No Change To Tobacco Policy In 2011

The Head of the North Dakota Center for Tobacco Prevention and Control Policy says that there will be very few changed in 2011. Jeanne Prom is the Director of the center says that they will not introduce legislation that would change tobacco policy in the state.

Prom said that her group will continue their education efforts. The Center is concentrating those education efforts on legislators with the hopes that there is a “groundswell in 2013” for a statewide ban on smoking in public places. In the mean time Prom says that they will also work to push for individual communities to implement bans.

Prom said that there no indication that there will be any changes to state tobacco policy “I don’t know of any legislators that are interested in putting forth a bill to increase the tobacco tax in the 2011 session.”

She says that North Dakota’s low tobacco tax makes it hard for people to stop using tobacco and it is also easy for people to start “We really feel that as long as tobacco is really cheap in North Dakota there are going to be people who find it hard to quit and easy to start” said Prom.

Rutherford students arrested on marijuana charges

Three Rutherford students were arrested at the school Tuesday after a witness saw what appeared to be a drug transaction on campus.

The witness, who saw the trade at about 11 a.m., alerted the principal who asked the school resource deputy to investigate, according to a news release from Bay County Sheriff's Office.

Randolph John Hodges, 17, of 401 S. Burkett Drive in Callaway, is charged with sale of marijuana and two other students, Austin Michael Simons, 15, of 727 Arrow Street in Callaway, and Joseph Houston Jordan, 16, of 1404 Foster Avenue in Panama City, have been charged with purchasing marijuana.

Michigan's medical marijuana law shrouded in haze

Michigan's two-year-old law allowing the use of marijuana for medical purposes is leaving communities, courts, patients and police locked in disputes over what is legal and what isn't.
Many patients who have the state's OK to use marijuana to ease their pain from conditions ranging from cancer to Crohn's disease have been arrested and others have been fired because of different interpretations of the law approved by Michigan voters in late 2008. Courts face a rash of medical marijuana cases, with the law raising so many questions one state appeals court judge described reading it as a "maze."
Local governments are jumping in and passing their own ordinances, mostly trying to limit, ban or regulate a wave of businesses popping up to grow and sell the drug.
Michigan isn't alone in trying to sort out hazy medical marijuana laws. Fourteen other states have similar statutes — prompting raids and debate over local regulations in California, disputes over which doctors can recommend pot in Colorado and fights over proposed regulations in New Jersey.
Many of the clashes are between medical marijuana advocates who say they're acting within the law and police who say they aren't. Adding to the tension is federal law that continues to ban the use and possession of marijuana. Although it won't be a top priority for lawmakers in a state swamped by economic and state government budget problems, Michigan's next Legislature likely will devote some time to clarifying the law.
A class on legal issues is a staple at Med Grow Cannabis College in Southfield, one of the few medical marijuana trade schools in the nation. Nick Tennant, who last year opened up the trade school in suburban Detroit, said the goal of the class is to provide students some clarity about a law that has gray areas.
"A lot of people want definitive answers," Tennant, 25, said. "It's just hard, because sometimes the attorneys can't really give a definitive answer. They can give almost a 'best practices, here's how you stay out of trouble, don't raise your risk tolerance in this gray area' type of thing."
The school also provides students with instruction on the medical and horticultural aspects of growing pot for medicinal use.
"We don't want the people and the public to be afraid of us or to think we're drug dealers, because that's really a popular misconception as well. We're here to help," said Travis Williams, a 38-year-old Detroiter who took classes at the school and now provides marijuana he grows himself to patients.
Michigan's more than 45,000 licensed medical marijuana patients can possess up to 2½ ounces of usable marijuana and have up to 12 plants kept in an enclosed, locked facility — or have a registered caregiver grow the drug for them.
Some police agencies want a better system to verify the authenticity of authorization cards. Physicians must certify patients would benefit from the pain-reducing aspects of marijuana, but it's left to the patients to register with the state and to self-regulate the amount and quality of the drug they take.
"There is absolutely no connection to medicine and what's going on with medical marijuana right now," said Oakland County Sheriff Mike Bouchard. "You don't have a required patient-doctor relationship. You don't go to a state-licensed, inspected and regulated facility like a pharmacy. ... It's creating already a lot of problems and a lot of misconceptions."
Advocates of medical marijuana say nothing in the law prohibits dispensaries and collective growing facilities, and that communities are ignoring the will of Michigan voters by cracking down on those businesses. Advocates of the law say it's broad by design to protect a wide range of activities.
Many Michigan communities have said state law isn't clear or is largely silent on how the drug can be grown and distributed by anyone other than patients or caregivers, or how plants and seeds can be bought in the first place.

Outdoor smoking ban weighed

Smokers soon may no longer be allowed to light up at Town of Poughkeepsie parks and playgrounds.
The Town Board is to vote tonight on a proposal that would post signs designating such areas as tobacco-free zones. The town has 22 parks, many of which are used by youth sports leagues.

Officials hope the signs discourage people from lighting up and protect others, especially children, from secondhand smoke. But leaders acknowledge the policy will be difficult to enforce. It is unclear whether the proposal would include fines for people found smoking in town parks.

Supervisor Patricia Myers said she hopes the signs help prevent smokers from lighting up.

"When smokers are around small children, it's not good," Myers said.

Communities across New York and America have approved outdoor smoking bans, part of an effort to improve residents' health. Hyde Park has limited smoking in its major parks and the Town of Wappinger has enacted similar measures.

Scott Santarella, president and CEO of the American Lung Association in New York, said 200 communities across the state have policies against smoking at parks, pools and playgrounds.

"It seems to be a growing trend," Santarella said, adding such policies "certainly help with extending protection against secondhand smoke."

He said about 2,500 New Yorkers die from secondhand-smoke-related problems each year.

According to the American Cancer Society's website, secondhand smoke each year in the United States leads to 46,000 deaths from heart disease in nonsmokers who live with smokers, and about 3,400 lung cancer deaths in nonsmoking adults.

Resident Doreen Tignanelli said she supports smoke-free parks, but she questioned how the measure would be enforced.

"I would really hesitate to just go up to someone and tell them they are not allowed to smoke," Tignanelli said. "I would be concerned about approaching someone directly."

Poughkeepsie Councilman Todd Tancredi, R-6th Ward, said he hoped people abide by the new policy and that fines would not be necessary.

"I hope people use common courtesy and stay out of the park when they are smoking," Tancredi said.

Myers said the signs should remind smokers to "just be respectful" when they are near nonsmokers and children at parks and ballgames.

This is not the first time officials have discussed banning smoking in parks.

Two years ago, the board debated whether to ban smoking in parks after a youth baseball official complained that smokers were lighting up during games.

The board never took action and the matter was tabled.

Tom Meyering, the town's recreation chief, said he recommended the board adopt a tobacco-free policy for the parks, rather than a more formal ordinance that would carry fines.

Meyering said the smoking issue came up again recently after the group SmokeFree Dutchess contacted town officials.

Anti-smoking gets 'ugly'

A handful of Sioux Falls elementary schools have already taken part - with more schools expected to later - in a new tobacco-free initiative being promoted by the South Dakota State Medical Association Alliance.

The 12-minute animated film, "Smoking Makes Me Ugly," is designed to educate children about the harms of tobacco use before they begin to smoke, said Grace Wellman, co-president of the Alliance. It's targeted at fifth-grade students, she said.

"The project presents the hazards of smoking through an animated video that captures the attention of children while delivering the lesson content," Wellman said.
The DVD only became available a few weeks ago. It costs $74.95. The Alliance has purchased 75 DVDs and placed them in schools throughout South Dakota, Wellman said. The Alliance is working with local law enforcement to help implement the video in school districts.

The film contains interactive lessons. Worksheets, handouts and teacher guides can be printed from the files included on the DVD, Wellman said.

Christine Bruzvoort, a Sioux Falls school resource officer, said she has been contacted by principals this school year on three different occasions about smoking at the elementary level.

So far, she has shown the video to fifth-grade students at Lowell, Longfellow, Hayward, Hawthorne and Renberg elementary schools.

"It shows you what smoking does to you," Bruzvoort said. "All the kids already know that smoking gives you cancer and it's bad for you, but this actually gives you a visual picture of what this does to your actual body."

Minnehaha County Sheriff's Deputy Josh Phillips works with the West Central School District. He will show students the DVD in early January. Other school districts such as Garretson, Dell Rapids and Tri-Valley will soon follow, he said.

"It's just not a video itself," Phillips said, "it's a Power-Point with interactions that I think will really keep the kids interested in the video and keep them talking about it."

Cigarette dispute leads to domestic assault

A Columbia man was arrested over the weekend on charges that he hit and bit his ex-wife over a pack of cigarettes.

Officers were dispatched at 2:10 p.m. Sunday to 1402 Court St. for a disturbance. A dispatcher told the officers Charles Silvey was involved in a physical fight in the house, Columbia Police Department spokeswoman Jill Wieneke said. Following the incident, 24-year-old Charles D. Silvey of Columbia was arrested on three different assault charges.

"In particular, he assaulted a female there who is his ex-wife," Wieneke said. "It looks like he hit her and bit her. He had also threatened some other people there and punched a male victim in the head, arm and wrist."

One of the officers had dealt with Silvey before and knew he had a history of violence. Three officers went inside the house and found three people in the back bedroom.

"It sounds like they had been screaming and yelling and fighting physically," Wieneke said.

Witnesses and victims said the fight had been ongoing throughout the day between the people in the residence. Silvey had been agitated all day because he thought someone stole his cigarettes, Wieneke said.

Silvey was arrested at the scene for second-degree domestic assault and third-degree assault, a charge that was enhanced because he had at least two past charges, Wieneke said.

Both victims declined medical attention.

At the time of his arrest, Silvey complained of some medical issues, including minor abrasions on his chest from one of the other people there. Per CPD policy, the police transferred Silvey to the hospital that afternoon. He was released from the hospital at 2 a.m. Monday and returned to CPD custody.

Silvey has been charged with other crimes in the past, including assault, domestic assault, property damage and operating a motor vehicle with a suspended driver's license.

