Tobacco.org

EDITORIAL: Overall, a good Utah Legislature session  

We also applaud Gov. Gary Herbert who, in the end, compromised on his opposition to an increase in the cigarette tax, approving one that amounts to $1 more per pack. That will raise a nominal amount of money. More importantly, it will keep some of the state's young people from ever smoking, and it will bring the state more in line with tobacco taxes elsewhere in the country.

Jump to full article »

EDITORIAL: Smoking Cessation: Presidential Health Care 

According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, tobacco use adds "more than $96 billion per year in medical expenditures and another $97 billion per year resulting from lost productivity."

President Obama can do the math: The combined $193 billion per year is nearly twice the projected annual cost of his national health care reform plan.

For the sake of his long-term health and his political agenda, Obama should kick the smoking habit. . . .

As a president, as a parent, and as a role model for millions of Americans, Obama should head to the nearest ashtray and stub out his habit for good.

Our "yes we can" president needs to prove that, yes, he can stop smoking.

Jump to full article »

EDITORIAL: Smoking debate smolders as students choose to butt out 

The fiery debate of smoking on the University of Cincinnati's campus has been stoked by a recent poll on the UC Blackboard Web site. The poll was sponsored by Student Government in conjunction with the student group Colleges Against Cancer.

The results were overwhelming, indicating 64.34 percent of the 6,102 students responding favor a non-smoking UC campus.

While the thought of a smoke-free UC campus is appealing, a tremendous amount of work needs to be done by the student body before attempting to institute a no-smoking policy, including enforcing the current rules UC has in place. . . .

Laziness on the part of the UC community to stand by its current policy is not a reason to create a new one. If the policy is truly put in action and is still found to be troublesome, then discussions concerning a new policy can begin.

There is an old saying: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." Unfortunately, the current UC policy hasn't been used enough to even be broken, let alone fixed.

Student Government should poll students again, asking students in favor of a non-smoking policy if they have actually addressed violators of the current UC rules.

It is easy to answer a poll feigning indignity at smoking on campus and demand a new policy. It's a lot harder to stand up and support what you already have, which is what the UC student body should do before calling for a new policy.

Jump to full article »

EDITORIAL: Park commission should snuff out its own cigar plan 

Which makes it puzzling why the Somerset County Park Commission wants to start selling cigars at its five courses.

Even more bewildering is that the decision to start selling cigars comes after the park commission was criticized in a 2007 independent report for not collecting sales tax on cigars. That caused the park commission to stop selling cigars.

"I think it's a terrible development," Freeholder Director Jack Ciattarelli said about selling cigars at the golf courses. "And the notion of government being in the business of selling tobacco on recreational grounds is awful."

Ciattarelli said he will ask County Counsel Thomas Miller to determine whether it's legally permissible for a governmental agency to sell tobacco products on county-owned property.

But even if it's legal, is it proper? . . .

The park commission has the admirable goal of improving the quality of life for Somerset County residents and it does a very good job working toward that goal. But selling tobacco products is directly contrary to that goal.

Let's hope the park commission scrambles from the rough and gets back on the fairway by rejecting this proposal.

Jump to full article »

EDITORIAL: Exposure to tobacco smoke  

Five years have passed since the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control went into effect (Feb. 27, 2005). The FCTC, the first treaty negotiated under the auspices of the World Health Organization, has 168 parties and covers 86 percent of the world population. Nevertheless, tobacco products remain the cause of serious health damage, including cancer and cardiac and pulmonary diseases, and hampers fetal growth.

On Feb. 25, the health ministry issued a notice to prefectural and municipal governments, calling on them to make public spaces nonsmoking areas in principle. . . .

There is resistance to a total ban on smoking from operators of drinking places and inns and hotels where drinking parties are held. But they should be aware that there are many customers who do not want to be exposed to tobacco smoke.

Importantly, the notice underlines the need to disseminate information on health damage from tobacco based on evidence. It also calls on smokers to be aware that they are exposing other people to tobacco smoke. Health minister Akira Nagatsuma said that after judging the effects of the notice, the government will decide whether stronger steps are needed. Ideally, heightened public awareness will lead to the proliferation of smoke-free places.

Jump to full article »

EDITORIAL: In praise of … presidential smoking  

perhaps it's better for Obama to have the odd puff if the alternative is keeping all that stress bottled up inside. When it comes to presidents and smoking, we ought to lighten up – and let them light up.

Jump to full article »

EDITORIAL: Smoking exemptions 

since the Sunflower State already has thrown millions at neighboring states that approved gambling years ago, the majority of legislators apparently don't want to give any more away.

Why the state gets to protect its cash flow while prohibiting bars and restaurants from doing the same defies imagination -- and constitutional muster, for that matter.

Yet lawmakers cling to their good-health position. "You'll be able to tell your children when you go home that you voted for clean air for Kansas," said Rep. Charles Roth, R-Salina.

Except for the air in every fifth hotel or motel room. . . .

This is a law that will not be universally applied. The exemptions to this law were not derived from philosophical concerns, any sense of fairness or one shred of common sense.

Special interest groups, lobbying entities and money drive the process. Legislators who don't go with the program don't get re-elected.

We only can hope the judiciary branch will receive a prompt challenge from any equally deserving business which was exempted from the exemptions. This farce masquerading as law should be struck down before July 1, when it is supposed to take effect.

