
Showing posts with label Tobacco Laws. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Tobacco Laws. Show all posts
House Passes Tobacco Bill, 298-112

The bill is now set for a Senate vote, but it will likely face stronger opposition there than it received in the House. Representing the largest tobacco producing state in the nation, Republican Senator Richard M. Burr, of North Carolina, has threatened a filibuster. But with Senator Edward Kennedy and Philip Morris USA backing HR 1256, and our new President on board, Senator Burr will more than likely have the proverbial uphill battle to wage. Interestingly enough, the Supreme Court denied an appeal to Philip Morris USA on March 31, 2009, in a landmark fraud case that awarded $79.5 million to a Portland, Oregon widow whose husband, a long-time smoker, died of lung cancer (see Philip Morris USA v Williams, 07-1216). The appeal has been bounced around the court system for 10 years and has racked up enough interest to make the award worth $155 million today. I can't help but wonder if Philip Morris USA will change its mind about supporting HR 1256 in light of this. After all, they will need smokers to buy their products in order to recoup their losses, right?
Remember, folks, HR 1256 has a direct impact on your right and ability to smoke hookah! Should the bill pass the Senate and become law, adding flavoring to tobacco will become illegal. Flavoring is the very heart of hookah tobacco!
What can you do?
Contact your senators and voice your opinion. Stand up and be heard!
Waxman's Tobacco Bill & Hookah Tobacco
Today, the House voted to put Rep. Henry Waxman's (D-Calif.) tobacco bill up for a vote. Waxman's bill seeks to give regulatory control over tobacco to the FDA and has specific stipulations that will have a tremendous impact on hookah tobacco:
"His bill wouldn't let the FDA ban nicotine or tobacco outright, but the agency would be able to regulate the contents of tobacco products, make public their ingredients, prohibit flavoring, require much larger warning labels and strictly control or prohibit marketing campaigns, especially those geared toward children." (Source)
The prohibition on flavoring tobacco means no menthol cigarettes and no flavored pipe or hookah tobacco! What is hookah without flavored tobacco?
The Supreme Court ruled in 2000 that the FDA does not have the authority to regulate tobacco, but Waxman and Senator Edward Kennedy (D-Mass) have worked tirelessly to change that. Considering the FDA's recent track record of failures in monitoring food safety, I can't imagine what they'll do with tobacco.
So, hookah smokers, now is the time to step up to the plate and let our voices be heard. Get on the phone and call your state's senators, both of them, and your district's Congressional representative before the opportunity passes by. Your voice counts!
"His bill wouldn't let the FDA ban nicotine or tobacco outright, but the agency would be able to regulate the contents of tobacco products, make public their ingredients, prohibit flavoring, require much larger warning labels and strictly control or prohibit marketing campaigns, especially those geared toward children." (Source)
The prohibition on flavoring tobacco means no menthol cigarettes and no flavored pipe or hookah tobacco! What is hookah without flavored tobacco?
The Supreme Court ruled in 2000 that the FDA does not have the authority to regulate tobacco, but Waxman and Senator Edward Kennedy (D-Mass) have worked tirelessly to change that. Considering the FDA's recent track record of failures in monitoring food safety, I can't imagine what they'll do with tobacco.
So, hookah smokers, now is the time to step up to the plate and let our voices be heard. Get on the phone and call your state's senators, both of them, and your district's Congressional representative before the opportunity passes by. Your voice counts!
Tobacco Taxes on the Rise

Last night, on the way home from class, I had to stop at the local 7-11 for a pack of cigarettes. As I walked into the store, I noticed a neon orange sign on the front door suggesting that smokers stock up before the latest cigarette tax takes effect on April 1. "Crap!" I thought, "Another tobacco tax coming down the pike?" So this morning, I decided to do some investigation to uncover the when, where, and how much of the latest round of tobacco taxes across the country.
In California, AB 89, which passed the Legislature on January 5, 2009, increases the tax on cigarettes only. On April 1, 2009, each pack of cigarettes will go up in price by $1.05. Although I scoured the bill, which you can read here, I didn't find any increase for other tobacco products. The cost of hookah tobacco should not go up as a result of AB 89; the language of the bill is specific to cigarettes. We got somewhat lucky this time around. Other states, though, weren't as fortunate.
- Arkansas' HB 1204 will increase the tax on non-cigarette tobacco products from 32 precent of the wholesale price to 68 percent. The governer's website has more information on the tax increase and the allocation of the funds collected.
- Kentucky's HB 144 doubles the current tax on "snuff and other tobacco products," so that means hookah tobacco prices will increase.
Several other states have tobacco legislation in the works, but the process that each state requires for a bill to pass into law has not been completed yet. If you like in Alabama, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, or South Dakota, you need to know that your states' governments are actively pursuing an increase in tobacco taxes. To find out more, check out the 2009 Proposed State Tobacco Tax Increase Legislation website.
Maybe it's time to learn the fine art of tobacco agriculture!
John Stuart Mill and Hookah Bans