The 13th Circuit Judicial Court of Missouri issued a child protection order against Silvey in April 2009

Thief stuffs pants with cigarettes

Surveillance video caught a man stealing cartons of cigarettes from a 7-Eleven store in Virginia Beach.

Authorities say the suspect went into the back stockroom of the store in the 2200 block of Red Tide Road Friday afternoon, stuffed multiple cartons of cigarettes into his pants and then left the store.

"He could be using them for personal use because cigarettes are expensive, or he could be selling them to make a profit off of them at different flea markets and trade shows," said Officer Adam Bernstein, a police spokesperson.

Police are investigating a similar incident that happened at the 7-Eleven store in the 300 block of Lynn Shores Drive on August 16. Police say it appears the same suspect targeted both stores.

Bernstein thought this crime was a bit unusual. "I did find other reports of people just jumping over the counter and grabbing a bunch of packs and running out the door. These are the only two I was able to locate where the person concealed several cartons of cigarettes and walked out the door," said Bernstein.

In each case, police say $300 worth of cigarettes was taken.

The suspect is described as a black male, in his 40s. He can be seen in the photos attached to this story. Authorities say the suspect got away in a light colored four door car with a sunroof.

If you can help police in this case call Crime Line at 1-888-LOCK-U-UP.

Store criticized for promotion offering beer and cigarettes for food stamps plus $1

Fla. - A new advertisement from a Plant City grocery store is causing some concern. The promotion basically offers to accept food stamps in exchange for cigarettes and beer.

The ad offers beer and cigarettes for $1 for customers who use food stamps to purchase large quantities of meat. The store owner calls it a promotion, but some call it a loophole in the law.

It’s illegal to use food stamps to buy things like beer and cigarettes, but what’s listed in the ad appears to be perfectly legal.

The ad for the Price Buster Food Center in Plant City offers large quantities of meat, such as 27 pounds of beef for $60. The very top line of the ad reads, "EBT & Food Stamps Accepted." If the customer pays just one extra dollar, the store will throw in cases of beer or cigarettes.

The bargain has some customers concerned. “It bothers me. Cigarettes and beer should definitely not be part of a food stamp promotion,” said customer Tina Brodowski.

ABC Action News asked store owner Jeffrey Housholder if the promotion is a loophole that allows customers to use food stamps to buy beer and cigarettes. “Well, they can use their EBT cards, they can use their credit cards, they can pay me cash. It’s all the same deal to everybody,” Housholder responded.

Housholder says he’s not doing anything illegal, and he’s right. The USDA says because the deal is available to anyone, even customers who aren’t using food stamps, and because the beer and cigarettes are a separate charge, it appears to be within the law.

But Terry Field with the Florida Department of Children and Families says that insignificant one dollar charge appears to be just a way to sidestep the law.

“It may not be technically illegal, but it certainly doesn’t seem to pass the smell test,” Field said.

Housholder argues that his store has been hit hard by the economy, and this is just another way to bring customers in.

“Plant City has lost probably about 8 to 10,000 residents in our area. We’re just trying to broaden our advertising and reach out to more people,” Housholder said.

Field says it could lead to misuse of the food stamps program.

“To know that they’re using food stamps to buy food simply because they’re getting a bonus of cigarettes or alcohol, that’s a little problematic,” Field said.

After ABC Action News brought this to the attention of the USDA, representatives said they hadn’t heard of a promotion like this before and they will investigate.

Ohio Tobacco Funding Case Reaches State Supreme Court

Information from tobacco news blog:
The Ohio Supreme Court is hearing arguments this week over the fate of the state's Tobacco Use Prevention and Control Foundation, which was stripped of its funding by state lawmakers, the Associated Press reported July 6.

Lawyers for the foundation told the court that lawmakers had no right to seize the program's $230-million endowment, which came from Ohio's share of the 1998 nationwide tobacco settlement and was placed in a protected fund. "The fact in evidence here is that the 123rd General Assembly plainly intended to create an irrevocable trust putting this money beyond the reach of subsequent general assemblies," said attorney John Zeiger.

But Alexandra Schimmer, Ohio's chief deputy attorney general, argued, "This money is and has always remained state money. It has never been given to any entity that has any legal independence from the state."

The state attempted to seize the money and shut down the foundation in 2008, but foundation officials responded by giving most of its funding to the American Legacy Foundation, a nationwide tobacco prevention program that is also a party to the lawsuit.

Tobacco on legislators' agenda

ALBANY -- After a Friday of furious budget activity, the Legislature returns to the Capitol today to vote on Gov. David Paterson's latest provocative one-week budget extender -- including a chunky tax hike on cigarettes and tobacco products as well as stepped-up tax enforcement on sales of tobacco products on Indian reservations.

Under the plan, the current tax on a pack of cigarettes will rise from $2.75 to $4.35. The tax on other tobacco products -- such as cigars, chewing tobacco and pipe tobacco -- will increase from 46 percent to 75 percent. The increases are scheduled to take effect Sept. 1 and raise $290 million annually, according to the Paterson administration; stepped-up enforcement on Indian sales is expected to collect $150 million more.
Over the weekend, forces on either side of the debate over smoking weighed in. Altria, the parent company of cigarette giant Philip Morris, released a packet of information arguing that the hike would be an unfair burden that would hurt consumers and retailers, and could lead to increased illegal trafficking.

The American Heart Association was one of several groups that came out in support of the boost: "The higher the better," said Julianne Hart, the state organization's advocacy director.

The inclusion of the new taxes will make the extender harder to support for any of the three Republican senators who enabled last week's emergency appropriation to pass over Democrat Ruben Diaz Sr.'s "no" vote. The extender's defeat would lead to a broad government shutdown.

Sen. Hugh Farley, R-Schenectady, said last week that he wants to keep the state running, but would refuse to vote for anything that contains new taxes.

The Senate's Democratic majority will also take up a series of budget bills dealing with government operation, transportation, environmental protection and other sectors. The bill were passed by the Assembly on Friday but lagged in the Senate due to the absences of several Democrats.

Paterson and legislators still have to tackle the thorniest portions of the budget: the state's revenue plan and education funding.

The budget deadline for this fiscal year passed on April 1. Paterson said last week that if a final budget plan isn't settled this week, he'll put the remainder of his budget proposal into the extender to be passed on Monday, June 28.

Stephen Strasburg = Smoking Fastball + Smokeless Tobacco

By now, everyone knows that Washington Nationals ace pitcher, rookie Stephen Strasburg is the real deal.

His debut lived up to all the hype, with the 21-year old throwing furious heat into the seventh inning. He had 14 strikeouts and no walks, getting his first major league win against the Pittsburgh Pirates in a 5-2 win Tuesday evening.

But what I had somehow missed in all the coverage leading up to his debut is this: the young man uses dip, that is, smokeless tobacco.

Reading some of the Washington Post coverage Wednesday morning, I came across a description of the Nats clubhouse scene which starts off with a mention of Strasburg's wife:

While Rachel was making an early run on the Nationals' Team Store — coming away with a bagful of limited-edition Strasburg 37 jerseys, and paying full price — her husband was taking batting practice in an indoor cage, with a tin of dip tobacco in his back pocket and a pinch between his gum and lower lip.

As Phil Rizzuto and Harry Caray might have said: Holy Cow! Or as was said in an earlier baseball era, say it ain't so.

So Strasburg has a weakness after all.

Major League Baseball has for years wanted to get rid of smokeless tobacco, a known carcinogen which causes some of the most hideous cancers of the mouth and throat imaginable. It has been banned in the minors since 1993, though players there still sneak it.

For years, there's been a concerted effort to keep young people from starting the dip habit, especially because of the mistaken impression that it's safer than smoking tobacco.

The mlb.fanhouse.com site has an informative story that provides plenty of background on the use of the product in the majors and efforts to prohibit it. Apparently, the players' union has opposed a ban.

But there are players who support a ban, who understand that they are role models to youngsters, according to the Fanhouse piece:

An excerpt from the piece:

"I would be for [a ban]," A's infielder Eric Chavez said. "I don't do it. Sometimes when I'm watching the games you see a guy throw in a big dip and the camera focuses in on it, I know kids are watching. You want guys to be able to do what they want. Everyone is an adult, but you also have to be aware of the message that you send to kids. ... Since I don't dip, I think I'd be an advocate for trying to get it out of the game, or at least off the field."

As was made clear last night, Strasburg draws a lot of attention and will no doubt be a role model for many youngsters, especially because, by all accounts, he is a humble and level-headed young man.

So his use of snuff is the kind of practice many people will find worrisome, not only for the personal health of one of the most gifted young pitchers baseball has ever seen but for the message it could send to many youngsters who may try to imitate their newest hero.

CDC Finds Higher Levels of Cancer-Causing Chemicals in U.S. Cigarettes

People who smoke certain U.S. cigarette brands are exposed to higher levels of cancer-causing tobacco-specific nitrosamines (TSNAs), the major carcinogens and cancer-causing agents in tobacco products, than people who smoke some foreign cigarette brands. This was one of the findings from the first-ever study to compare TSNA exposures among smokers from different countries. CDC researchers compared mouth-level TSNA exposures and urine biomarkers among smokers from the U.S., Canada, United Kingdom, and Australia. Results of this study are published in the June issue of Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers and Prevention.

“We know that cigarettes from around the world vary in their ingredients and the way they are produced,” said Dr. Jim Pirkle, deputy director for science at CDC’s National Center for Environmental Health, Division of Laboratory Sciences. “All of these cigarettes contain harmful levels of carcinogens, but these findings show that amounts of tobacco-specific nitrosamines differ from country to country, and U.S. brands are the highest in the study.”

The types of tobacco in cigarettes vary by manufacturer and location of production. The U.S. cigarette brands studied contained “American blend” tobacco, a specific mixture of tobacco from the U.S. that contains higher TSNA levels. The Australian, Canadian, and U.K. cigarette brands were made from “bright” tobacco, which is lighter in color and flue cured. Changes in curing and blending practices could reduce U.S. smokers’ exposure to one type of cancer-causing compound, however, this would not necessarily result in a safer product.
Study collaborators enlisted 126 persons from Australia, Canada, the U.K., and the U.S. who smoke cigarettes daily to participate in the study. Cigarettes smoked by study participants represented popular brands in each country.

