And another congratulations from me! Also, to anyone else considering quitting, try the Oregon Quit Line at 1-800-QUIT-NOW. There may be free smoking cessation products and/or in-person counseling available to you. Also, loads of tips.

Right on. Now, there's the spirit of the whole deal.

You can be as justifiably pissed off at big tobacco as you want. I choose instead to believe that the cowardly people who tried to add grief to low income smokers rather than take on the wealthiest Oregonians (who could fund inurance for kids without sweating) will have to REALLY look at this crisis now.

Congratulation, that means the tobacco industry only gets 2999 new smokers today.

David, it's not like smokers are the only people funding health care in Oregon.

Though they do disproportionately add to the cost.

Also, how dare lottery dollars go to schools! We should ALL pay for schools ... wait, we do. It turns out children are just a wise investment if you've got extra money to spend.

In an ideal world, tobacco cessation products would be free and tobacco prohibitively expensive, pushing addicts over to the free nicotine in the quit kits. And in an ideal world, health care would be well-funded. I guess the unconsionable thing here was that those uppity politicians were going to let us kill two birds with one stone.

Good, quit smoking, an excellent idea. Also quit backing pieces of crap and blaming somebody else for the outcome. The day you can sell me on the idea that RJR is peceived as a fount of truth and wisdom by Oregonians is the day I'll buy that bridge from you.

Good job! Democrats love to denounce "Big Tobacco" but I have seen way too many Democrat staffers and activists smoke, and I have joined them from time to time. Every smoker who reads Blue Oregon should quit. Instead of talking about taxing cigaretts, we should talk of banning them. I had two Grandads with lung cancer- one died and one survived. Apparently losing his business partner to lung cancer didn't phase Mark Nelson.

Well my my...somebody sounds like they're having a craving for a smoke! Queue evil bigoil/big auto/bigtobacco music I quit smoking for much the same reason…only with a little more reasoning. I figured that since the State is squeezing me for every single dime they think they can get away with…and since they ALWAYS make it about the children (but it never is). I quit so Oregon will get that much less tax out of me every year….and I feel SO much better! I know I know it’s a spite your face kinda thing…I’m pretty silly some times too. Just not as silly as you.

But to the point: So! You quit smoking. You didn’t want to give money to RJ Reynolds huh?

I look forward to the annual posting of your ‘in lieu’ taxes picture….lets see 40 bucks a carton….a carton a week….lets see 65% of wholesale price, carry the one divided by 1.65…yeah that works out to about $1,260 per year!!! WOW! Now that is commitment! Isn’t that commitment everyone? You’ll round that up to a nice even $1,300 won’t you? Remember, it’s for the children.

I look forward to seeing a copy of the deduction from your bank account to the state of Oregon on every Nov 7...indefinitely. What a MAN!

Should I hold my breath? I don’t think that I will. Does anyone remember where the public was told all funding would go for the state lottery? Yeah, I didn’t think so.

Of all the many good reasons to quit smoking, it was Measure 50 and big tobacco propaganda that motivated you to do so? I get it; you're a freakin' moron. No offense friend, I hold the same opinion of every American smoker in 2007.

One less smoker; thanks RJR!

Shouldn't that read 'One fewer smoker'?

Full disclosure: I quit smoking to give more attention to my grammar gnome hobby.

Good for you. Frankly I don't care what motivated someone to stop smoking - if they quit, I view it as a plus.

Now I need to stop ;-)

I wonder if I'm the only smoker who thinks the high taxes are good? I've been to other countries (England, Singapore, Hong Kong) where cigarettes are far more expensive and, as you would expect, I smoked less as a result. I suppose that reeks of social engineering, but if it discourages smoking, I don't personally mind. In fact, I'm thankful for the nudging.

Congratulations on your recovery, Bill! I got a good laugh out of your comment…but I am sorry you hate children so much ;) You see, that's what I find hilarious about you anti-government types: you've somehow forgotten that we are the government (and BTW, it's unhealthy to hate yourself)...so just to remind you: democracy is a governance structure that derives its power from the people (that would be us), which isn’t to say that I think that bureaucrats always get it right and do the right thing, because they don’t and neither does business. But that’s another topic for another day.

"a carton a week" Good god, no! I was max. ½ pack per day (=carton/3 weeks). I have no idea where your calculations come from, but since your assumption was 3x the actual, my annual check would be approx. $300. I usually donate more than that every year (yes, even as a student/part-time worker). I would be happy to write a $300 check to Doernbecher from my newfound savings so that some kid will get the health care that they need. In fact, I usually make my contributions at Christmas time…so not only will I commit to that annual donation, but I will commit to writing a guest blog here at Blue Oregon at Christmas every year encouraging everyone else to join me (if Kari will publish it), in remembrance of Big Tobacco’s recent benevolent visit to Oregon.