"The only freedom which deserves the name is that of pursuing our own good in our own way, so long as we do not attempt to deprive others of theirs, or impede their efforts to obtain it. Each is the proper guardian of his own health, whether bodily, or mental or spiritual. Mankind are greater gainers by suffering each other to live as seems good to themselves, than by compelling each to live as seems good to the rest." --John Stuart Mill, On Liberty
If I couldn't laugh about the irony of it, the latest smoking ban would have me crying. Virginia, a state whose economy depends on the manufacture of tobacco products (tobacco manufacturing is still the state's number one industry), has recently passed a sweeping anti-smoking law that will more than likely put several restaurant and bar owners out of business.
According to the Washington Post, this bi-partisan bill was "hatched in closed-door meetings between Gov. Timothy M. Kaine (D) and House Speaker William J. Howell (R-Safford)." Although the new law doesn't reach quite as far as some of the more virulent anti-smoking groups wanted, it does go far enough to target places where smoking has been an accepted part of business for generations. With all the secondhand smoke hype that the media has subjected us to, I can't help but wonder why anyone who is genuinely worried about secondhand smoke exposure would continue to work in establishments that permit smoking or, more importantly, why anyone who chooses not to work in an area where smoking is allowed is so concerned about those who do.
John Stuart Mill, in his essay, On Liberty, says it best: "The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not sufficient warrant." In other words, don't try to stop me from smoking hookah in a shop made specifically for that purpose because you think that the secondhand smoke may cause harm to others. An alternative is available: if you don't want to be subjected to secondhand smoke, avoid places of business that permit smoking. Problem solved. Duh!
Related Links
- How delegates and Senators voted on Virginia smoking ban
- Economy of Virginia Including Virginia Agriculture and Manufacturing
- The Tobacco War: Industry Intrinsic to Virginia Now Vulnerable
Hookahs: Not in my neighborhood!
If I had a dime for every time I heard an older adult lament the bad behavior of youth, I'd be a gazillionaire! The older generation complains about young people all the time, yet they never seem to offer a viable solution to the things they see as problems among the youth. Take for example, an interesting situation that has been going on in Napa Valley, California.
Napa Valley, long known as Ca
lifornia's wine country, is a popular destination for tourists. As a result, businesses in the Valley cater to visitors. Hot air balloon rides, winery tours, fine dining, and wine tasting events are great for tourists and, I'm sure, provide them with a wonderful vacation. However, there are people who actually live in Napa Valley -- people who have families. The teens of Napa Valley aren't old enough to participate in the alcohol related events and don't have the disposable income to afford the fine dining experience (and probably wouldn't be interested in it anyway). So what is a bored teen to do in Napa Valley?
Evidently, nothing. Businesses designed to cater to the locals tend to have run-ins with neighbors who don't want the teens in "their neighborhoods." The case of the Smoking Cat, according to a recent article in the Napa Valley Register, appears to be the norm. Kids come, they enjoy themselves in an environment where no alcohol is served, and neighbors complain. The Smoking Cat planned to serve hookahs on an outside patio, but the idea got neighbors up in arms. The old "not in my neighborhood" prevailed, and complaints from a neighbor and a nearby religious school brought the Smoking Cat before the Napa Planning Commission, where they were told that clients could not smoke, even on the outside patio, and that live music could not continue after 8 p.m.
With all of the adults howling about teens wreaking havoc and making trouble, it makes no sense to me that we wouldn't be seeking viable alternatives for them. Give teens a safe place to hang out with friends, allow them to express themselves on live mic night, and offer those who are of legal age a non-alcoholic way to socialize, and we might be surprised at what could happen. Provide teens with a solution to their boredom and we just might see them enjoying themselves in ways other than vandalizing property, partying without adult supervision, and generally causing mayhem.
Remember what John Milton said about being a careful considerer of human nature?
Napa Valley, long known as Ca

Evidently, nothing. Businesses designed to cater to the locals tend to have run-ins with neighbors who don't want the teens in "their neighborhoods." The case of the Smoking Cat, according to a recent article in the Napa Valley Register, appears to be the norm. Kids come, they enjoy themselves in an environment where no alcohol is served, and neighbors complain. The Smoking Cat planned to serve hookahs on an outside patio, but the idea got neighbors up in arms. The old "not in my neighborhood" prevailed, and complaints from a neighbor and a nearby religious school brought the Smoking Cat before the Napa Planning Commission, where they were told that clients could not smoke, even on the outside patio, and that live music could not continue after 8 p.m.
With all of the adults howling about teens wreaking havoc and making trouble, it makes no sense to me that we wouldn't be seeking viable alternatives for them. Give teens a safe place to hang out with friends, allow them to express themselves on live mic night, and offer those who are of legal age a non-alcoholic way to socialize, and we might be surprised at what could happen. Provide teens with a solution to their boredom and we just might see them enjoying themselves in ways other than vandalizing property, partying without adult supervision, and generally causing mayhem.
Remember what John Milton said about being a careful considerer of human nature?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)