Scientists measured chemicals in cigarette butts collected by each smoker over a 24-hour period to determine how much of a certain TSNA entered the smokers’ mouths during that period. They also collected urine samples from study participants to find out how much breakdown product from this TSNA appeared in the urine. Comparing the results from these two types of sampling showed a correlation between the amount of one TSNA that enters the mouth and the amount of its breakdown product that appears in the urine. This is the first time this relationship has been documented.

Malaysia gov't faces tobacco wrath over ban delay

A tobacco giant that exhausted its inventory of small cigarette packets in anticipation of a ban threatened Thursday to take legal action against the Malaysian government for reportedly deciding to delay the prohibition.

The Malaysian affiliate of Philip Morris International voiced disappointment with what it called a "precipitous" decision that would be "a devastating blow not only to our business but to foreign investor confidence in Malaysia."

Tobacco companies in the Southeast Asian country have been phasing out parts of their inventory and manufacturing equipment in recent months ahead of a government ban on cigarette packets containing fewer than 20 cigarettes that was supposed to take effect June 1.

However, the financial newspaper The Edge reported Thursday that the government had decided to postpone the ban. The Malaysian Insider news website later quoted Health Minister Liow Tiong Lai as saying that authorities feared the ban would spark a surge in demand for illegally produced cigarettes.

Health Ministry officials said they could not immediately comment on the reports, and that Liow was traveling late Thursday and could not be contacted.

"In the absence of clarity surrounding this decision, (we) will have no choice but to evaluate all possible avenues, including legal recourse, to recover any losses the company may suffer," Richard Morgan, the managing director of Philip Morris in Malaysia, said in a statement.

"How can any corporation plan for its future and maintain its viability in an environment of such legal uncertainty, where decisions that are supposedly set in concrete can be overturned so rapidly and without any consultation?" the statement added.

The government had been planning the ban for years as part of efforts to curb smoking among young Malaysians who consider smaller cigarette packs more affordable.

The Malaysian Insider quoted Liow as saying the government would make a final decision in "a few months" on when the ban might be enforced.

Tobacco funding: time to quit

Tobacco companies are not philanthropic institutions. As long ago as 1967 the late Senator Robert Kennedy said, "the cigarette industry is peddling a deadly weapon. It is dealing in people's lives for financial gain".

The Australian tobacco industry is dominated by three big companies (or in modern political parlance, three "great big" companies), British American Tobacco, Philip Morris and Imperial Tobacco - all overseas-owned, with decisions made not in Sydney or Melbourne but in London and New York.

These are tough and ruthless multinational corporations, promoting and selling a product that kills one in two of its regular users. They have known for sixty years that their product is lethal. During this time almost one million Australians have died because they smoked - while the tobacco companies have denied and downplayed the evidence, doing their utmost to oppose and delay any action that might be effective in reducing smoking. Around the world their products cause five million deaths a year - a figure which will only increase as their drive into developing countries bears lethal fruit.

The new Chief Executive of Imperial Tobacco, Alison Cooper, was recently reported in the UK media as still refusing to accept that smoking causes cancer. Small wonder that only last week a survey of the reputations of the UK's largest 150 companies had Imperial Tobacco at 147 and British American Tobacco at a rock bottom 150.

There is massive evidence from once-confidential industry documents now available following litigation in the US that for decades tobacco companies have acted more cynically than even tobacco campaigners might have thought - summarised by a quote from an industry executive - "We don't smoke this shit, we just sell it. We reserve the right to smoke for the young, the poor, the black and the stupid."

And as if all this were not enough, the industry has been found guilty of racketeering in the US.

Tobacco companies have only one aim, in London, New York or Canberra. In line with their responsibility to their shareholders, they spend money with the sole purpose of benefiting their interests.

So why would anybody want to take money from this pariah industry?

The Australian Electoral Commission website reports that in recent years both the Philip Morris company and British American Tobacco have been generous donors to the Liberal Party and the National Party. During the year 2008/9 Philip Morris contributed $158,000 to the Liberal and National parties around Australia.

No doubt in addition to direct contributions there is also much indirect funding from groups supporting and representing tobacco companies, but this is much harder to pin down.

The only reason for these contributions is to further the interests of tobacco companies. The website of the British American Tobacco company is quite explicit about political donations: "Such payments can only be made for the purpose of influencing the debate on issues affecting the company or Group..."

A review of tobacco industry political donations in the US, published in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine, concluded that, "tobacco industry monetary contributions are closely related to the way a legislator votes on tobacco issues", and "The more campaign contributions received by a Congress member, the more likely he/she votes pro-tobacco on tobacco-related bills".

Political donations are not simply about an intention to buy direct support: they are also about much less tangible benefits gained through indirect support, influence, contacts, access and credibility.

The Greens and Democrats took the lead in refusing tobacco industry funding, followed by the ALP. The other major parties understand the dangers of smoking; they know exactly why tobacco companies want to give them money; it is hard to imagine that they would knowingly take money from drug dealers - and yet they seem content to accept contributions from an industry whose products cause more than 80 per cent of Australia's drug deaths. Surely there is something awry with the moral radar of anyone who accepts this kind of blood money.

The argument we sometimes hear that this is a "legitimate industry" is old and tired. If cigarettes were a new product they would not be allowed on the market. Our parliaments have decreed that the product is so harmful that it should not be sold to children and adolescents, should not be advertised, and that its sales should be subject to ever-increasing controls. This is no ordinary product, no ordinary industry.

The Australian government now leads the world in action to reduce smoking, complementing strong action in most jurisdictions (other than the Northern Territory, whose lack of interest in tobacco remains a mystery).

It is time for all political parties to refuse tobacco funding, or for legislation that forbids such contributions from companies that still seek to oppose the work and recommendations of governments and health authorities, and whose products cause 15,000 Australian deaths each year when used precisely as intended. Then we can be assured that all parties are making policy on this vital public health issue free of the taint of association with tobacco companies, and free of any suspicion that their policies might be influenced by these disreputable, lethal donors.

Australian cigarette tax is all smokes and mirrors

THE first cigarette I smoked was a Peter Stuyvesant, described in its advertisements as "the international passport to smoking pleasure".

Hiding under the family home at Holland Park, I didn't really get the feeling I was on the Champs-Elysees. Perhaps the copy writers had it wrong.

Maybe I should have tried Benson and Hedges – "when only the best will do".

I remember the packaging – the pale blue of Belair packets, the heavily seriphed type of the Chesterfield packs, the white and blue of Rothmans, the red circle on white of Lucky Strikes and the dark red of the Lark brand which boasted "charcoal filters".

All gone, victims of another piece of political grandstanding by a Federal Government obsessed with the creation of shimmering PR images designed to dance on the political horizon until the federal election. Cigarettes will from 2012 be sold in plain packaging and the price will go up by $2.60 or more a packet. Wow! Another first for Australia!Watching Prime Minister Kevin Rudd on television announcing this, I cringed. The tobacco companies, he crowed, would hate the move and would fight it. "Bring it on" was the message from Action Man Rudd.

"PM gets tough on Tobacco Giants" was the message the PM's office was shovelling. Was this the same Man of Steel who'd tossed his ETS out the window the moment the political wind shifted?

Was it the same tower of strength who hung Environment Minister Peter Garrett out to dry when there was overwhelming evidence that despite the Prime Minister's office having been advised that the ceiling insulation scheme was fatally flawed, it insisted that it be rushed out into the suburbs regardless?

The same, and now he is challenging the tobacco companies to the best of 15 rounds to be fought bareknuckle with no quarter given, this titanic struggle to take place beneath the banner of a health initiative.

It's a stunt, and a transparent one. Of course the tobacco companies will fight it as Rudd hoped they would. They're defending their individual brands but in provoking this conflict, the PM is trying to portray himself as the fearless warrior unsheathing his sword to wage a holy war against the ravages of smoking-related disease.

People will stop smoking, we are told, if cigarettes are sold in plain packets. Crap. People will keep smoking because smoking is addictive and it's really hard to stop. I know what I'm talking about here.

People stop smoking because they are afraid it will kill them.

If this move is going to stop people smoking then why is the Government hoping that increasing the price will tip billions of extra dollars into the Treasury's coffers?

The other insupportable claim that is being woven around the announcement is that if cigarettes are sold in plain packaging, people who have not previously smoked will not take up the habit. Crap. People smoke because it's always been viewed as slightly outrageous and not something that "really nice" people do. It's marginally rebellious. It's a nose-thumb at society and its anti-smoking regulations.

Attractive packaging may well sway smokers in their selection of brand, the gold of the B&H exerting more visual allure than the blue and white of the Winfields, but it won't drive them to take smoking up in the first place.

If the Government is right in its approach, which is plainly an attempt to deflect attention away from the policy disasters now mounting around it, then it has unwittingly stumbled upon the answer to the social evil of binge drinking. Henceforth, all alcohol must be served in plain packaging. No more exotic beer labels or fine artwork on wine bottles which will now just read Fourex beer or Lindemans chardonnay.

This move, if the Government's case for tobacco is well-founded, will cause young people to lose all interest in drinking because it's the packaging that's been attracting them, not the product which lies within.

Putting up the price of cigarettes merely means more kids will go hungry. Thirty-eight per cent of unemployed people smoke, as do 50 per cent of indigenous Australians. They're not going to stop because it's become more expensive, which means the extra money will have to come from somewhere.

The tobacco companies will take legal action which will drag on. In due course, the PM's initiative may be disallowed by the courts but it doesn't matter.

The extra money will continue to be squeezed from smokers and the packaging issue can be held up as a "health initiative" until the election, which is all that was ever intended of it. If this is not the most cynical government in Australian political history, will someone please tell me which was.

Electronic cigarettes allow students to side-step no smoking rules

Ryan Prystash has gotten his nicotine fix a couple of times in the residence halls.

But not with regular cigarettes, chewing tobacco or cigars.