So (cue evil big brother music) I know you hate the government, but I’ll challenge you back. How about you? Where are you going to spend your “extra money” on now that you’ve quit? Will you match my donation? Come on, you undoubtedly make more than I do. I’ll be waiting with baited (but fresh) breath...and that goes for everyone here.

"Should I hold my breath?" Oh, please don’t! Now that you’re a non-smoker, you should breathe all the clean air into your lungs that you can (without hyperventilating of course).

P.S. Trollbot – I’m on day 4; I quit before the election was decided. People have complex motivations for doing things: reward/pleasure, anger/rage, guilt, etc (p.s. I’m no psychologist). I’ve wanted to quit for a while now to improve my health and the impetus was more than RJR and PM. However, their misleading, disingenuous campaign was funded with money I had given them by smoking…not to mention Grover Norquist’s “Americans for Tax Reform”…and it pushed me over the edge. So, spite, anger, rage, reward, pleasure…it was probably all of the above. But who are you to judge my motivations? Now, go troll somewhere else…and butt out (you see what I did there with the subtle cigarette reference? Pretty good, eh?).

P.S.S. A genuine thanks to all for the support and encouragement (never did I expect my snark to make BO front page...God help us all!).

Gee JT...I quit...you quit....how come it's me that hates the kids?

Hey...I don't blame you for backing away from a $1300 annual commitment. I wouldn't go there either. I'm sure you smoked only a pack every three days to a month. Probably more like a $20 annual commitment would cover it.

You da man!

You'll be smoking again in nine days

Who'd a thunk it? Even a post about quitting is troll bait.

You can't jilt Marlboro, you pink-lunged commie!

If only there was a way to boycott privately held Stimson Lumber. But that guy flushed a half million down the toilet on his own.

[I'm disappointed that M50 did not pass, and RJR and PM and those buttholes only spent a few hours of profit to defeat it. These merchants of death and misery should rot in the seventh circle of hell. To all you sanctamonious jerks out there who keep saying good it failed it was aweful and NOW it's time for real health care reform that is not on the back of poor nicotine addicts: put your money where your mouth is! Call your state and national Legislators (especially call the Republicans) and demand they support public health care, first for kids (who have no vote or voice for representation but need help) and eventually for all Americans. Tell your elected representitives you want all Americans to get health care without the for-profit insurance companies taking a piece of the pie. The highway department does not make a profit, and we all benefit from it. Likewise the Coast Guard, the National Weather Service, the Department of Energy, they all serve the interests of the taxpayers, hopefully in the most efficient and effective way possible. The health insurance companies can pound sand. Tell them to create a competitive, not-for-profit health plan and do it NOW.

se merchants of death and misery should rot in the seventh circle of hell.

See now we’re getting somewhere. No whining. This is ‘stand up like a man and sound off like you have a pair’ stuff. You’d make a fine conservative except you’re so wrong.

I stand against you on several counts but heck…that why this stuff gets posted right? So we can beat the same dead pony over and over and over? ‘s OK with me I have as much stamina as anyone here.

To me, you have a fundamentally flawed perspective and it has nothing to do with evil corporations…even if they are evil.

You see them as a company forcing the poor downtrodden into the slavery of addiction, as if the smoker is poor put upon and hapless soul who was at the wrong place at the wrong time.
It is the only way you can look at it and be consistent with the views you apparently have. I don’t blame only you; it’s a popular view, easy to access, and plays well with those who never want to look in the mirror for blame. It’s always some one or some thing out there that is bad…that sorta thing. But I submit that when you do that you take away, you discount my free will, offhandedly.
WHAT?!! Sure, you think it is extreme stance and an outrageous extrapolation, but it is fundamentally not. At least if you are intellectually honest (ah the rub). You see it with group think…an evil corporation preying on a huge population…and I’ll even concede that THAT may be the case. It does not change the fact that you do not look closely enough…that you strip me of my freedom when you take that view.

I thought socialists were all about nuance and fine observation?

Aany way that’s all aside...the point is that when you stand back and identify ‘those’ corporations preying on ‘those’ people you immediately take my free will out of the loop…that I have no capacity for choice, that I do not have the ability to identify what is right and what is wrong for my personal circumstance or proclivity. And I don’t like that…you keep you damn assumptive hands off me and out of my life. You don’t know me or mine.

