Tobacco.org

Smokers wince at tax increase  

Cigarettes in Vermont cost a quarter more a pack and $2.50 more a carton, and the 6 percent state sales tax applies for the first time to liquor, all the result of legislation that took effect Wednesday. Liquor? No big deal, beverage store proprietors said. Cigarettes? That's another story. . . .

"They're trying to out-price it," she said of the extra 25 cents a pack, "but if everyone stopped smoking, they'd have to find something else to go after."

Would the extra charge persuade her to stop?

"Probably not," she said.

Maher said the state's intent was to "isolate a certain group." The price increases would at some point lead to bootlegging, she said. "It'll be what the Prohibition was."

Frantz Ozanic, a 20-year smoker, also standing in front of the library, said Vermont was moving in steps to make cigarettes "unobtainable."

Jump to full article »

Recession ushers in more tobacco taxes 

Clipping away at a $590 million deficit, Rhode Island this April raised its taxes on cigarettes by $1 to $3.46 a pack - the highest rate in the country. With the backing of its governor, a former tobacco lobbyist, Mississippi in May imposed its first tax hike on smokers in more than two decades - up 50 cents to 68 cents a pack - and is already considering another increase. . . .

"You have to go back decades to see states with such budget shortfalls," said Sujit CanagaRetna, a state budget and tax expert at the Council of State Governments. "A sin tax is a low-hanging fruit. Politicians are more prone to go down that path because doing so is just not as onerous."

Other experts, however, regard these short-term budget patches as part of a larger problem. One leading anti-tax activist, Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform, said a better solution to burgeoning budget gaps is to cut state spending.

"Any problem of overspending that could be passed on to cigarettes could be fixed by just spending more wisely," Norquist said. "The problem with the tax increase isn't just that it's a tax increase, … it is that the tax is what you did instead of reforming state government."

Jump to full article »

ROMM: States raise tobacco tax, not necessarily revenue 

For lawmakers scrounging to balance state budgets in a recession, tobacco taxes were one of the most popular options on the table this year. Seven states -- Arkansas, Florida, Hawaii, Kentucky, Mississippi, Rhode Island and Vermont -- tapped smokers' wallets to help plug their budget gaps, up from two states in 2008. More than 20 additional states debated whether to follow suit, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

But there are growing signs that tobacco, which generated about $19 billion for states in revenue from sales and excise taxes last fiscal year, might not deliver the new money state lawmakers are hoping for.

In a double-whammy for smokers, the federal government on April 1 also imposed a 62-cent increase in its cigarette tax, raising it to $1.01 a pack, and the Food and Drug Administration is assuming sweeping authority over the tobacco industry. Together, the two federal moves are likely to depress cigarette sales -- already in decline -- that every state counts on for extra cash. According to the Tax Foundation, a nonpartisan research group, the federal increase in cigarette prices could hold down sales and dent states' tobacco tax receipts by $1.6 billion next fiscal year. In addition, the Congressional Budget Office estimates that the proposed FDA regulations could slash states' tobacco excise revenue by an additional $20 million in 2010 -- and up to $300 million by 2014. . . .

That's why state health departments tend to celebrate tobacco taxes as hard-fought victories. In New York, where the state cigarette tax is $2.75 a pack, health officials say a combination of higher taxes and smoking bans have lowered health-care costs statewide. . . .

. But while states have long-term financial and health reasons to discourage smoking, they remain hooked in the short term on these "sin taxes" -- excises on vices such as smoking, drinking and gambling that are politically easier to increase than sales or income taxes. . . .

Others regard these short-term budget patches as part of a larger problem. One leading critic of higher taxes, Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform, said a better solution to burgeoning budget gaps is to cut state spending.

"Any problem of overspending that could be passed on to cigarettes could be fixed by just spending more wisely," Norquist said. "The problem with the tax increase isn't just that it's a tax increase. . . . It is that the tax is what you did instead of reforming state government."

