Tobacco.org

Smoker Actually Got Ticket For Smoking In Washington Square Park 

a tipster tells us she got a $50 ticket for smoking a cigarette in Washington Square Park recently. "I really feel like this news should be out there because IT IS RIDICULOUS & people should know. I did some research into this and no one I know has heard of this happening," she writes. Read her whole account of the ticketing below:

I got a $50 ticket for smoking in Washington Square Park. I really feel like this news should be out there because IT IS RIDICULOUS & people should know. I did some research into this and no one I know has heard of this happening. I was sitting with a girlfriend on a bench on the north side edge of the park at lunch, not many people were around (So I know it was not reported by a passerby). A parks guard (i don't even know what they are called) approached me, told me I was not allowed to smoke and took out his ticket book thing right away. I was respectful, as I always am to working people who are doing their job, and asked him to please not ticket me. . . .

The worst part about is that when I pointed out to this asshole parks guy (nope even a cop!) that a large number of the chess touts in the NW corner of the park, who, incidentally, were looking on in amusement, were also smoking he ignored me. It was enraging. . . .

Those regular chess players of the park have been notoriously defiant when it comes to the smoking ban, as one man told The Villager last year: "You could ask me to put it out and if I like the way you ask me, I might put it out. I'm just out here enjoying myself. I'm not a criminal so I don't care what they do." We've contacted the Parks Department for comment on whether that has been an uptick in ticketing people for smoking in the parks.

Jump to full article »

FISCHER: Guest Viewpoint: Smoking is a burden on health care  

I would like to address online comments made in response to the Dec. 24 letter to the editor titled "Tobacco prevention funds pay off in time."

A common misconception is that smoking pays for "kiddy health care." "Kiddy health care" is what some people call the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), which is a federally administered program that provides matching funds to cover uninsured children in families with incomes that are modest but too high to qualify for Medicaid.

Taxes received by New York from the sale of tobacco and money paid by the tobacco companies to 46 states as outlined in the Master Settlement Agreement — commonly known as tobacco settlement money — are put in the state's general fund and used along with money from many other sources to run the state government.

Although these two sources of tobacco-generated revenue totaled $2.2 billion for the state in 2010, they don't begin to cover the cost to treat people with smoking-related illnesses. In contrast to the $2.2 billion that the state received from tobacco in 2010, that same year $8.2 billion was spent in New York to cover health care costs directly caused by smoking, with $5.4 billion coming from the Medicaid program. If smoking ceased and we no longer used Medicaid money to treat smoking-related diseases, New York would have $3.2 billion more to fund "kiddy health care," not the other way around. . . .

The key message is that tobacco use not only takes a terrible toll on the health of our family and friends, it also costs taxpayers a large amount of money. Each household in New York has a tax burden of $884 per year in state and federal taxes from smoking-caused government expenditures — a fact too often forgotten when people think only of the revenue that tobacco provides.

Jump to full article »

LETTER: Tobacco ban in pharmacies is proper for health-care venues | 

I write in response to a letter, "Proposed Ban on Tobacco Sales in Pharmacies is Govt. Overreach," in the Jan. 20, 2012 Staten Island Advance.

The letter calls the proposed legislation sponsored by Assemblymen Matt Titone and Lou Tobacco to prohibit the sale of tobacco products in pharmacies "a threat to free enterprise" and an inconvenience to "people addicted to smoking."

There is ample precedent for this ban. In 2008, San Francisco became the first U.S. city to adopt a tobacco-free pharmacy law. Boston and Needham, Mass., followed suit in 2009.

Many Canadian provinces have similar legislation. These localities do the right thing in their efforts to reduce diseases and healthcare costs by solidifying prevention policies. . . .

It is a conflict of interest for pharmacies, providers of health care, to profit from the sale of products that are proven to harm and kill.

Jump to full article »

ANDREWS: New York City Can't Impose Graphic Tobacco Warnings on Grocers 

the notion of forcing retailers to actively participate in encouraging their customers not to purchase their own products seems not only unfair, but unthinkable. Given the importance the Supreme Court has placed on the First Amendment right to speak and to refrain from speaking, it would be surprising for the Government to attempt to uphold and enforce such a law. But that’s precisely what New York City is asking the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit to do in the case of 23-34 94th St. Grocery, Corp. v. New York City Board of Health.