Jump to full article »

EDITORIAL: State smoking ban 

Hutchinson has had a citywide smoking ban in some public places that seemingly has worked flawlessly. Now, a ban that would cover the whole state would pre-empt Hutchinson's ordinance.

Hutchinson exemplifies why the statewide measure is too far-reaching. And like 35 other cities and three counties in Kansas, Hutchinson shows how this issue already was being handled just fine on a local level. . . .

From Hutchinson's perspective, this bill goes too far. That is because Hutchinson's ordinance, enacted in 2004, basically is just a restaurant smoking ban. The new state law will extinguish smoking in bars, too.

Hutchinson's ordinance has worked well. Restaurants always have been the chief concern, and with provisions for bars to allow smoking, the city has struck a good balance between people who like to dine out in a smoke-free atmosphere and bar owners who say that much of their clientele smokes. Basically, people in Hutchinson can choose between smoke-free and smoking-permitted establishments.The state seems late to the party with a law at this stage - and with a law that seems especially unwanted in cities like Hutchinson where locals had the foresight to debate this issue years ago and the self-confidence and local knowledge to legislate an effective prohibition locally.

Jump to full article »

EDITORIAL: Smoking out illegal sales of tobacco 

After many years of getting it wrong when it comes to protecting kids from the harmful effects of tobacco, Indiana is getting it right. The latest TRIP data underscores that fact.

It stands to reason that if fewer stores are selling tobacco to kids, then fewer kids are buying it. . . .

This sustained, measurable improvement is a credit to educational and enforcement efforts. TRIP not only documents illegal tobacco sales rates, but its surprise inspections provide an incentive to retailers to stay on their toes.

TRIP is a partnership of the Indiana Prevention Resource Center at Indiana University Bloomington and the Indiana State Excise Police. Together with the independent Indiana Tobacco Prevention and Cessation agency, Indiana in the last decade has made striking progress in an area that for too long was neglected.

Indiana should boost its support of TRIP's tobacco stings, and continue to back an independent Indiana Tobacco Prevention and Cessation agency. The state spends very little money on tobacco prevention and cessation. It's getting a lot of bang for its buck.

Jump to full article »

Editorial: Yes he can (quit) 

Obama is not alone: Many smokers have tried, and many have failed to quit.

"It is a testament to the power of tobacco addiction that millions of tobacco users have been unable to overcome their dependence and save themselves from its consequences: perpetual worry, unceasing expense, and compromised health," says a federal treatment guideline.

But of all Americans, the President has a responsibility to lead by example. Our "yes we can" president must show that, yes, he can stop smoking.

Jump to full article »

EDITORIAL: Smoking at UMaine  

UMaine is wise to rule out designated smoking centers, contending that they would actually promote more tobacco use on campus, plus the expense and spread of secondhand smoke.

It will be a long campaign, with ups and downs. But it is well worth the trouble, since it will promote health, save and extend lives. Other colleges will do well to do the same.

Jump to full article »

Our view: Erie needs stop-smoking, anti-obesity campaigns 

Michelle Obama wants America's children to shape up. Erie's largest employer wants workers to quit smoking.

From the White House to GE Transportation, these efforts to improve our health are welcome initiatives in our region, where a recent report found that Erie does not fare well on a nationwide health scorecard.

County Health Rankings, a project of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute, examined health factors and outcomes in all 50 states.

Erie ranks 30th out of 67 Pennsylvania counties for overall health, but we're 61st out of 67 counties in the percentage of adults who smoke, the percentage of children who live in poverty, and in the amount of air pollution. . . .

And if more evidence is needed about health and the economy, consider this: A study of GE's smoking cessation program found that the average employee who quit saved $3,400 a year.

Jump to full article »

Forum editorial: President sets poor example 

Anyone who’s tried to quit smoking and repeatedly failed knows how difficult kicking the habit can be. But the president is not anyone. This president in particular is youthful, athletic and the loving father of two daughters – fine qualities that stand in stark contrast to tobacco addiction. He should use a measure of his much-admired will power to quit.

Jump to full article »

EDITORIAL: Stop delaying; take up cigarette tax bill 

LATER THIS MONTH, the House will take up a plan to increase the nation's lowest cigarette tax by 30 cents a pack.

That's a significant step backwards from the insufficient 50-cent increase the House overwhelmingly approved last year, . . .

There simply is no excuse for spending nearly an entire session placating special interests and pandering to partisan extremists, when there is significant, life-and-death legislation rotting on the calendar.

Jump to full article »

Editorial: Is Appleton tobacco grant idea right use of $3 million?  

we question the city's role in a state application for a stimulus grant to fight a new form of tobacco that could be aimed at kids.

It's dissolvable tobacco that looks like little mints and comes in the kinds of small, colorful containers that little mints come in.

It sure looks like a health threat that people -- especially parents and kids -- should be made aware of.

But $3 million worth of awareness? Really?

That's the amount of the grant Appleton could receive, out of $8 million the state has applied for. It's a two-year plan in which Appleton would spend about $1 million on personnel, including at least four new full-time jobs; $1 million on advertising; and $1 million on other resources.

If the federal government wanted to give us $3 million to improve public health, we could find many better uses for it than dissolvable tobacco. City . . .

spending $3 million on this project -- even if it's coming out of the federal pot, and even though someone else will spend it if we don't -- sounds like something we'd raise our eyebrows about if another city were doing it.

And if Appleton gets the grant, make no mistake -- we repeat, make no mistake -- when the two years are up, these jobs have to be gone.

More than anything else here, that makes sense.

Jump to full article »