Jump to full article »

• Health groups back tobacco treaty  

With legislation to strengthen tobacco regulation now signed into law, public health groups are pushing for the Senate to ratify a treaty on tobacco control that has languished for five years.

Though the United States signed the treaty in May 2004, President George W. Bush never submitted it for approval by the Senate, the final step in the process.

The treaty requires a host of anti-smoking measures by the 164 signing nations. And it seeks to attack global issues such as cross-border advertising and tobacco smuggling.

Supporters say it is time for the Senate to act.

"There's no excuse, we really should," Senate Majority Whip Richard Durbin, D-Ill., said in an interview in the White House Rose Garden after President Barack Obama signed the new law that allows the federal Food and Drug Administration to regulate tobacco products.

Opponents, including Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., believe American participation in the treaty is unnecessary. . . .

The global treaty threatens the future of tobacco growers in Kentucky and other states, as well as around the world, said Roger Quarles, president of the Burley Tobacco Growers Cooperative Association.

"It's basically a pathway to eradicate tobacco consumption and production throughout the entire world," said Quarles, who is also president of the International Tobacco Growers Association.

Jump to full article »

Tobacco giant denies price cuts are to encourage smoking 

But British American Tobacco says retailers set their own prices and the new list is a guideline only.

Spokeswoman Susan Jones says the small reduction is in direct response to the number of competitor products on the market.

She says the company's actions fall squarely within the Smoke Free Environments Act.

Jump to full article »

BROWN : New tobacco control act  

The annual health care costs in New Jersey directly caused by smoking amount to $3.17 billion. Residents' state and federal tax burden from smoking-caused government expenditures is $664 per household. Regardless of the state of the economy, no one wants any of his or her hard-earned money going toward these costs, let alone $664. Finances aside, the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act will save something much more precious than money: It will save lives. The law "gives us hope," as President Obama said, adding that, "It will help protect the next generation of Americans from growing up with a deadly habit."

To learn more about cessation resources on how to quit smoking, visit lungusa.org or call 1-800-LUNG-USA, ext. 2.

Jump to full article »

MUHLE: Tobacco use is deadly and contributes to poverty  

Tobacco is a health problem directly resulting from the impact of globalisation. As other expects put it: "[Tobacco] provides examples of the ways in which globalisation, trade liberalisation, modern communication and marketing, direct foreign investment and the growth of multi-national corporations can impact on the poor, on life expectancies and health status, and on the ability of national governments to legislate for and implement tobacco control policies." This article is an attempt to help demonstrate why tobacco is a developmental issue and also a public health issue. One could as well argue that it may be considered to be within the same bracket as AIDS. Like HIV and AIDS it will certainly pose a challenge to those who deny the reality of tobacco as an epidemic. So many lives of fellow Swazis are at risk--many unwittingly. This article is a humble attempt to let us understand why - given all that we know - so little is being done about this silent yet venomously deadly epidemic. All evidence point to the reality that tobacco smoking, like HIV, is on the increase in the country. Like HIV, it is being denied and very little seems to be done about it at all levels. Like HIV, it is not easy to confront it, let alone change. Nevertheless, we must face up to the reality of how the use of tobacco is damaging our people, especially the young--the very vestige of our future as a people and society. . . . The one greatest challenge we are facing as country in this front is the illicit trade on this deadly product as demonstrated by the recent spate of cigarette smugglings in truck loads! You and I have a duty to play our role and help the people of this country overcome this impeding epidemic regardless of who is purported to be involved in the smuggling syndrome--remember this words "without fear or favour"? The ball is in our court!

Jump to full article »

Cash boost to curb smoking 

CIVIC chiefs have been given a £100,000 boost to help smokers quit and reduce health inequalities.

The cash will be used to increase the number of successful smokers quitting, reduce the number of youngsters starting to smoke and to crackdown on cheap and illicit tobacco.

