Ravenwood - 06/04/03 04:30 PM
Following up on yesterday's report, I've finally found a web link for the Surgeon General's testimony to the House Energy and Commerce Committee. (Energy and Commerce?) CNSNews reports that the U.S. Surgeon General, Richard H. Carmona came out strongly against all tobacco products, including smokeless tobacco. Here is what Carmona had to say.
"If you're asking me, would I support banning or abolishing tobacco products? Yes."I could say the same thing about meatloaf. (Both the meal and the singer.)"If Congress chose to go that way, that would be up to them. But I see no need for any tobacco products in society."
In a related story, CNN reports that the president of the American Society of Clinical Oncologists (ASCO), Dr. Paul Bunnn, called for a massive federal tax increase on cigarettes, and the formation of a "blue ribbon committee." (Uh oh.) The committee would "study the medical, social and economic aspects of tobacco worldwide." Translated, that means it would seek to prove that American cigarettes are more deadly, and that America is at fault for forcing tobacco and tobacco related illnesses on the World.
"The end point is a tobacco and smoke-free world," Dr. Bunnn said.Once again, I'll reiterate a point I made some time ago:
It won't be long before cigarettes and tobacco are banned outright, in some cities and states. A national ban won't be far behind, and soon tobacco will be treated as an illicit drug.I cannot emphasize this enough. Tobacco will not go away. The police have been unable to eradicate illegal guns and illicit drugs, so what makes anyone think that they can eradicate tobacco. (Especially someone with a decade or more of higher learning.)When that happens, everyone will just stop smoking, right? Wrong. Cigarettes and tobacco products will go underground. As enforcement increases, prices will skyrocket and trafficking will be a lucrative business. It will also lead to more serious crimes, like murder, and money laundering. In general, crime will increase, and rather than profiting with tax revenue, governments will be spending millions to try to keep our streets tobacco free. Ironically, instead of being less accessible, cigarettes and tobacco will be more accessible than ever; especially to young children.
Making tobacco illegal, will wipe out all government regulation and control. Temperance will mean that the Fed can no longer regulate the price, the quality, the potency, and the availability of tobacco products. Plus the government will lose all of the tax revenue, and the states can kiss their tobacco settlement money goodbye. Ultimately, we will end up spending vast amounts of money on enforcement.
Tobacco will also become more available to children, and there will be no control over how it is packaged, marketed, sold, or what other illicit drugs it is laced with. It will also become a staple product of organized crime and smugglers. Ironically, banning tobacco will set back the anti-tobacco movement farther than the "Big Tobacco" lobby ever could.
You're dead on correct. Anyone remember Prohibition and how well that worked out?
Posted by: lplimac at June 4, 2003 4:52 PMTobacco is big business and the government hasn't been able to get it's filthy hands in on it other than taxes so they want to ban it. It will never go away. I am not a smoker, but do believe in our rights to choose what's good and what's bad for us. Our government is in place to help lay the law of the land, but not so that it is so intrusive in our everyday lives.
Posted by: SageOne at June 4, 2003 9:57 PMAs a non-smoker I am stunned at the vigor which other folks attack smokers. It seems fundamental to civilized society that if you don't care for someones personal habits you avoid them. The logical extension of this "i don't like it so make it illegal" attitude will extend to all facets of our lives - perfume is pretty obnoxious, flatulence in an elevator - awful, BO - unacceptable, loud music ......
What happened to the concept of personal liberty and choice.
The media is blowing this whole Surgeon General/tobacco ban thing out of proportion.For one thing, the man did not "call "for a tobacco ban as many of the media outlets are reporting; but did say he would support that legislation in what I see as a "pie in the sky","if this was a perfect world.." sort of way.He was coming at the question from the perspective of a health care provider.When he said he "didn't see the need for it in society", he was merely reflecting the opinion of doctors everywhere.Let"s put it this way;if someone stated that the "Anna Nicole Show" and "The Bachelor" were inane sources of entainment,and detrimental to the cultivation of culture in the individual, you,as a person of discerning taste may agree and even say that you would support them being taken of the air.That would be your opinion, which all individuals are entitled to.
Posted by: Jonathan at June 8, 2003 11:29 AMI certainly wouldn't cry if either of those shows were taken off the air. However, you're analogy doesn't quite fit the argument, because the SG is in the position to make public policy recommendations. That is, he was testifying before a Congressional Committee, and thus, his testimony will undoubtedly be used by some to support legislation.
A better analogy would be for the FCC chairman to be testifying that he would support a ban of the "Anna Nicole" show, because it was a bad influence on your nation's youth. Since the FCC chairman is in a position of power, it would probably raise the alarm for content providers across the nation.
Also, I would personally never support a ban on the free exchange of goods between two private parties, when it doesn't deprive a third party of life, liberty, or property. In other words, I would never support censoring the Anna Nicole Show, because I think it's inane. I may, however, choose to not support the show by refusing to watch it, and refusing to spend money on their advertiser's products. As a private citizen, that is my right.
I would never advocate outright censorship. It goes against every thing I believe in.
Posted by: Ravenwood at June 8, 2003 5:13 PM(c) Ravenwood and Associates, 1990 - 2014
