Banning Flavors in Cigarettes: Discrimination again?

By GregInFla Posted in Comments (11) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

Congress is considering S. 2461 The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, which would grant limited control of tobacco to the FDA. Fox News asks: Is menthol a flavor that should be banned from cigarettes?

Menthol flavoring would not be banned under a bill before Congress that gives control of tobacco products to the Food and Drug Administration. The bill would ban flavor additives such as mint, clove and vanilla, which appeal to young people.

Menthol is preferred by more than 75 percent of black smokers, according to government estimates. Fewer than 25 percent of whites smoke it.

Read more ...

One could deduce that allowing menthol flavoring in cigarettes is a move against blacks. This is Dr. Louis Sullivan's opinion:

"If we're banning things such as clove and peppermint, then we should ban menthol," said Dr. Louis Sullivan, health secretary from 1989 to 1993 under President George H.W. Bush and one of seven former health secretaries who sent a letter to lawmakers voicing opposition to the menthol exemption. "If it doesn't happen, this bill will be discriminatory against African-Americans."

You can read more from Sullivan at ajc.com.

What do the tobacco companies have to say? Fox News reports

Philip Morris spokesman Bill Phelps said the bill would give the FDA authority to remove ingredients that are determined harmful to health.

"Based on our scientific judgment, menthol does not increase the inherent hazards of smoking," Phelps said.

Rush today had this to say about it (Story #6 on the Stack):

RUSH: Okay, speaking of the race card, do you remember the story where the AMA or the Food and Drug Administration was going to ban all flavorings in cigarettes except menthol, after they learned that 75% of blacks smoke menthol cigarettes? So they didn't want to ban menthol because they thought it would be racist. Guess what? The country's largest organization of doctors last week refused to challenge a controversial tobacco bill that would ban many flavor additives and cigarettes sold in the US but exempt menthol. So the AMA's gone along with the FDA. Fine, we're going to leave menthol flavorings "under a bill before Congress that gives control of tobacco products to the Food and Drug Administration. The bill would ban flavor additives such as mint, clove and vanilla, which appeal to young people," but menthol flavoring would be allowed. Menthol preferred by more than 75%% of black smokers. Hey, Obama, this is made to order for you, bud. The AMA, FDA want to ban all flavorings except those preferred by blacks. Can we infer from this that the AMA and the FDA would prefer blacks continue to smoke? Why? Smoking does what, it makes people sick? It shortens their life? And the FDA and the AMA, we infer here, want blacks to continue to be able to get the flavor that makes 'em smoke the most?

My initial reaction: Congress cannot win here. If it outlaws menthol, then it could be viewed as discrinating against black smokers. if it allows menthol, it also can be viewed as being against black smokers. They were not thinking or paying attention when they started down this road, which has turned into a one-way dead end street.

P.S.: Please accept my in-advance apology: if you go to the link above to Rush's page, you have to go past the Lara Logan pic to story 6. It may be a bit difficult, but control your cursor and scroll on down.

Not banning somebody's favorite flavor is discriminatory ? What about pipe smokers and chewing tobacco ?

Are they going to ban the Nicotine sodas I get from Japan ?

Jeez is there no end to congress's reach ?


"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

I am sooooooooooooooooooo sick of liberals!

We like to actually expand on why we think the other side is wrong. There are plenty of other outlets for mere catharsis.

lesterblog.blogspot.com

There might be turmoil in many nations if certain American brands aren't made anymore.

lesterblog.blogspot.com

There isn't anything that they smoke that isn't flavored fifty different ways.


"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

I have skimmed through the new Chapter IX and cannot find exact wording on the flavor restrictions. It defines flavors and additives, but the control of those is escaping me. The first thing I thought of was pipe tobacco. The regulations cover both producers and importers, so it affects everything sold here. Would it control products made for export? I would hope not, given our trade deficit's shortness of exports. Also, what would happen if you get caught with a pack of clover cigarettes?

Look at this from a different angle: Doesn't a person have the right to treat his/her own body as he/she sees fit, with privacy from an inquisition-like government? That's the pro-choice position, right? Or is smoking a bigger decision than taking a human life?

Given the conundrum of menthol control and its perceived affects on the African-American smoking community, I'd predict this legislation will, unless amended, die somewhere, and likely be buried next to Obama's Global Poverty Act.

-- A true evolutionist would let endangered species die off. Anyone care to change sides?
-- Can't Feed 'em? Don't Breed 'em! --

and everyone invested in it.

Seriously, no one, on any side, has ever answered my question of why the magic and absolute right to privacy at the heart of Roe v. Wade suddenly goes out the window whenever one person is doing things to their body without even involving another human being.

lesterblog.blogspot.com

But I don't know any state that lets "children" buy tobacco products of any stripe. This is clearly another case of not enforcing the laws on the books, taking another of our freedoms, (even if its a vice, it is a freedom), and making laws for the sake of being seen as doing something.

If we want to solve the social security crisis, then we better find ways to let us die off before we break the piggy bank.

On a sarcastic side, the condoms-in-schools argument could be made to justify the sales of cigarettes to minors. That's the one that goes: "You know they are going to smoke, so why not let them use cigarettes. If they cannot get cigarettes, they'll jut use marijuana or crack instead and then they'll get hurt worse."

-- A true evolutionist would let endangered species die off. Anyone care to change sides?
-- Can't Feed 'em? Don't Breed 'em! --

If the act does what it intends, (and that's a big if, because this is Congress, where bills are written by the affected businesses -- in this case Philip Morris and for the Mortgage bill we have BankOfAmerica as its author), then this is a tax cut for the children who will not be buying cigarettes anymore. So, the libs will need to either raise revenue via a tax increase or cut spending in order to offset this tax cut.

-- A true evolutionist would let endangered species die off. That's the basis of the theory. Anyone care to change sides?
-- Can't Feed 'em? Don't Breed 'em! --

 
Redstate Network Login:
(lost password?)


©2008 Eagle Publishing, Inc. All rights reserved. Legal, Copyright, and Terms of Service