Hartlepool Borough Council has been given the cash by the Department of Health as part of its Reducing Health Inequalities through Tobacco Control programme.

It comes in the same week as the Mail revealed that more than 500 law-breakers have been hit in the pocket for dumping cigarette ends.

A total of 531 people were handed £75 fixed penalty notices in Hartlepool for dumping cigarette butts between April 2008 and March this year.

Jump to full article »

ROY: Package warning: A good anti-tobacco tools  

Currently, under the Tobacco Control Act 2005 in Bangladesh, only written warnings on tobacco products are required to occupy 30 per cent of the main surfaces of the packets. Such warnings include "Smoking Kills" and "smoking Causes Lung Cancer". Under the FCTC (Framework Convention for Tobacco Control), pictorial warnings accompanied with written messages should account for 50 per cent (front and back) of the total packet of tobacco products.

Already, there has been tremendous progress in Bangladesh implementing legislation to mandate pictorial warnings. Seven countries including Thailand, Australia and Singapore require all tobacco containing products to convey health warning pictorial and message accounting for a minimum of 50 percent both side of the total packet.

Most of the story of tobacco control in Bangladesh is still unwritten and events continue to unfold. It remains to be seen whether the tobacco control movement will be sufficiently powerful and proactive to counter industry tactics and persuade the government to take strong measures to control tobacco. The tobacco industry is a mighty force in Bangladesh than elsewhere and it will be difficult to maintain a spotlight on tobacco in the face of so many competing causes of disease and ill health. But if the progress made over the past few years is any indication of the future, the many organizations and individuals working for tobacco control in Bangladesh have good reason to be optimistic. . . . we need to act now. This is the time to go ahead to save our future generation. And for that let us work together.

Jump to full article »

• Smokers priced out of the habit  

CIGARETTES would cost more than $20 for a packet of 30 and come in plain wrapping under a radical proposal being considered by the Federal Government to fund a massive preventive health program.

The cigarette tax hike and ban on all remaining forms of tobacco advertising have been included in the Federal Government's yet-to-be-released Preventative Health Taskforce report.

The report, being examined by Health Minister Nicola Roxon, urges the Federal Government to slash smoking rates in the next decade to 9 per cent of the adult population, cutting the number of people 14 and older who smoke daily from 3 million to 2 million.

Under the changes cigarette packets would be generic with larger graphic health warnings . . .

The plan has been strongly backed by anti-smoking organisations such as the Public Health Association, the Cancer Council and the National Heart Foundation but has alarmed cigarette companies, which are claiming such changes could be unlawful.

Jump to full article »

College of Coastal Georgia bans tobacco on campus 

BRUNSWICK - Good health is as important as a quality education.

Following that philosophy, the College of Coastal Georgia is nudging its students toward good habits and away from bad ones.

As part of a healthy campus initiative, the college banned the use of tobacco effective Wednesday and has overhauled a couple of exercise facilities in hopes of attracting students and faculty.

"As a college, we are focusing on health and wellness without the hazard of tobacco use on campus," said college President Valerie Hepburn.

Throughout the roll-out of the tobacco-free campus, the college has focused on raising awareness through signage, information on its Web site and a partnership with local health agencies to offer smoking cessation classes to faculty and staff, she said.

The signs are up at campus entrances announcing the tobacco ban.

Jump to full article »

ADLER: Philip Morris Gets Its Tobacco Bill 

The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act is revealed as yet another Beltway deal for Big Government and Big Business. Those who proclaim it a victory for public health and the public good are blowing smoke.

While supporters trumpet the legislation as a major advance for public health, any benefits will be quite modest. The Congressional Budget Office projects the bill will reduce adult smoking by 2 percent and youth smoking by 11 percent over the next ten years. These reductions will come at the cost of a new regulatory bureaucracy and a more intimate relationship between the federal government and Big Tobacco.