The case involves a challenge to a new provision of the New York City Health Code that requires all tobacco retailers within the City to display gory, anti-smoking signs in their stores. Many tobacco retailers understandably object to the signs, which urge their customers not to use tobacco products. Each sign includes warnings about the adverse effects of tobacco use (e.g., “Smoking Causes Lung Cancer”) and the directive “Quit Smoking Today—For Help, Call 311 Or 1-866-NYQUITS,” as well as one of three graphic, color images depicting the potential effects of tobacco use: a brain-damaged by a stroke, decaying teeth and gums, or a diseased lung.

The U.S District Court for the Southern District of New York struck down the requirement under the Supremacy Clause as preempted by the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1331-1341, and that holding is currently on appeal. But the First Amendment implications of the case are even more astonishing.

Jump to full article »

EDITORIAL: New York state's tobacco tax strays from target  

New York is among the most aggressive in its efforts, prohibiting smoking in public places and raising taxes to make the purchase of each pack painful. Yet with all that money coming in, the state continues to cut back on the amount it spends on this effort. Most of the money from those taxes and from a settlement with the tobacco industry has always gone to other causes, but, in recent years, the state had diverted even more.

It's not too much to expect the Cuomo administration to maintain spending levels on anti-smoking efforts, especially when they pay off in the long run by reducing the amount everyone has to pay in increased health-care costs.

Jump to full article »

LAWSON: So About That Tobacco-Free Policy…Part Two 

Last week, you may have read Regina Iannizzotto preach about how “great” the tobacco and smoke- free campus is. This is not one of those editorials.

For the college to make a decision to limit what its students can do that is in compliance with state and federal law is completely absurd. I understand why the school is doing it; to make the school a healthier place to live, but that does not justify limiting the consenting adult who knows all the health risks involved. . . .

We are adults now; we should be able to make our own decisions for ourselves without being limited. With this new rule, it feels like I never really left high school.

Jump to full article »

KNOX: Conflict in the air 

University President Lee Bollinger’s recent call requires USenate to make a final decision on the fate of smoking on campus by the end of this semester, effectively bringing this interminable discussion to the forefront of campus politics. I am not a smoker, and never plan on being one, but an all-out smoking ban is the worst way to deal with this issue. I firmly believe the University Senate should have a policy for smoking on campus, but not one that completely prohibits it. Columbia, in effect, would be harming its reputation and image by banning smoking on campus. . . .

The smoking issue on campus is an important dialogue to have because it promotes discussion between groups in a democratic manner. Banning smoking from campus does not promote anything but a strict regime by the University and a bunch of angry protests occupying smoke-free spaces on campus, which would obviously be the whole campus at that point. . . .

I strongly encourage nonsmokers and smokers to make sure the ban of smoking on campus doesn’t come to fruition. It would serve only to create more problems worse than the one it was intended to resolve.

Jump to full article »

• Judge Won't Revive Challenge To Master Tobacco Deal  

A New York federal judge on Monday refused to revive cigarette maker Grand River Enterprises Six Nations Ltd.'s antitrust suit challenging the $200 billion master settlement between state attorneys general and the nation's largest tobacco companies.

U.S. District Judge John F. Keenan shot down Grand River's bid to vacate his decision granting summary judgment to the states on the cigarette company's Sherman Act claims, despite Grand River's allegations that newly discovered evidence would have influenced his findings if he had had access to it.

The suit, filed by Grand River in 2002, stems from a 1998 deal between 46 attorneys general and 19 participating tobacco companies, including Philip Morris Inc., R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., Lorillard Tobacco Co. and Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. The cigarette makers agreed to make annual payments to the states in part to help fund high health care costs associated with tobacco-related illnesses under state Medicaid programs.

The settlement contains provisions that give states incentives to enact so-called escrow statutes directed at manufacturers that did not participate in the settlement, in order to create a resource available to the states in the event they sue and obtain a judgment or settlement against a nonparticipating manufacturer.

Jump to full article »

Detective Kyron Collins fired after guilty plea in cigarette smuggling robbery  

NYPD Detective Kyron Collins was fired after allegedly stealing cash and a large quantity of cigarettes from cigarette smugglers in the Bronx.

A veteran detective was fired Tuesday after pleading guilty to ripping off cigarette smugglers in a string of armed robberies in the Bronx and Manhattan, police said.