Instead, he smokes electronic cigarettes.

“I started about a month ago,” said Prystash, a New Baltimore freshman.

With the e-cig, there is no fire, tar, ash or carbon monoxide.

It’s about the same size as a regular cigarette, only with a few modifications.

The end where the cigarette is normally lit is where the battery is located. The part which is held by the smoker is the cartridge containing water laced with nicotine.

“The cartridges can be plugged into an outlet,” he said. “I even charged one of them from my laptop.”

Prystash said using the cigarettes inside a residence hall has caused some confusion.

“I was smoking in my room when an RA passed by,” Prystash said. “She started freaking out until I pulled it apart and showed her what it was.”

He said the RA then allowed him to continue smoking.

However, the popularity of the product does present an issue of how it conforms to the rules in no-smoking areas of campus.

“We have had no complaints yet,” said Shaun Holtgreive, associate director of Residence Life. “The FDA is still figuring out how to regulate them.”

Currently students can smoke e-cigs on campus without being held to the standards of regular cigarettes, he said.

“We don’t have enough info now,” Holtgreive said. “We’ll probably make a decision about them by next fall.”

The starter pack costs around $60, and comes with two batteries and six cartridges, which contain different flavors, Prystash said.

“It’s a good alternative for those trying to quit,” said Jonathan Grinter, a Farmington Hills freshman.

Grinter said he hasn’t received any complaints about his electronic smoking yet.

“I’ve smoked mine in class, the dorm and outside,” Grinter said. “They don’t smell and last longer than the real thing.”

Stub it out

Japan’s smoking rate has fallen to a record low amid rising health awareness and tighter regulations.

WOW! The huge billboard in front of Yokohama Park across the intersections must have cost a bomb. It depicts a picture of a little girl beside a smouldering cigarette held in a man’s hand. The caption reads: “For the health of others, do stop smoking while walking.”

When my son was a toddler, his hair was nearly singed and my hand almost burnt by the cigarettes of smokers jostling in crowded places. Inhaling the secondary smoke made us cough, too.

My husband had smoked for nearly three decades. When he started working after graduating from university, his mother had encouraged him to smoke for the sake of socialising, only to regret later because the house reeked of tobacco smoke and the wallpapers got stained.

My father was a chain-smoker until he quit at the age of 50. Much as I loathe smoking, I overlooked this flaw in Koji when I married him.After Ken was born, Koji was confined to his study room (which I nicknamed “nicotine room”) whenever he needed a smoke. When we went on outings, he sneaked off with his portable ashtray, for a puff.

When we shifted into our present apartment, he lost his “nicotine room”. So he puffed away on the balcony.

Even during winter, he would brave the cold outside to have his cigarette before breakfast. Frustrated, I told him that he should emulate my father’s determination to kick the habit.

“I’ll quit when I reach 50,” Koji replied casually.

A week before his 50th birthday, when we reminded him of his “promise,” he retorted: “I think you said your father quit at 55.”

During that week, Ken and I checked his pockets. Good. He didn’t bring back any cigarette or filter. For the first two weeks, he kept his craving at bay with chewing gums. As an incentive for him to persevere, I rewarded him with a dinner treat and an expensive pair of shoes.

Now Koji detests the smell of tobacco smoke. His brother, brother-in-law and niece had also quit smoking.

Japan has been dubbed a major smoking nation, but its smoking rate has been decreasing since a decade ago.

Last year, a 31-year-old man and his three-year-old daughter filed a lawsuit against Tokyo’s Kita Ward government for failing to take preventive measures against passive smoking in the park, and demanded ¥100,000 (RM3,463) as compensation for the sore eyes and sore throat that they suffered. Following that, the authorities removed all public ashtrays in 20 children’s parks.

Since its nationwide launch on July 1, 2008, smokers need to show their “Taspo” (tobacco passport) card to purchase cigarettes from convenience stores or vending machines. This smart card is issued to those 20 and above, to prevent minors from smoking.

Yet, underaged smokers have been illegally using the card. Two years ago in Fukuoka, a woman (a non-smoker) became the first person to be prosecuted for obtaining a Taspo card for her underaged son to buy cigarettes from a vending machine. Her action was tantamount to giving cigarettes to a minor.

It was not an April Fool’s joke when Japan’s first anti-smoking ordinance took effect in Kanagawa Prefecture, banning smoking in schools, hospitals, government offices and other public places. A ¥2,000 (RM69) fine is imposed for smoking in prohibited public buildings, while managers of such facilities face a ¥20,000 (RM690) fine.

The penalty would also apply to restaurants and hotels from April next year.

Many people welcome this move, though smokers, business operators and the tobacco industry will be affected.

Restaurants, mahjong and pachinko parlours with a floor space of over 100sqm and hotels of over 700sqm must either become non-smoking or create designated smoking areas. Operators of smaller business facilities are required to ensure a smoke-free environment and are not subjected to the penalty yet.

Notwithstanding the smoking and non-smoking sections in major restaurant chains, non-smokers are still exposed to the harmful effects of second-hand smoke. Nevertheless, major restaurant chains like McDonald’s Co (Japan) Ltd and Yoshinoya Co had prohibited smoking at their Kanagawa outlets, even before the enforcement.

The ban on smoking at swimming beaches (except for designated areas) is expected to be implemented next month. No penalty has been set for offenders but hopefully, the ban would reduce littering and prevent health hazards caused by secondary smoking.

From October, the price of cigarettes is likely to increase by ¥100 (RM3.45) a pack, to offset the market’s falling sales.

With the smoke-free environment campaigns, Tobacco Inc will launch non-flammable, odourless cigarettes next month, initially in Tokyo. Costing ¥300 (RM10.40) and classified as sniffing tobacco, Zero Style Mint comes with a tobacco pipe, mouthpiece and two cartridges. A pack of four refill cartridges costs ¥400 (RM13.80). The 8cm cigarette-like device can last half a day or the whole day, and its nicotine content is one-twentieth that of a regular cigarette.

With such stringent actions, Japan’s smoking rate is expected to drop further.

Tobacco-related products under fire

Anti-tobacco activists spread out around the Minnesota Capitol Wednesday in an effort to convince lawmakers to ban products they say are designed to hook children on nicotine.

A bill due up for a legislative committee hearing Thursday would forbid sale of “e-cigarettes,” designed to give users nicotine vapor without tobacco. The bill also would classify “little cigars” as cigarettes.

“The new products, they are sneaky,” said Dr. Mary Boylan of St. Luke’s Cardiothoracic Surgery Associates in Duluth, who spoke at the rally with about 150 people.

Those at the rally, including many young people, talked to legislators about making the changes to a law that already bans tobacco use in public buildings.

“We will save more lives today than I can being in the operating room all day,” Boylan said about changing the law.

One of the new products, legal to sell now, resembled a breath strip, but the doctor said it provides a dose of addictive nicotine.

“They are under the radar screen,” she said.

DFL lawmakers seek

change in health plan

Some Democratic lawmakers want to change a health care program for the poor that was signed into law just three weeks ago Wednesday.

Rep. Tom Huntley, DFL-Duluth, and others announced Wednesday they have a plan to provide permanent health care to poor adults with no children other than the new General Assistance Medical Care program. The plan would take $1 billion of state money to be matched with $1 billion of federal money.

Patients would move off of GAMC onto a newly expanded Medical Assistance Program, and some MinnesotaCare insurance recipients also would move to the new program.

Huntley said the new program would allow rural hospitals to receive better funding when they provide care for the poor. Most rural hospitals would not participate in the new GAMC program, citing its high cost.

But Gov. Tim Pawlenty’s spokesman said Huntley’s plan is based on incomplete tentative information and would cost too much. Brian McClung said the new GAMC program, negotiated between legislative health leaders and the governor, should be given a chance to work before it is scrapped.

Also, McClung said: “There is a significant math problem with this proposal.”

McClung claimed that the Huntley plan was built on use of money from a fund that would be in deficit.

ERA again

An equal rights amendment to the Minnesota constitution is being considered, as it has every year since the federal ERA took effect in 1982.

A Senate committee discussed the matter Wednesday, but took no action. It was unclear if the proposed amendment would be brought up for a vote in the month the Legislature has remaining in its 2010 session.

The amendment proposal would require people be treated the same, regardless of gender.

Refund party

If Dairy Queen’s Blizzard can celebrate its 25th birthday, the Minnesota property tax refund program can do the same, Rep. Paul Marquart, DFL-Dilworth, said.

So, as chairman of the House property taxes committee, he hosted that party Wednesday in an attempt to draw attention to the program, which a third of eligible taxpayers do not collect.

“It helps people stay in their homes,” Marquart said.

Sitting behind a “happy birthday” sign, Former Gov. Wendell Anderson said that his signing of the bill, combined with raising taxes a few years earlier, “made Minnesota in the minds of others, the state that works.”

Alec Olson of Willmar, Senate president when the refund passed, said the concept was “rather radical,” but the program “has brought people together.”

The average property tax refund in 2008 was $683.

Also celebrated was a related program, which provides money to renters.

BAT predicts global cigarette consumption to stay stable

British American Tobacco (BAT) on Friday forecast that the world's consumption of cigarettes was likely to remain fairly stable at 6 trillion cigarettes a year, one-third of which are sold in China.

The cigarette company, responsible for the Dunhill, Kent and Lucky Strike brands, plans to ensure it is well-placed to meet the needs of consumers, whether they are down-trading in times of recession or up-trading as the economic situation improves.

Six years ago, the UN conducted a study of the world's tobacco consumption and found that the number of smokers in the world was expected to grow from 1.1 billion in 1998 to about 1.3 billion this year, an increase of about 1.5 percent annually.

This is in direct contrast to BAT's estimations in its latest annual report, which states that the global legal market had shown a decline in consumption by 1.5 percent annually over the long term.

BAT chief executive Paul Adams said trends indicated that individual smokers would consume fewer cigarettes each and smaller percentages of populations would smoke.

"However, offsetting these trends, the number of adults in the world over the age of 20 continues to grow," he said.