...NOW it's time for real health care reform that is not on the back of poor nicotine addicts: put your money where your mouth is! Call your state and national Legislators (especially call the Republicans) and demand they support public health care,…

You’ll forgive me if my eyes roll back in my head as I return to the 60 from whence I came…shades of Che and Jane and Abbie and defiantly raised black gloved hands. It is soo tired…but hey I love the sad enthusiasm.

I wonder if you stood in line with a little protest sign then?
I wonder if you stand in line to day screaming about whatever governmental thing so deeply offends your sensibilities today?
Let my (south of the border Spanish speaking job stealing illegal entry type) people go? We need more government sponsored stem cell research? We need more money for me to give to some one as I see fit? …yeah, I know I digress pretty bad sometimes.

My point is that those from your perspective have the uncanny ability to hate the government; identify them as winners of the Clueless Dolt award with Short Bus cluster on one hand…and then turn immediately around and with a smile on your face demand that my health care for my family be subjected to your will and the very same government you just finished bashing. Clearly not clear thinking. Wouldn’t you agree?

Glen HD28 - You might want to know that all of the health care activists I know (most of them left-leaning Democrats) started lobbying the Democratic majority in Salem that they need to take up children's health care, as well as big problems with SB329, in the special session. Without mixing the tobacco issue and health care so we all can tell the anti-tobacco nutjobs to shut up and butt out. Starting, oh, about the next morning after the regular session ended. In the face of repeated criticism by the "Yes On 50" membership.

Right up to election day we were told that the Democratic majority has no intention of taking it up, using the excuse the Republicans would stop them (an excuse pattern that sounds too familiar). They need to bring it up, be as conciliatory as they can for the good of the children, and let the Republicans look bad publicly if they want to. My personal belief is that enough Republicans care about their children too that we can get something done.

Hopefully, that lobbying, which continues unabated, will finally bear fruit now that Measure 50 has failed. At this moment it does not look promising, but a couple of good nights sleep by our legislators after this rebuke may clarify their thinking quite a bit.

Also, it seems you might be misusing the term not-for-profit insurance to mean public coverage plans. The health care advocates I spoke of above are lobby for public health care coverage, like Medicare, and not accounting games in which private insurers work with out elected officials set up "not-for-profit" insurance plans that generate what are euphemistically called "excess operating revenues" rather than "profit".

JTT your disrespect for a large number of voters who voted their conscience is palpable in your clueless misunderstanding of what has been going on since before the regular 2007 legislative session. Instead of your petulant rant here, you really should have been calling legislators yesterday like the activists I mentioned above.

Personal story - because of the Moore apppearance on Olbermann, I got a phone call from a liberal, non-smoker in another state wondering if Oregonians were really as nuts as putting up Measure 50 as our solution to providing health care for children looks to outsiders. Part of that is because we would have been competing with SCHIP for the same tax source. Dumb, dumb, economic policy, compounded by a really dumb political move by Democrats of letting the anti-tobacco nutjobs run the political debate. Based on just how reflective Blue Oregon and clowns like Hartmann and his sidekick on KPOJ are of a large segment of the 40% "Yes" vote, what could I possibly say?

I want to address a few different things here. I am very upset that m50 was not passed. I am a very lucky person to have very good health insurance for my two boys. But, I know a lot of people that do not have nor can even afford bad health insurance and they make to much to qualify or OHP. So they are what everyone refers to as the working poor. They can afford to eat but, not much else. Heaven forbid that their child gets sick and or hurt at school or just playing on the playground or backyard. It is not like all of these people I know went out and had children with out health care things happened in their lives to cause them to not have health care anymore. They lost jobs or other things happened. So I am not being critical of them. I am just so damn mad at the people that did not want to pass a measure that would fund the health care for children of our state. I just know that a lot of people would sing a different song if it was a close friend or family member that was with out health insurance.

I dont know if the smokers of Oregon should fund the whole thing but, they should help because they help contribute a large portion of the health problems we face. If a person smokes around children then they are increasing that childs risk for asthma and other health related problems as well as others around them at the time they are smoking.

I think instead of a fully funded program then maybe we could go on a sliding scale based on income. I feel that people take more pride in things that they pay for instead of totally free items. I do understand that some people can not afford to pay anything so they could and should have it free. But, others can afford to pay a small amount or even a co-pay when they go to the doctor. I would say as low as $1.00 for each doctor visit or Rx most can afford that much or a monthly fee of say $25.00 per family. If they have to make a sacrufice then so be it. I am not judging anyone here. Those of us that would not qualify for any state help have to adjust our monthly budgets if something unforseen comes up. So I think everyone that receives help under a state wide health plan should help pay something for it. Like I stated not a lot but, something so that they can apreceate it more.