Kyron Collins, 39, faces five to six years in prison when he is sentenced April 2.

Jump to full article »

FEINBERG: Anti-smoking gains in jeopardy  

Now the bad news. This historic public health success will be jeopardized unless the state continues to invest in the comprehensive, science-based programs that have brought down smoking rates. Gov. Andrew Cuomo's budget proposes to slash another $5 million from the tobacco control programs that have proven so effective in driving down smoking rates, thereby also reducing health care costs for taxpayers.

It gets worse. More than half of the funding for New York's Tobacco Control Program has been cut over the past four years, even though the state collects an eye-popping $2.3 billion from tobacco tax revenues and lawsuit settlements.

The governor now proposes extending those tobacco taxes to cigars and loose tobacco, a great idea . . .

It's a question of fairness. If state government raises billions of dollars in revenue from tobacco and proposes to raise even more tobacco tax revenue, isn't there some obligation to fund proven programs that help smokers quit and make sure young people and other non-smokers don't ever start?

Consider this: Poor New Yorkers remain addicted, and continue to pay tobacco taxes, at higher rates than others.

The horrible toll of tobacco-related death and disease is also concentrated in traditionally marginalized communities. . . .

Now is not the time to rest on our laurels. It is instead the time to keep our efforts going strong. It is a matter of life and death.

Jump to full article »

LETTER: Assistance shouldn’t pay for beer, cigarettes 

I have something to ask our New York leaders. I am a cashier and day after day I see people on food stamps and cash assistance take money out of the cash on their card, then buy cigarettes and beer.

We have people out there working two or three jobs to survive, while these people live off the state. . . .

It’s unbelievable what I see go through my register every time I work.

Jump to full article »

Anti-tobacco groups upset with Cuomo's funding cuts 

Anti-tobacco groups in New York are upset with Governor Andrew Cuomo over proposed funding cuts for their initiatives. Cuomo has proposed cutting tobacco control spending by five-million dollars in the coming fiscal year, reducing it to a total of 36-million dollars. Officials with groups such as the NYS Smokers' Quitline are lobbying state legislators to get the money restored, saying such cuts means the state can't afford public service announcements to encourage people to quit smoking.

Jump to full article »

Audrey Silk: Governor Cuomo Says No New Taxes in Budget but Loophole Closure Is a Tax on Smokers 

This past Tuesday New York State Governor Andrew Cuomo presented the state's Executive Budget for 2012-2013. . . .

When our governor declared in his State of the State address that his budget, in deference to "putting the people first" because "we are New York," wouldn't contain any increased taxes but then raises it on cigars and loose tobacco, it seems to make it official that smokers aren't "the people." Not New Yorkers; not persons.

Jump to full article »

NYC’s 5 Best Cigar Bars 

Since the restaurant and bar smoking ban took effect in 2003, it has been illegal to open new cigar bars. But here's the catch - those that already existed before the ban are allowed to remain open, and new cigar stores are still allowed to open. You don't have to be a cigar-lover, though, to enjoy these spots. Here are our picks for the top 5 spots in NYC to enjoy a cocktail and a stogie. - By Jonathan Pogash

Jump to full article »

IANNIZZOTTO: So About That Tobacco-Free Policy… 

So, the school is tobacco-free, huh? Well, the school has made a wise decision. Since January 1, 2012, The College of Saint Rose has been free of smoke clouds that make breathing difficult and offensive smells that drift across campus. It is a beautiful thing.

When I first arrived on campus, I had completely forgotten about the new policy. I walked to class on Tuesday thinking “something’s different,” but I just could not put my finger on it. Then, it hit me; no one was smoking and a huge smile spread across my face. I did not have to hold my breath when I walked into the EAC and I did not get a whiff of smoke when passing Albertus. So I took a deep breath and entered the building happily.

The next day, I found myself walking behind three construction workers, two of whom felt the need to have a cigarette between their fingers. . . .

Later that day, I saw two people smoking on the brick wall by Albertus and I just rolled my eyes. Here is the best one, though: I saw a guy standing on the entrance to the EAC by the picnic tables smoking a cigarette. Hanging next to him was a sign that read “This is a smoke and tobacco free campus.” Seriously? . . .

The campus is smoke-free. Please be respectful of that

Jump to full article »