Tobacco Settlement

* With regard to the money that Los Angeles will be receiving from the tobacco companies (“Dispute Flares Over L.A.’s Use of Tobacco Funds,” Nov. 21), I believe that a better use for the funds would be to build a larger county hospital than is now planned. The people’s health supersedes the need for sidewalk moneys or dollars handed to promoters of programs aimed at children and teenagers. As to the latter need, there are already many such programs in place.

The tobacco companies have already announced they are going to tack on 40 cents to each pack of cigarettes to pay for these court-ordered billions in fines. This price hike, coupled with the 50 cents added by the recent initiative, will be the best deterrent to teenage smoking.

There is no limit to the number of worthy causes desperately in need of money, but we must consider that the money can be dribbled away piecemeal with little tangible evidence of good for future needs. Ultimately, many tobacco-related illnesses will end up at this hospital. A larger county hospital will better serve all the people of the county of Los Angeles for many years to come, just as the present one has faithfully done for indigents of every age and nationality in the past.

JOSEPH B. LOPEZ

Montebello

*

Smoking has cost us nonsmoking taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars in health care and other related costs. The big bad lawyers defending our interests have brought the tobacco companies to their knees. But instead of putting the millions of dollars into the pockets of health care facilities treating those with smoking related diseases, our political think tank is exploring all options.

Here’s an idea. Allocate the money to those whose expenses for treating smoking-related diseases come from the general taxpayers’ funds, and return to the citizens the portion that the tobacco companies have been forced to pay.

JOHN C. PALKA

Anaheim Hills

*

The Times supported the settlement of the states’ lawsuit against the tobacco industry. Your Nov. 18 editorial pointed out that this will be a good settlement because of not just the money, but the future restrictions on tobacco advertising. Our young people, especially, will be protected from ads such as on billboards, product placements in films, and on clothing and promotional materials.

It is interesting that The Times recognizes that advertisements for tobacco should be limited, yet on page A19 of that same paper is a full-page ad for Kools. Where is your moral judgment on this one!

KEN CONSTANT

North Hollywood

*

I keep trying not to think how much my taxes will increase if everybody quit smoking. It scares me. Smoke another cigarette!

EDWARD CHACON

Downey