I cant afford to smoke to be able to quit and I dont have "extra" money to make large donations to a childrens hospital but, I do what I can to help. I do care about children. I volunteer for our elementary school and I help in other areas when I can. I do donate money when I can too. I do beleive that most people do not want to hurt children I just think that they dont want higher taxes either.

I do have one more coment. If someone could explain this to me that would be great. I am really trying to understand politics and this would help. I would like to know why all of the statements in favor of measure 50 were from people or groups that most people have heard about and the statements against measure 50 were from groups that nobody could find anything about. They were from groups like "stop higher taxes committees" and " save our consitution committees". I would just like to know if you want to say something either for against something then stand on the line and speak out about it. I have a real hard time for something if everyone or almost everyone hides behind a committee of some sort.

If someone could explain why some people, in my opinion, are to chicken to stand up and give their name.

By the way, Because I know people will jump and accuse me of the same thing I am questioning, my name is Melody. I will not give my last name because you can't trust people on the internet. I am also not talking about an argument against or for a measure here I am just asking a question.

I heartily agree with Yawner. M50 was really badly conceived legislation, and I had to hold my nose to vote for it in the hope that kids would get some healthcare. However, singling out smokers was obviously going to attract megabucks in opposition from tobacco corps. Making it a constitutional amendment is not the way to do legislation, as many voters surely thought, particularly after the ads. I do understand that doing so was to go around the 3/5 majority needed to raise taxes. Every state with such restrictions, especially California where I recently moved from, is suffering very badly in detiorated schools, infrastructure, etc.

Either Oregon has to educate the voters on an ongoing basis that they need to pay for improvements, including social welfare programs, and modify the 3/5 requirement like 49 modifies 37, or continued deterioration of infrastructure and programs is inevitable.

In the short term, the legislature is going to have to grow up and pass some legislation to deal with these issues by passing a tax by 3/5 or a creative trick, like making a new lottery game whose proceeds go to kids' healthcare, which might mean new lottery legislation, probably only requiring a majority.

As to healthcare in general, until we pass Kucinich's bill to put all Americans under Medicare with the bill's improvements in alternative health modalities and bulk buying of pharmaceuticals and other improvements on insurance companies' bad acts, we are just fiddling like Nero.

Bill said:

"Hey...I don't blame you for backing away from a $1300 annual commitment. I wouldn't go there either. I'm sure you smoked only a pack every three days to a month. Probably more like a $20 annual commitment would cover it."

I guess this means that Bill is not going to match JTT's contribution? Bill's evasive tactics are totally transparent, as Republican tactics usually are.

Bill da man! He know how to write useless comment!

Wait... if it had passed would you keep smoking?

I mean I guess it would have been good for you to smoke because you would have been paying for kid's health-care.

but...what about you?

Wait, I am confused.

Bill said:

"Hey...I don't blame you for backing away from a $1300 annual commitment. I wouldn't go there either. I'm sure you smoked only a pack every three days to a month. Probably more like a $20 annual commitment would cover it."

I guess this means that Bill is not going to match JTT's contribution? Bill's evasive tactics are totally transparent, as Republican tactics usually are.

Bill da man! He know how to write useless comment!

Doesn't this guy embarrass you socialists? (g)

Smoking cigs is the great scapegoat as we saw with M50. It's the easiest class of people to target because most of us, smokers and non-smokers, freely admit smoking is bad for ones health.

And yet so is the food dyes in so many of our food products. MSG. The amount of soda pop and corn syrup laden "fruit" juice drinks young people drink these days. The increasing use of fast food restaurants. All such things that are detrimental to ones health when used on an on-going basis. All such things people choose to consume.

If our government only had the balls to stand up to the big companies, like the tobacco companies, and demand they return to the days where they PAID THEIR FAIR SHARE OF TAXES, we could fund health care for all. I honestly had to laugh as I watched Kulongoski speak with such (feigned) anger over his disgust over Big Tobacco and how they won this measure, and how the government will eventually "get" these evil tobacco companies. Please. Talk about shoveling the smelly stuff to win points.

For whatever reason you quit smoking, congratulations!

It's been 17 years now for me, and I admit there is still the occasional craving to light up (nicotine addiction is more insidious than heroin addiction.) When that happens, from somewhere deep inside me come the thoughts, "But I'm a non-smoker, I am a non-smoker..." The craving dissipates and it's easier to fend off the next time.

<h2>I just wanted to pass that along because quitting smoking is a big deal. I'll let the other folks discuss the political and ideological aspects of the measure.</h2>