as did all other businesses in Wisconsin as of July 5th, have YET to see an influx of new non-smoking customers!

Once again, articles like these only further reinforce my opinion that smoking bans and/or rules restrictions should be a voluntary rule imposed by a business owner(-s), NOT a government-mandated law.

http://www.wiscnews.com/reedsburgtimespress/news/local/article_84110a0e-a3e1-11df-9240-001cc4c002e0.html

electronic cigarettes may be soon totally banned in the UK

And I thought the bans I read about prohibiting their use in restaurants and bars for both New Jersey and some jurisdictions in New York state(i.e. Suffolk County) were terrible laws! I know at least a few anti-smoking activists have even been brave enough to go against the normal anti-smoking line and speak out in favor of e-cigarette use, such as Bill Goodshall(sp?) of Smoke Free Pennsylvania.

This is from the blog Velvet Glove, Iron Fist:
http://velvetgloveironfist.blogspot.com/2010/08/e-cigarettes-look-set-to-be-banned.html

Creative Loafing's editorial-in-chief stupidly believes Atlanta 'would be great candidate for a bar smoking ban'

Here's the joke of an editorial, if you want to read it. She wrote this, despite that there are currently NO PROPOSALS in Atlanta's city council to ban smoking in adult-only restaurants and bars(which goes beyond Georgia's state ban of only banning smoking in businesses where minors under 18 are allowed to enter, and/or are employed at). I wonder if she was inspired to write this, just because Savannah, GA's city council is debating a recently introduced proposal to ban smoking in bars and adult-only restaurants:

http://clatl.com/atlanta/smoking-indoors-sucks/content?oid=1950119

My response in the comments section(interestingly this editor responded to at least one comment in the comments section, maybe she'll respond to mine soon):

Ah Mara, what an extremely poor editorial you wrote on this issue. While I totally support banning smoking in TRULY public places(note: NOT privately-owned businesses where you have the option not to patronize them) where non-smokers and smokers must use together, say like government buildings and on public transit, it would be a very ridiculous idea for Atlanta's city council to go beyond the Georgia's state smoking ban and ban it in all adult-only restaurants and bars. I live in Illinois, and I've seen all the negative effects our ban has done to privately-owned businesses. Businesses that don't have room to construct patios are greatly screwed versus bars that do have the room to construct patios, casino business STATEWIDE is down over 20%(versus gamblers increasingly favoring casinos in other states, not to forget one IL casino laid off 30 people after the ban started), plus the Chicago Tribune had an infamous article last year about the fact that many bars ignore the state ban just to keep their doors open. In Ohio state, there is a well known website that documents all businesses that ignore their state ban(which is equally as strict as Illinois): http://www.smokechoke.com

What I think would be fair, is if businesses permitting smoking had to post clear exterior signage stating whatever their indoor policy was on smoking, and businesses had to disclose to employees on job applications and in interviews what their smoking policy was. That way, anyone sensitive to smoke would know what places not to patronize and/or apply for, and those who don't mind smoking(smokers, and anyone who isn't a militant anti-smoker) have places they can patronize as well. A total ban would unnecessarily take away the free choice of employees who freely want to work in smoking establishments(yes there are those out there who truly prefer working in such establishments, unlike what anti-smokers want you to think), and the right of those who want to gather together and patronize indoor establishments allowing smoking(not to mention entrepreneurs that run smoking establishments).

And who's to say there hasn't been at least some Atlanta bars and adult-only restaurants that choose freely on their own accord to ban smoking, after the state ban took effect years ago? I've seen similar effects in another city under a very similar smoking ban I visit more frequently than Atlanta(Indianapolis, which also like the state of Georgia, requires businesses permitting smoking to limit entry and employment to those 18 and older at all times), and MANY adult-only businesses there have chosen on their own accord to ban smoking, since this fair-minded ban took effect several years ago. It's probably good riddance that last fall, their city-county council(Indianapolis and Marion County merged their governments together long ago) voted against a proposal to ban smoking in all bars and adult-only restaurants. Stay free Atlanta, and don't go down the path of a total smoking ban.

Missouri voters make me proud, and set here a great example for respecting personal freedom

Nice to see 71% of state voters in Missouri's primary voted in favor of a (well, it's basically symbolic, as state laws don't override federal law) referendum that would prohibit the federal government from requiring individuals to purchase health insurance, and also prohibit the feds from reprimanding individuals that don't have health insurance.

Go Mizzou! (hope Missouri residents and visitors who are fond of that state don't mind my use of University of Missouri's nickname, lol)

http://habledash.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=817:proposition-c-missouri-rejects-obamas-mandatory-health-care-law&catid=45:the-nook&Itemid=59
http://keepstlouisfree.blogspot.com/2010/08/vote-yes-on-proposition-c.html