Some provisions could actually hamper the bill’s ostensible purpose of protecting smokers and others from tobacco. The bill grants the FDA the authority to limit nicotine in cigarettes, but not eliminate it altogether. . . .

The bill also creates burdensome regulatory requirements for new tobacco products that have the potential to reduce the risk of smoking. . . .

In their zeal to limit tobacco advertising and promotional activities, the bill’s sponsors also trampled the First Amendment. . . .

Limiting tobacco advertising and stalling the development of new tobacco products won’t help public health, but it will certainly benefit the nation’s largest cigarette manufacturer. Government regulation is the most tried-and-true way for incumbent firms to squelch smaller competitors, which helps explain why Philip Morris supports the bill and smaller tobacco companies oppose it. Harder to fathom is why public-health advocates who should know better celebrate the law as a major advance.

Jump to full article »

NELSON: This once was a free country  

‘When I Was a Kid, This Was a Free Country,” G. Gordon Liddy lamented in his book by the same title. I found the book unexceptional except for his longing for a country long gone. He takes the reader through a stroll of America in its more untrammeled days and contrasts it with the constantly harried, henpecked regime we find ourselves in now.

Liddy has a few years on me, but I, too, remember freer days. Political correctness hadn’t yet completely stifled free speech, and kids with hunting rifles in their cars at school parking lots or little girls with aspirin in their purses weren’t whisked off by zero-tolerance twits. . . .

The Forum Editorial Board, which apparently never met a nanny it didn’t love, has held forth again on the evils of tobacco. Pay no attention to the subversive notion of letting people enjoy their vices in peace and privacy; nay, the new Puritans will hound smokers until the last leaf of tobacco is extinguished. The recently enacted Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act will now, under the Food and Drug Administration, further choke tobacco users and pile on more useless regulations.

You might think alcohol would be a fitter subject for nannyism, since it’s more addictive and orders of magnitude more damaging to its users and to society than tobacco could ever be. . . .

I voted against North Dakota’s Measure 3 setting aside tobacco money to help stop smoking. Not only are there better uses for all that cash, it’s blood money anyway. Extorted from the producers and users of a perfectly legal substance, it’s money we have no right to whatsoever.

Jump to full article »

Backer: Smoking ban has created big cultural shift 

Iowa's anti-tobacco efforts have ushered in a major cultural change that has reduced the number of adult smokers and made workplaces healthier places, backers of Iowa's indoor smoking ban said Wednesday.

"This is probably one of the biggest cultural shifts in a short amount of time that our state will ever see," said Rep. Janet Petersen, D-Des Moines, who helped enact the smokefree air act which took effect July 1, 2008.

Advocates said the restriction covering virtually all public places -- except casino gambling areas, the Iowa State Fairgrounds and the Iowa Veterans Home in Marshalltown -- and state and federal cigarette tax increases have helped reduce smoking among Iowa adults to 14 percent compared to 19 percent two years earlier.

State Attorney General Tom Miller said Iowa has jumped into the top five states nationally in terms of smoking compliance. He noted that in the 1960s about four out of every 10 Iowa adults smoked tobacco products.

"We've really turned a corner," he told a Statehouse news conference.

Jump to full article »

New law bans all smoking in workplaces 

All Vermont workplaces become smoke free today as a new state law goes into effect, banning the designated smoking areas that were allowed under the previous law.

Public places have been virtually smoke free since the 1987 Smoking in the Workplace law was passed, and then updated under the Clean Indoor Air act of 1993.

Those laws permitted businesses to have segregated areas indoors where smokers could light up.

The new law, which lawmakers approved this past session, makes it illegal to smoke anywhere inside a public building.

"We have known about the dangers of second-hand smoking for many years," said Sheri Lynn, tobacco control program chief at the Vermont Department of Health. "People used to think some ventilation would help but there are no levels of safe exposure. This is about protecting public health."

Jump to full article »