This page was last updated on May 15, 2016.
ONE GRAPHIC, 10,000 WORDS; Carl Davidson; Facebook; May 8, 2016.
You can learn more about BCR’s leftster management here. “Leftster” is the combination of leftist and gangster, inspired by the left-originated “bankster.”
On his Facebook page, Carl Davidson (KD) of Beaver County Reds (BCR) wrote, “ONE GRAPHIC, 10,000 WORDS...Ahhh, the good old days, when we didn’t have those job-killing government socialist regulations and punitive taxes ruining our lives!” KD’s referring to an alleged 1940s – 1960s era magazine ad for Chesterfield cigarettes for Mother’s and Father’s days.
It appears KD used Mother’s Day to celebrate the nanny state.
Here’s how our government should handle product problems. If a manufacturer or vendor lies about or hides critical info from consumers, the manufacturer or vendor should be prosecuted for fraud and, if found guilty, should be assessed an appropriate penalty. Depending on their role, individual company officials should also be prosecuted.
That wasn’t the case for tobacco. Our government launched an all-out jihad against tobacco usage via confiscatory tax rates, radio and TV advertising bans, government anti-smoking advertising, smoking bans on private property, and so on. The media – also fans of the nanny state – are doing their part. For example, from March 2005 through April 2011, the Beaver County Times published at least 57 editorials lobbying for a smoking ban on private property. We’re now seeing this behavior applied to “sugary” drinks and the sodium content of food.
Tobacco products have been a target of nanny-state thinking since the late 1500s or the early 1600s.
The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (H.R. 1256 – 111th Congress) gave the FDA the power to regulate tobacco products. That the FDA itself is unconstitutional is a discussion for another day. One of the provisions “Ban[s] tobacco-brand sponsorships of sports and entertainment events or other social or cultural events” while another “Ban[s] the sale of packages of fewer than 20 cigarettes.” While it should be no surprise to anyone Democrats overwhelmingly voted for the bill (House – 97%, Senate – 98%), it’s disappointing 44% of voting Republican representatives and 65% of voting Republican senators did likewise. Ten percent (18) of House Republicans chose not to vote.
Confiscatory tax rates plus the “Ban [on] the sale of packages of fewer than 20 cigarettes” led directly to the death of Eric Garner. Here’s an excerpt from a review I wrote in 2014: “Because of confiscatory taxes, some low-income persons can’t afford to buy a pack of cigarettes. In NYC, with the highest total tax rate in the country, the average price for a pack of cigarettes is more than $14, $7.06 of which is the sum of federal, state, and local taxes. According to the Tax Foundation, ‘almost 57% of cigarettes smoked in New York were bought into the state illegally, the highest of any state.’ Mr. Garner responded to demand and engaged in selling black market, low or untaxed cigarettes individually, aka ‘loosies.’”
I don’t have a problem with the warning labels that started in 1965 and I don’t have a problem with prohibiting sales to minors. The problem is, the U.S. Constitution doesn’t grant those powers to the feds. As per the 10th Amendment, powers not granted to the feds “are reserved for the States respectively, or to the people.” I doubt any of the federal tobacco laws/regulations are constitutional without creative reading.
Please, don’t tell me about the Constitution’s Commerce Clause [Article I, Section 8 (Powers of Congress), clause three], perhaps the most abused provision of the Constitution. Article I, Section 8, states, “[The Congress shall have Power] To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes.” Article I, Section 9 (Limits on Congress), clauses five and six state, respectively, “No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State” and “No Preference shall be given by any Regulation of Commerce or Revenue to the Ports of one State over those of another: nor shall Vessels bound to, or from, one State, be obliged to enter, clear, or pay Duties in another.” I think it’s fairly obvious the intent of these provisions is to keep the states from getting into interstate trade wars, not to insinuate the federal government into every aspect of commerce, whether interstate or intrastate. The sole intent of federal involvement in any business/industry is to increase federal power at the expense of the states and the people.
The feds eventually decided the existing warning labels weren’t enough and in 2011 the FDA proposed new, graphic labels had to cover at least 50% of the box. A federal district court and an appeals court ruled the FDA regulation “violated First Amendment free speech protections.” The FDA chose not to appeal the case to the Supreme Court.
If someone uses a product everyone knows is dangerous, that’s his problem. I bought Grandpa a carton (10 packs) of cigarettes for at least one Christmas, long before doing so required a mortgage. When I was 10 or 11 years old, I pilfered a few of Grandpa’s cigarettes so a few friends and I could see what we were missing. I was coughing after my first or second puff and concluded smoking wasn’t good for me, and I never became a smoker. If a 10- or 11-year-old can figure out smoking is bad, adults who blame someone else for their smoking habit is lying to herself/himself.
This is my standard disclosure regarding the tobacco topic. I’ve never been a user of tobacco in any form. I prefer not to be in places where people are smoking – the smoke irritates my eyes and throat – and I hate the smell of smoke on my clothes. I don’t permit persons to smoke in my car or home.
Finally, two good friends of mine smoked and died from cancer, one of whom was my best friend for the better part of 20 years. Both were smart, well-educated, and knew the risk, yet they chose to smoke nevertheless. I wish they hadn’t smoked and were still with us. That said, I would never take away their right to make the decision they did.
In Peace, Friendship, Community, Cooperation, and Solidarity. <g>
© 2004-2016 Robert W. Cox, all rights reserved.