He said volume declines had been evident in a number of markets last year and BAT expected global volumes to remain under pressure this year.
"We estimate that the global legal market, excluding China, fell by 3 percent last year compared with its long-term trend of declining 1.5 percent," he said.

But pricing had remained positive, and the global profit pool was expected to continue to grow.

"In many key markets, legal volumes have been affected as consumers move to illicit products," Adams said.

He said illicit trade in tobacco products - smuggled, counterfeit or tax evaded - was in effect one of the company's major global competitors and represented nearly 12 percent of world consumption.

BAT reported a gross turnover of £40.7 billion (R447bn) for last year. Adams reported that acquisitions continued to play a part in its growth strategy and explained that its latest acquisition - Bentoel in Indonesia - gave the group a strong position in the fourth-largest cigarette market.

The UN in its report predicted that more tobacco would be smoked in developing countries, where tobacco consumption was expected to grow to 5.09 million tons this year from 4.2 million in 1998.

City Tries to Shut Club It Says Flouts Smoking Ban

The Bloomberg administration is moving closer to shutting one of the largest and busiest nightclubs in the city, as part of an aggressive new strategy to revoke the operating licenses of clubs that health officials believe promote smoking.
The nightclub, the M2 UltraLounge on West 28th Street in Manhattan, went on trial last week at a special administrative court that the city uses when it seeks to take away property. If the case against the club succeeds, it would be the first time the city had closed a business solely for flouting a ban on smoking.

City officials have also moved to take several other clubs before the court, seeking to revoke their food and beverage licenses. It has been an open secret for years among the late-night set that there is a network of so-called smoke-easies throughout the city, from little neighborhood dives to glossy, exclusive boîtes, that let patrons smoke illegally.

Health department officials say that the vast majority of businesses comply with the 2002 law forbidding smoking in clubs and bars, but that inspectors have struggled to enforce it at a handful of high-end places that seem to market themselves as smoker-friendly, some even offering loose cigarettes for sale.

Generally, health officials have looked for signs of active tobacco use as part of their inspections concerning other rules, like those for food safety, and have cited clubs for violations that often result in fines of $200 to $2,000.

But they have had difficulty gaining access to the clubs when patrons are actually smoking.

“Some of the clubs where smoking is going on tend to be very, very cool clubs, and a bunch of guys showing up in jackets tend to be very, very uncool,” said Thomas Merrill, general counsel for the health department.

So in recent months, the department has deputized a team of inspectors — many of them younger and hipper-looking than the stereotypical bureaucrat — to work into the wee hours, posing as patrons and hunting for tolerance of smoking by clubs’ employees.

Because the inspectors found many instances of patrons smoking without being asked to stop, the department petitioned the administrative court, the Office of Administrative Trials and Hearings, known as OATH, to recommend revoking the food and beverage licenses of 16 bars and clubs.

“We found places with repeated nights of smoking, with sort of flagrant violations — selling cigarettes, clearly creating an atmosphere in which smoking appeared to be tolerated or even welcomed,” said Daniel Kass, the acting deputy commissioner for environmental health. “Those places are clearly not responding to the idea that we’re going to fine them periodically for violations.”

Five of the clubs have settled with the city, typically agreeing to devise a plan for correction and to pay for any violations, health officials said.

In all but one of the cases, if inspectors find indications of continued smoking during the next year, they can immediately shut the club down and bring it to trial.

Two clubs closed for other reasons, and most of the rest, including the downtown spots Lit Lounge, the Box, Tenjune and Southside, are weighing possible settlements against a looming trial date, city officials said.

The M2 case has gone the furthest. The administrative law judge hearing the case, Alessandra F. Zorgniotti, will make a ruling that will serve as a recommendation to the health commissioner, Dr. Thomas A. Farley.

In the trial, which could end as early as Thursday, the city has introduced photos of people with cigarette packs on their tables or with burning cigarettes held aloft on the dance floor.

One inspector testified that a bouncer told her she could smoke in a back area near an exit door; another said he was able to buy a loose cigarette for $2 from a collection of items for sale in the men’s bathroom.

But lawyers for the club say the city’s case is flawed, arguing that the undercover inspectors could not know whether the staff had tried to get patrons to stop smoking. The club, which has been under new management since July, submitted reports showing that bouncers had ejected at least two patrons for smoking, and Robert Bookman, a lawyer representing M2, said it had fired the two employees who had been selling loose cigarettes in the bathroom.

“The law is being misconstrued by the health department purposely to make it sound like it’s an automatic violation for a club having a patron smoking on their premises,” Mr. Bookman said. “All the law says is that we have to make a good-faith effort to inform patrons that they were breaking the law, and not with a nod and a wink.”

He added that investigators had found only a few smokers on each of their visits to the club, which can hold thousands of people. “Not only do the numbers bear out that this is not a smoking lair,” he said, “but it shows that they are in fact doing what they’re supposed to do.”

Mr. Bookman also criticized the city for not going after the smokers themselves, saying that officials were accusing employees of doing what the inspectors do when they see smoking, “which is not doing anything.”

Health officials contend that their obligation is to ensure that the clubs they license follow the law, and that cracking down on the clubs is a more effective deterrent. “The entity is the repeat offender,” Mr. Kass said. “On any given night there might be one person, or 2 people or 10 people or even way more than that, who on their own are welcomed to smoke or allowed to smoke, but they’re not necessarily back the next night.”

Senecas See Comeback Over Cigarette Sales

An article in the New York Times last week provides an overview of the Seneca Nation and its strength in opposing legislation that would ban mail-order cigarette sales.


The Senecas control a cigarette “empire” that generates more than $1 billion a year, and subsequent to House and Senate bills to block the shipment of cigarettes, they began a campaign of “back-room lobbying” that for now has derailed the legislation while sustaining the tribe’s cigarette business.


“Isn’t that the way things go in the American system?” asked Richard Nephew, co-chairman of the Seneca Nation’s foreign relations committee. “It is something new for us to actively get involved in the American political process, [b]ut we are trying to learn what works in America, and I guess making political contributions is something that works.”


In November 2009, the Senate Judiciary Committee passed unanimously the Prevent All Cigarette Trafficking (PACT) Act — a bill that closes gaps in current federal laws regulating “remote” or “delivery” sales of cigarettes and smokeless tobacco products. The bill enhances penalties for violations and provides law enforcement with new tools to combat the innovative methods being used by cigarette traffickers to distribute their products. NACS supports passage of the PACT Act and is a member of the Coalition to Stop Contraband Tobacco.


However, according to the New York Times, a handful of senators told party leaders privately that they were considering blocking the bill. The Senecas viewed this as a victory, which had suffered a setback five years ago when then-Attorney General Eliot Spitzer banned FedEx and UPS from delivering cigarettes, leading to a decline of roughly 60 percent of the Senecas’ sales volume.


Since then, the tribe has increased its lobbying presence in Washington, spending more than $300,000 last year in lobbying fees.


The lobbying effort has appeared to work, painting anti-mail order cigarette trade as a ploy by tobacco companies to scapegoat the Indians for teen smoking. Additionally, the Senecas warned that the ban could cost 1,000 jobs in the cigarette business.


By mid-December, the campaign had won two converts: Democratic New York Reps. Brian Higgins and Eric Massa, who have since urged Sens. Charles Schumer and Kristen Gillibrand to block a proposed Senate ban. “I do not believe that western New York can afford any more job losses,” Higgins wrote to the senators.


The Senecas have dedicated $1 million to fight New York officials whose proposals countered the tribe’s activities. In January, it approved an expenditure of $250,000 to oppose Sen. Gillibrand’s reelection campaign because she supports the PACT Act, according to the newspaper.


Meanwhile, not all New York legislators share the Senecas stance against the PACT Act. Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY) is the lead sponsor of the PACT Act in the House, H.R. 1676, which overwhelmingly passed the House by a 397-11 vote on May 21, 2009.


“We must crack down on the illegal sale of tobacco, which gives terrorists and criminals the ability to raise more money,” said Weiner during a press conference in November. “Every day we delay is another day that states lose significant amounts of tax revenue and kids have easy access to tobacco products sold over the Internet. I urge my colleagues in the Senate to pass the bipartisan PACT Act.”

Smoking is smoking

In an era of increasing awareness about the negative health effects of tobacco, it seems to me that we may be missing the boat on tobacco prevention in ways other than cigarette smoking and chew tobacco. With the help of Amendment 35 funding, Colorado has achieved tremendous success in the prevention of tobacco in our state in regard to cigarette smoking and tobacco use. From 2001 to 2008, Coloradans consumed 66.3 million fewer packs of cigarettes, Colorado’s high school smoking rate has dropped to 11.9 percent — well below the US Dept. of Health and Human Services Healthy People 2010 goal of 16 percent — 85 percent of Colorado’s homes have smoke-free home rules and the Colorado Quitline has enrolled 100,000 tobacco users in the past seven years.

Locally, we are seeing achievements being made that will help our community be healthier in regard to tobacco use. However, tobacco in any form is not a healthy product and much of the marketing from tobacco companies and retailers is targeted toward youth ensuring an ongoing consumer base. Once addicted, they may continue to purchase and use tobacco for a lifetime. Smokeless tobacco may not impose secondhand smoke on others, but it carries many of the same risks to the user as cigarettes.

As a community, our best defense and method of prevention is awareness and education for ourselves and especially our youth. Did you know that there are many additional tobacco products available in our local marketplace? These products are “sold cold,” “spitless,” flavored in “yummy” flavors and the packages are very appealing to males and females alike. The common component to all of these products is that they contain nicotine, are highly addictive, and can kill you if used as directed.

As for smoking, whether it be cigarettes, cigars, natural cigarettes or hookah, there is no safe form of smoking. Even all natural, herbal cigarettes produce harmful toxins when they burn and emit smoke. According to the CDC, during a one-hour hookah session, a hookah smoker may inhale 100 to 200 times the volume of smoke inhaled from a single cigarette. The American Lung Association has released a statement that “smoking hookah is not a safe alternative to smoking cigarettes.” Think of smoking as smoking, no matter what the form. And secondhand or even third-hand smoke exposures are proven environmental health hazards.

As a community health educator and registered nurse, I work with individuals who struggle to end their addiction to nicotine and see the damage that has been caused. Our youth have the opportunity to never start. If they never start, they never will have to quit. What an awesome gift we will be giving our children, our future generations. Tobacco is not a benign product in any form. As a community, we can help undo the damage that can be caused by tobacco. Early education to our youth and awareness for us all can change and improve all of our lives.

Cigarette tax hike draws fire

The Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids describes a $1 tax increase on cigarettes as a win-win-win scenario - a win for states' budgets, a win for health care and a political win.

According to a recent news release, raising West Virginia's tax on cigarettes by $1 from the current 55 cents would generate an additional $117.6 million annually, "keep 19,100 kids from becoming addicted smokers" and save about $475 million in health care costs over the short and long term.

While a national poll found 67 percent of voters of all stripes support a $1 tobacco tax increase, according to Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, West Virginia legislators from the tri-county are split on the proposal.

The Journal surveyed via e-mail the eight state delegates and four state senators representing Berkeley, Jefferson and Morgan counties. Of those who responded, five opposed the tax increase and three did not.

The Journal asked, "What do you think about raising the tax on cigarettes by $1, and do you think such a proposal would have any chance of passage in the West Virginia Legislature?"

Delegate Jonathan Miller, R-Berkeley, wrote:

"Raising the tobacco tax harms the poor. It is a tax increase on poor people, and during this recession, we definitely shouldn't be raising taxes on the poor.

"Poor people addicted to tobacco don't need to be punished for their addiction, and especially not during this recession.

"West Virginia state government collects plenty of tax money from its citizens. We don't need to collect any more money from our citizens, and we definitely don't need to soak the poor any more. Instead of raising taxes on poor people, we should spend our money wisely.

"If we want to spend taxpayer money in an attempt to reduce tobacco use, we should find a way to pay for that with the amount of money we have now, not raise taxes on the poor.

"Lastly, some will claim raising the tobacco tax is a way to stop people from smoking. Trying to stop people from using tobacco is not the purpose of government taxing its citizens. Government taxes people to pay for government services, not to coerce them to engage or not to engage in a particular activity. It is morally wrong for the government to use the force of taxation to manipulate people's behavior."

Delegate Craig Blair, R-Berkeley, responded:

"I applaud and support efforts to stop or discourage teen smoking. However, I have zero interest in voting for any tax or fee increase of any kind. Our economic times are tough for smokers and non-smokers alike. Government can and should be ran more efficiently rather than increase any tax burdens on consumers or business.

"Actually, I would entertain one exception, and that's to eliminate the food tax by increasing the tobacco tax. West Virginia smokers would actually see their additional tax returned via their savings when purchasing food. And, I'll admit that I'm not completely sold on this idea, but it's worthy of careful consideration.

"Also, it's always been my understanding that a $1 increase would generate $80 million in West Virginia, not $117 million. The food tax generates $25 million for every 1 percent of tax ($75 million). New Jersey thought tobacco tax revenues would increase but ended up with a loss of $30 million.

"Basically, when our state government stops wasting taxpayers' dollars on programs like prevailing wage, then and only then will I support any tax or fee increases to balance our state's budget."

Delegate Daryl Cowles, R-Morgan, replied:

"I do NOT support a tax increase on cigarettes in West Virginia at this time.

"It might be important to note the attorney general of West Virginia, Darrell McGraw, won a huge settlement from tobacco companies - an amount in excess of $800 million.

"This money was to be spent on prevention, education, cessation, health care costs of smokers, etc. over a 29-year period.

"The money was cashed-out by the Legislature for 50 cents on the dollar by selling bonds with the immediate proceeds used for bailing out retirement funds, teacher pensions and other unrelated programs.

"To now further tax smokers - after misappropriating their settlement award, granted on their behalf and due to their suffering - is simply not proper.

"The irony of the Legislature complaining about Darrell McGraw not sending other settlement monies to the Legislature for appropriation is interesting. But that is a story for another day."

Delegate John Overington, R-Berkeley, said:

"I would be opposed to the $1 cigarette tax increase unless there would be an equal or greater reduction elsewhere, such as a food tax reduction. We are increasing the penalty for selling to and possessing cigarettes for minors."

Delegate Walter Duke, R-Berkeley, responded in part:

"I do not think West Virginia could afford to raise the cigarette tax by an additional $1. I do not think it is good fiscal policy to link revenue with efforts to reduce the activity which brings in the revenue in the first place. It seems you would be working at cross purposes.

"I do support efforts (even spending of tax dollars) to get people to never start smoking and to get people to quit smoking."

In her response, Delegate Tiffany Lawrence, D-Jefferson, refers to a bill that was introduced Monday (Feb. 15) to ban smoking in the state Capitol, including lawmakers' offices:

"West Virginia has the second highest use of tobacco products in the nation. Due to this alarming statistic, I have long been an advocate of reform. As a member of the House Health and Human Resources Committee, I was a part of the discussion that took place yesterday surrounding this interesting debate. I do believe that this piece of legislation will spur more discussion as we move forth in the final weeks of the legislative session."

Delegate John Doyle, D-Jefferson, replied:

"I'm very much in favor of increasing the tax on tobacco products by at least that amount. Sadly, I think this effort has little chance of success in an election year."

Delegate Terry Walker, D-Jefferson, wrote succinctly, "This would have my support."

Chuck Hamsher, a spokesman for Coalition for a Tobacco-Free West Virginia, said specific poll results for West Virginia are not available, but that national poll results tend to reflect state results, although there are some variations from state to state.

The national survey of 847 registered voters was conducted from Jan. 20 to 24 by International Communications Research and has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.4 percentage points, according to the news release.

To quit, 'nicotine-free' smokes as good as lozenges

Trying to quit smoking? So-called nicotine-free cigarettes may be as helpful as nicotine lozenges, hints a small study.
Smokers who used the nicotine-free cigarettes before quitting were as likely not to be smoking six weeks later as those who used nicotine lozenges, authors report in the journal Addiction. (Such cigarettes actually have a tiny amount of nicotine.)
And nicotine-free cigarettes and the lozenges both beat low-nicotine cigarettes, Dr. Dorothy K Hatsukami, at the University of Minnesota Tobacco Use Research Center in Minneapolis, and colleagues note.
Nicotine-free cigarettes have 0.05 milligrams of nicotine per cigarette, while low-nicotine cigarettes each have 0.3 milligrams. For comparison, light cigarettes have between 0.7 and 1.0 milligrams of nicotine.
While scientists have tried various ways to reduce the amount of nicotine smokers inhale to help them cut down, they have been concerned that smokers may just smoke more cigarettes to make up for what they're missing.
The idea of nicotine-free cigarettes is to make that much less likely, because it would take so many such cigarettes.
Hatsukami's team compared smoking habits and rates of quitting in 165 mostly middle-age men and women who had smoked for an average of about 15 years, reported multiple previous attempts to quit, and appeared highly motivated to try again.
The investigators supplied nicotine-free cigarettes to 53 participants and identical looking low-nicotine cigarettes to another 52. Each group was to solely smoke supplied cigarettes for 6 weeks, then quit. The remaining participants went cold turkey and used nicotine lozenges for 6 weeks.
Urine and lung tests in those who completed the study showed 19 in the nicotine-free group and 12 in the lozenge group abstinent after 6 weeks. Just 7 in the low-nicotine group were not smoking at that point.
Compared with the low-nicotine group, the nicotine-free smokers had lower levels of tobacco-related toxins and symptoms of withdrawal, though both groups reported similar cravings.
As scientists have suspected, low-nicotine cigarette smokers were more likely to compensate their withdrawal by smoking more cigarettes. Nicotine-free cigarette smokers were not.
Although nicotine-free cigarettes "can be used potentially as a cessation tool," the authors note, the results from this one small study aren't enough to suggest that smokers should use nicotine-free cigarettes instead of nicotine lozenges, Hatsukami told Reuters Health by email.
Part of what limits the conclusions scientists can draw from the study is that a third of the smoking group and half the lozenge dropped out during the course of it.
Still, the results are "encouraging," write Mitch Zeller and Saul Shiffman of Pinney Associates, Bethesda, Maryland, in an accompanying editorial, and should be followed up to explore "how nicotine reduction might affect smokers."
Pinney has consulted for GlaxoSmithKline, which has a smoking control division. Members of the study team have served as expert witnesses in lawsuits against tobacco companies, and have consulted for various drug companies.

No Booze, Cigarettes, or Fancy Cars for Welfare Recipients -- if State Representative Frank Antenori Has Anything to Say About it

Welfare recipients may want to hurry up and buy that Bentley they've been saving up for because -- if state Representative Frank Antenori has his way -- there soon will be restrictions on how much money people receiving government assistance can spend on cars and other items.
Antenori introduced HB 2770, which would prohibit welfare recipients from not only using their money to purchase expensive cars but from "consuming or purchasing alcoholic beverages, tobacco products, or illegal drugs."
Awesome. Now we can expect 40-year-old welfare recipients to be hanging out outside of gas stations playing "hey mister" to get a pack of Newports.
The bill would limit the amount of money a welfare recipient could spend on a car to $5,000, as well as limit him or her to only subscribing to basic cable and cell phone services (but only if the cell phone is the recipient's only phone).
Welfare getters may want to hurry up and buy that 72-inch plasma TV, too. If the bill becomes law, folks on government assistance would only be allowed to spend $300 on a boob tube.
If someone needs the government's help to provide the basics like food and clothing, do we really have to worry about them spending gobs of government loot (they are only doled out pittances in this state, for Christ's sake) on fancy cars and TVs. Cigarettes and booze maybe (we would sure want to stay as drunk as possible if we were on welfare). And, Representative Antenori, meth's already illegal to purchase.
We called Antenori to see how the hell the government is supposed to enforce this proposed law, but he hasn't gotten back to us.
Oh, we forgot to say what political party Antenori's in. Nevermind, it's obvious.

Smoking was a part of life

I received the first two seasons of the television series "Mad Men" as a birthday present last August. The show is set in the 1960s and is centered on a New York advertising agency. It has taken me nearly five months to finish the first season, since watching television is a rare indulgence. But "Mad Men" is a very smart show and a set piece that seems, at least to me, to capture the look and feel of big-city life in the early 1960s.

One of the first things that caught my eye was everybody smoked cigarettes. Everywhere and all the time. People smoked at the table before they ate dinner, between courses and while clearing the table. In the 1960s the "little woman" cleared the table while the men repaired to the living room for drinks and more cigarettes. At least on "Mad Men," they do.

The men and women of "Mad Men" smoke in their offices, at meetings, on the subway and of course at the three-martini lunches that apparently were commonplace then. I have never partaken of three martinis, for lunch or at anytime. I am certain that a nap would be immediately required if I did.

A memoirist's piece in the New Yorker the other day reminded me of my own smoky milieau. He was revisiting childhood haunts hoping to catch olfactory memories and recalls the housekeeper ironing his dad's shirts with a cigarette hanging from her mouth. Thing is, those of us of a certain age — say approaching the double-nickel such as yours truly — grew up in smoke-filled rooms, though probably not to the extremes as in "Mad Men," where everything is viewed through a veil of smoked-exhaled gauze.

Both of my parents smoked until I was a teenager, when they kicked it. Growing up, we boys dodged cigarette ashes flicked out the window that flew back in through the open windows into the back seat in our Ford Falcon, which didn't have air-conditioning. That amenity wasn't required in New Hampshire in the early 1960s. My maternal grandfather smoked a pipe. Nearly all my aunts and uncles smoked. I started out smoking grapevine at age 10 or so but didn't take up nicotine until graduate school. More on that later.

I even made my mom an ashtray at camp one year, gave her a store-bought on another occasion. Apparently I lacked imagination in the gift-giving department. When I joined the workforce, at this newspaper in the late 1960s, folks smoked everywhere, and they did at subsequent places I worked. I spent a few years in college (and many more years later in life) at the Daily Sentinel in Nacogdoches, working as a photographer.

I'm not sure the old downtown office could have operated without tobacco smoke. Publisher Vic Fain wandered around puffing on his cigar as our late-morning deadline beckoned, back when the Sentinel was an afternoon paper. Daddy Bear Weaver, who pasted up the pages, had his own cigar going. I think he smoked a considerably cheaper vintage than Vic's. All the fellows shooting the page negatives or burning the plates were smoking cigarettes or chewing tobacco. The advertising manager checked ad proofs while puffing on a pipe.

About then I took up the habit, I am sorry to say, as much out of defense as anything else. I smoked a pipe for years, which I'm certain made me look terribly foolish. Then it was on to a closet cigarette habit after which I went through years of stopping and starting. It is a tough addiction to break. I fully empathize with anyone who tries to do so.

Over time, smoking indoors finally became something that simply is not done, thank goodness, except in one's own home — and even then fairly rarely. I have one friend who smokes inside his house. He's elderly, set in his ways and has been given permission from his doctor. His company, intellect, conversation and sense of humor are worth having to Febreze my clothes when I leave.

I gave up smoking many years ago and only rarely miss it — but never enough to start back, even when I watch "Mad Men." I wonder sometimes how we all managed to breathe during those years of living in a cloudy haze of tobacco smoke — especially those folks who never took up the habit. But we did survive, some of us even to a ripe old age.

Earnings Preview: Reynolds American Inc.

Reynolds American Inc. reports its fourth-quarter and full-year results on Thursday. The following is a summary of key developments and analyst opinion related to the period.
OVERVIEW: The nation's second-biggest cigarette company, Reynolds sells Camel, Pall Mall and Natural American Spirit cigarettes and it owns American Snuff Co., which makes Kodiak and Grizzly brand smokeless tobacco.
Reynolds, based in Winston-Salem, N.C., said in October that tax increases and the tough economy cut the volume of cigarettes it shipped by 11 percent.
For the fiscal year that ended Dec. 31, Reynolds American forecast annual profit of $4.60 to $4.70 per share. Analysts on average predict earnings of $4.69 per share on $8.39 billion in revenue.
Last week, Richmond, Va.-based Altria Group Inc., owner of the biggest U.S. cigarette maker — Philip Morris USA, which sells Marlboro cigarettes, Black & Mild cigars and Copenhagen and Skoal smokeless tobacco products — reported that raising prices on cigarettes and cigars and cutting costs helped its fourth-quarter profit climb 7 percent even as cigar and cigarette volumes fell.
BY THE NUMBERS: For the fourth quarter, analysts surveyed by Thomson Reuters on average expect Reynolds American to post a profit of $1.11 per share on revenue of $2.07 billion. A year earlier, it earned 89 cents per share, on revenue of $2.18 billion.
ANALYST TAKE: Credit Suisse analyst Thilo Wrede wrote in a Jan. 19 that he expects Reynolds' promotion of Pall Mall to help offset declines in its other brands. Reynolds is promoting Pall Mall as longer-lasting and more affordable.
Wrede said Altria's promotion of Copenhagen Wintergreen smokeless tobacco could hurt Reynolds' Grizzly smokeless brand. Altria introduced Copenhagen Wintergreen in many states at prices lower than Grizzly sells for.
WHAT'S AHEAD: Wall Street will watch how growing scrutiny from the Food and Drug Administration, new federal marketing restrictions and the need to spend more on promotions affect tobacco companies.Reynolds joined Lorillard Inc. and smaller tobacco companies to sure the government over several of the new restrictions. A federal judge overturned two.
STOCK PERFORMANCE: During the fourth quarter, Reynolds shares rose 19.3 percent to $52.97. Over the last 52 weeks, the stock has traded between $31.55 and $55.15.

Plan To Ban Logos From Cigarette Packets

Cigarettes could be sold in plain packets under new plans to halve the number of people who smoke.
Health Secretary Andy Burnham pledged to reduce the number of nicotine addicts from eight to four million in the next 10 years.
He said: "Now that we've banned advertising and will soon see an end to attractive displays in shops, the only remaining method of advertising tobacco is the packaging.
"So we will carefully consider whether there is evidence for making tobacco companies use plain packets."The packs would just show the brand name in text.
The Government also wants to target the estimated 200,000 young people who take up smoking every year.
Mr Burnham said: "Government should and will do everything in its power to protect young people.
"One day, in the not-too-distant future, we'll look back and find it hard to remember why anyone ever smoked in the first place."
But smokers' lobby group Forest said the plans would lead to more laws and would "further erode our ability to choose how we wish to live our lives".
Other commitments to be announced by the Government include a review of the law to consider whether or not entrances to buildings should be included in the smoking ban, and clamping down on tobacco vending machines.

Kiwis want cigarettes banned by 2020

Half the nation, including smokers, support completely banning cigarettes within 10 years, a study has found.
The 2008 Health and Lifestyles Survey compiled nationwide interviews from the Health Sponsorship Council of 1608 people, including 422 smokers, and has just been published in the NZ Medical Journal.
It found 49.8% of people agreed cigarettes should no longer be sold in New Zealand in 10 years, 30.3% disagreed and 19.9% neither agreed nor disagreed. Of the smokers surveyed, 26.2% agreed and 55.3% disagreed.
The study also showed public support for plain, unbranded cigarette packets and fewer tobacco retailers.
Pacific Islanders, in particular, showed strong support for the measures.
One of the study's authors, Dr George Thomson, from the University of Otago, Wellington, called on the Government to take action.
"There's now a need for politicians to embrace and act on the idea of a foreseeable and planned end to tobacco sales through a predicable timetable by 2020. The public wants more defined action to reduce smoking, and not a series of incremental steps."

GFD, Andersen Firefighters Join To Put Out Big Yigo Grass Fire

GFD Spokesman Joey San Nicolas says no homes had to be evacuated and no one was injured, but the flames consumed more than 5 acres of brush before it was finally extinguished about 2pm.
GFD engines 4 and 10 from Dededo and Yigo responded to the fire and GFD requested support from Andersen Air Force Base which, according to a release, dispatched 16 firefighters, two medics, three Security Forces Squadron personnel and one Navy helicopter to help put out the fire.
GFD's San Nicolas reminds residents that this is the dry season, and people should be cautious, and not thrown lit cigarettes out of their windows as well as avoid burning waste in their yards.
“Emergencies aren’t pre-planned events,” said Joey San Nicolas, Fire Service Specialist with Guam Fire Department. “Mutual aid is critical and today’s event highlights a long history the base and GFD have of working together.”

Fall in supply of illegal cigarettes

THERE was a significant drop in the number of contraband cigarettes seized in 2009 compared to 2008.
Singapore Customs (SC) seized 2.9 million duty-unpaid cigarettes in 2009 - almost 40 per cent less than the 4.6 million in 2008.
SC also observed that syndicates distributing contraband cigarettes had to resort to more elaborate and cunning methods of concealing their contraband goods.
These syndicates also brought in smaller quantities of illegal cigarette supplies to minimise chances of detection.
This was a stark contrast to tactics used in 2008.
Examples of more elaborate methods of concealment encountered in 2009 include hiding the illegal goods within plastic film rolls and cementing pockets of cigarettes into concrete slabs.
In 2009, SC successfully crippled three major contraband cigarettes smuggling syndicates - two in January 2009 and one in December 2009.
Thirteen members from these groups were arrested and prosecuted.
The eradication of the larger players in the black market resulted in a cut in illegal cigarette supplies to the local market.
The price difference between legitimate cigarettes and duty-unpaid cigarettes in the region remain high, and so international syndicates still find it lucrative to take advantage of the large price gaps to continue illegal distribution of contraband cigarettes to Singapore.
SC says it will maintain its vigilance and continue with enforcement efforts to eradicate such organised crimes.

Cigarette tax hike could lead to more smuggling

A recent increase in the private consumption tax (ÖTV) on cigarettes may lead to more cigarettes being smuggled into Turkey from neighboring regions and a consequent drop in the country's tax revenues.According to the corporate relations director of British American Tobacco, Tuna Turagay, speaking to the Anatolia news agency, the recent ÖTV hike has scared tobacco producers, as it may create further incentive to smuggle cigarettes from neighboring countries. While a pack of cigarettes costs TL 7 in Turkey (3.3 euros), it costs 1.13 euros in Syria and about 1 euro in Turkey's eastern neighbors. In Western European nations such as France, Spain, England and Germany, a pack of cigarettes ranges from 3.75 euros to 6.9 euros in England.
The share of smuggled cigarettes in total cigarette consumption in Turkey was 7 percent in 2007, meaning a tax revenue loss of $1 billion. This share is 27 percent in England “despite the fact that it is an island nation,” said Turagay. If Turkey were to have a similar percentage of smuggled cigarettes, the amount of tax revenue lost could be over $4 billion. He added that smuggled cigarettes make up 50 percent of the total in Quebec, Canada, and 36 percent in Malaysia, due partly to high prices of cigarettes in these areas. Turagay revealed that this figure was as high as 20 percent in eastern regions of Turkey and that they feared smuggling would spread into larger metropolitan cities such as Ankara and İstanbul.
Turagay also stated that these price increases would hurt the poor the most, noting that before the ÖTV hike, a smoker would spend 19 percent of the minimum wage on cigarette consumption, while this would swell to 23 percent with the tax increase. “It’s not easy for everyone to stop smoking, and with wages as they are, it’s much more attractive to consume smuggled goods. This is our main concern,” said Turagay.
Turagay called on the government and the cigarette industry to work hand-in-hand to address this issue and stated that the public should be informed about the risks involved in buying smuggled cigarettes. Recalling that every pack of cigarettes is approved by the Tobacco and Alcohol Market Regulatory Agency (TAPDK) before being put on the shelves, he said: “Smuggled cigarettes are not approved or tested by any agency [in Turkey]. This is risky for consumers. Therefore, the government, the private sector and the public need to fight this problem together.”

Smoking Everywhere Electronic Cigarettes Defeats the FDA

Due to the efforts of Smoking Everywhere, Inc., American consumers will continue to have access to an electronic cigarette.
On January 14, 2010, Federal Court Judge Richard Leon ruled in favor of Smoking Everywhere, Inc., the industry leader who brought suit against the FDA and the Department of Health and Human Services.
Smoking Everywhere's contention was that it was unlawful to prevent the continued import of electronic cigarettes into the United States, something which the FDA believed was within its power to do.
“This is a huge victory for the American consumer,” said Smoking Everywhere's Vice President Ray Story. “Now this product will be readily available, just like conventional cigarettes. Consumers will be able to purchase the electronic cigarette as a smoking alternative, wherever they can find conventional cigarettes.”
Story said that because the electronic cigarette doesn't use tobacco and, therefore, has no carcinogens, tar, and “thousands” of other harmful chemicals, there is no second or third-hand smoke, which statistics say kills about 15,000 people annually.
Story openly theorized why the FDA would be against the import of such a product.
“My guess is that it has something to do with ‘big tobacco' ruling the roost,” he said.
Smoking Everywhere is the largest retailer of the electronic cigarette, a product that's been available for over three years. Story said his company has been a retailer for about a year, but the FDA's import ban took up about nine months of that time, limiting the product's availability.
The electronic cigarette delivers nicotine, but none of the other major harmful ingredients in cigarettes, not the least of which is the presence of the deadly second and third-hand smoke. And there's another way the product will save lives, according to Story.
“Texas has a law that went into effect on January 1 that mandates that all cigarettes sold in the state must be ‘fire safe compliant', or FSC,” Story said. “In other words, an FSC cigarette must be designed to go out if it's not being actively smoked, reducing the risk of an accidental fire. Smoking Everywhere's electronic cigarette can be smoked without being a fire hazard,” he added.
Story said that with Judge Leon's decision being rendered, his company will quickly begin to broker agreements with major chains and department stores in the United States to begin carrying the electronic cigarette.
“We should be good to go by the second quarter of this year,” Story said of the presence of electronic cigarettes in major retail outlets.

On top of old smokey

Stroll with me, if you will, down memory lane all the way back to December of 1996 when I was nearly eighteen and feeling quite rebellious. You see, I'd spent years being a goody-two shoes, church-going teenager, and I was ready to break the shackles and live it up.
My parents had friends visiting from the UK, and one of them had bought a carton of cigarettes - Benson and Hedges Special Filter - and in the folly of my youth I decided that smoking would be a great way to make me appear cooler than I actually was. So I stole a packet from the carton and lit my very first smoke.
Twelve years later, I was still puffing away - in fact by that stage I was close to a pack-a-day smoker. I loved smoking, I was good at it, and it pretty much ruled my life. Smoking was my best buddy... oh the laughs we would have!
Then, a year ago today I smoked my last cigarette.
I woke up on the morning on January 18, 2009, and decided that the last cigarette in the packet would be my last cigarette full stop. And it was.
I'd finally had enough of stinking like ciggies, and feeling crap when I woke up. I didn't like the idea that smoking had such control over me, and of course I was frightened of the long-term effects on my health.
Looking back on the entry I wrote at the time of giving up it's obvious I wasn't entirely confident I'd be able to see this quitting thing through, so sitting here a year later, still smoke-free, makes me feel quite proud that I've managed to stay off the ciggies.
Don't worry, I'm not going to get on my high horse about smoking - there's not much worse than an ex-smoker suddenly getting all self-righteous and up in the grills of their friends who still smoke. Sure, I'm pleased I quit, but if you want to carry on smoking then go for it. I might even be a wee bit jealous of you.
Really, I just wanted to take a moment to stop and smell the roses (now that I can) and say "Woo! Look at me! I managed to quit smoking and it's been a whole year since my last cigarette."
Quitting is hard - and anyone who has never smoked really cannot understand what it's like to be addicted and try to break that habit. If you are thinking of quitting, I have just this one piece of advice for you. Wait until you're ready. If you quit because you feel like you should, rather than because you want to, you'll pick up another cigarette and then feel like a failure. You'll know when the time is right, and no one else can make that decision for you.
Have you ever smoked and managed to quit? If so, do you have any words of advice or encouragement for those who are considering giving up? What about those of you who don't smoke - what do you make of friends and family who do?

Tobacco tax hike could backfire

Should they turn their gaze northward, state legislators looking to increase tobacco taxes by as much as $1 per pack will discover a cautionary tale.
One recent report out of Canada suggests that 48 percent of cigarettes consumed in Ontario, for example, come from smuggling — a rate that has increased and decreased with excise tax rates.
Our own research indicates that, if the $1-per-pack tax increase is adopted in Washington, the state’s cigarette smuggling rate will leap to more than 50 percent of the total market, along with other very expensive unintended consequences.
As recently as 1980, cigarette tax rates in Canada were in the same range as in most U.S. states. In a book published in 2000, “Tobacco Control in Developing Countries,” several economists describe how this changed beginning in the early 1980s. By 1994, Canadian federal and provincial cigarette taxes had been increased to “more than five times the U.S. average.”
As a result, smuggling accounted for 30 percent of the market by 1993. To combat this, Canada’s federal government (and some provinces) slashed cigarette tax rates in 1994. As predicted, legal sales rose dramatically and “the overall smuggling problem all but disappeared.”
The economics lesson didn’t stick, however. By 1998, Canada’s politicians were once again increasing cigarette taxes, widening the gap between their rates and most American taxing jurisdictions. As a result, Canada began experiencing renewed and rampant cigarette smuggling.
In March 2009, the Center for Public Integrity described Canada as having “a runaway black market,” complete with brazen heists from tobacco farmers, mobster- and gang-related crime, and even violence against police.
Of course, these unintended consequences are not limited to Canada. Examples of theft, violence and organized crime involvement in the illicit cigarette trade are reported with great frequency here in the United States, too.
In December 2008 we published a study with colleague Patrick Fleenor, titled “titled “Cigarette Taxes and Smuggling: A Statistical Analysis and Historical Review,” designed to measure the smuggling rates of 47 contiguous states. We recently updated the model to include changes to the Federal Excise Tax.
Based on that model, we believe that hiking taxes $1 per pack will lead to a leap in the total smuggling rate in Washington from 39.3 percent to 51.5 percent. That is, 51.5 percent of the cigarettes smoked in the state of Washington will be contraband.
We also expect legal paid sales to drop by at least 20 percent over 12 months following the tax hike, but as a direct result of smuggling, not from people quitting smoking. Research shows that as much as 85 percent of the after tax-increase change in cigarette sales is a function of tax avoidance — as opposed to smoking avoidance. The smuggling will occur in two major forms: casual and commercial.
Casual smuggling typically involves individual bargain hunters shopping for themselves or perhaps a friend over the state border or perhaps on the Internet.
Commercial smuggling involves large-scale organizations that ship semi-tractor trailers and vans long distances and maintain complex distribution systems.
Our estimates indicate that nearly 30 percent of the smuggling will come from these commercial haulers. It’s worth noting that some of the trailers are actually hijacked from underneath legitimate truckers themselves.
Anyone familiar with the history of alcohol prohibition knows that much of the booze consumed in the states then was brought in illegally from Canada. Today’s policymakers are engaging in a form of “prohibition by price” — making cigarettes effectively illegal by raising their costs — so we’re reliving many of the unintended consequences of that era.
Consider some parallels: violence against police, corruption of law enforcement, the sale of adulterated products manufacturerd by illegal producers (“bathtub smokes,” anyone?), smuggling, theft, hijacking, expansion of organized crime syndicates and even the sale of “loosies” – cigarettes illegally sold one stick at a time. (During Prohibition, men would sell single shots of whiskey to factory workers leaving manufacturing plants in the Detroit area.)
If state lawmakers wish to hike cigarette taxes, they must do so with the knowledge that the new rate is likely to generate a fraction of the new revenues they suspect and much more in the way of crime.
Today’s cigarette smuggling issues — on both sides of the U.S.-Canadian border — are the product of an addiction: Politicians addicted to the tax revenue generated by the sale of a legal product that people want.
Michael D. LaFaive is director of the Morey Fiscal Policy Initiative at the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, a research and educational institute headquartered in Midland, Mich. Todd Nesbit is a Penn State economist and Mackinac Center adjunct scholar.