Clove Cigarettes Have Gone Up In Smoke

In researching the persecution of e-cigarette manufacturers, I discovered something else that I can direct my impotent outrage toward.

In late September 2009, clove cigarettes were banned in this country. Apparently, our all-wise government has determined that flavored cigarettes, including cloves, are more appealing to children and they have been deemed more dangerous than another other cigarette for that very reason. I found it odd that flavored cigars and smokeless tobacco products are not included in the ban. And I nearly fell out of my chair when I realized that menthol-flavored cigarettes are not included in the flavored cigarette ban and Philip Morris USA (part of Big Tobacco for those of you not in the know) supported the ban. Lolwut?

So what gives? Feeling quite a bit like Philip Marlowe (a fictional private detective who, appropriately enough, smoked), I had a feeling that things weren't as they seemed and I did a little more digging.

In addition to plain old tobacco cigarettes, they also came flavored as cloves, menthol, candy, and fruit. I discovered that the FDA (them again!) determined that cigarette manufacturers intend to attract teens to the dark side by making flavored cigarettes. That's very interesting. Considering the flak that cigarette companies get for any implied advertising directed toward minors, I'd sure like to see the evidence of a marketing plan that specifies an implicit desire to attract teens. And, considering that flavored cigarettes have been around for decades, why is it suddenly a problem that needs to be addressed?

How the FDA made such a determination is anyone's guess, but I suppose their newly developed Center for Tobacco Products had to have something to pursue in order to justify their department and their salaries. The SCOTUS ruled in 2000 that the FDA does not have the power to regulate cigarettes, but President Obama and Congress granted them that authority in June 2009. I'm a little confused because it seems that the "T" in the BATF would cover all tobacco products, but I'm not one of our all-wise government leaders so what do I know? I was particularly galled to find that the FDA also developed a tip-line to be used if anyone sees a retailer selling flavored cigarettes. Call me crazy, but I'm generally not a fan of citizens reporting on other citizens to the government. But it's okay if it's for the children, eh comrade? There's no way this is about expanding government, duplicating government effort, or taking another baby step toward making all tobacco products illegal. No, there's no way that this is really what it's about.

In my quick research, I also discovered that Philip Morris USA only sells traditional and menthol cigarettes. Ah, it's all starting to make sense now. Why would Philip Morris want to have any competition? See, they aren't the bad guys, it's those damned flavored cigarette makers who are the real problem. And, after having been on the market for decades, teens are only now realizing that clove cigarettes are awesome. Uh-huh.

I find a recent study to be rather puzzling. It found that menthol cigarettes are far harder to quit than traditional cigarettes among African-American and Latino users. Though menthol cigarettes are preferred by only around 25% of Caucasian smokers, nearly 80% of African-American smokers prefer menthols. It also found that menthols are increasing in popularity among teen smokers. So can someone explain why menthol-flavored cigarettes aren't included in the flavored cigarette ban?

Let me see if I have this straight. Cigarettes are bad. We should quit smoking. Menthol cigarettes are harder to quit than traditional unflavored cigarettes. But only other flavored cigarettes are banned? Menthols, flavored cigars, and flavored smokeless tobacco are okay? I'm not trying to be obtuse, but what am I missing here?

I'm not Fox Mulder and I don't see conspiracies everywhere I look, but something sure stinks here and it sure as heck isn't the smoke from flavored cigarettes.

Apparently it's Bad for Smokers to Quit Smoking

Smoking is bad, okay? This is the message that our great and glorious government leaders have been telling us via legislation for over 40 years. Cigarette manufacturers have been forced by the government to place warnings on their product since the mid-1960s. Cigarette manufacturers have been banned from television and radio advertising since the very early-1970s. Smoking has been banned since the early-1990s in many private businesses due to intrusive legislation.

It seems we got the message all too clear. Big Tobacco is a boogieman that we hate as much as the characters in the novel 1984 hated Emmanuel Goldstein. Big Tobacco is our common enemy, comrades. It is our duty to hate them and the users of their product.

The non-smoking public is enraged by smokers. It is acceptable to direct all of our hatred and vitriol toward this minority group because they are a dangerous threat to public health & safety. Interestingly enough, it is not socially acceptable to hate other minority groups who may carry communicable diseases that are also a dangerous threat to public health & safety. Society is impossibly paradoxical sometimes.

A handy device, colloquially called an e-cigarette, has emerged as a popular smoking cessation tool in the last several years. The smoker gets their nicotine hit via a vaporized liquid nicotine mixture and enjoys a similar hand-to-mouth experience. It doesn't release any smoke or chemicals, it only releases water vapor. It should be perfectly acceptable to use an e-cigarette in areas where actual smoking is prohibited because the user is not actually smoking anything.

I'm a former smoker and this sounds like a win-win to me. Smokers get their hit and no one is forced to endure the lingering effects of cigarette smoke. What's not to like here?

Turns out there's plenty not to like here. Since smokers still persist in their habit, many states have increased the taxes on cigarettes to epic rates. Presumably, state legislatures and voters figured that they could tax the addiction out of existence. But then they inexplicably created feel-good social programs that are funded by said tobacco taxes. Suddenly it isn't desirable to have too many people quit smoking because those fabulous social programs sure as heck aren't going to pay for themselves. Those programs need to continue to receive funding from the cigarette taxes we get from those damn dirty smokers. Apparently it is bad for smokers to quit smoking.

The FDA regulates e-cigarettes as a drug-device combination and they had been attempting to stop shipments of e-cigarettes. Federal District Judge Richard Leon put a temporary stop to the agency's shenanigans by recently declaring that e-cigarettes are basically the same as traditional paper & tobacco cigarettes. He pointedly added, "This case appears to be yet another example of FDA's aggressive efforts to regulate recreational tobacco products as drugs." And he found their claim of jurisdiction "to be unreasonable and unacceptable." Given Judge Leon's ruling I would guess that BATF are the ones who would regulate e-cigarettes and I'm curious what they think of the FDA trying to regulate one of their regulated products.

So why is California Attorney General Jerry Brown in state court attempting to prevent the sale of e-cigarettes? It's disingenuous that AG Brown says that e-cigarettes are dangerous and marketed to children. Traditional cigarettes are considered dangerous, why isn't he trying to make a case against those? I'm curious to hear what evidence he has of this marketing effort directed toward children and I doubt it truly exists. Smoking Everywhere is the company involved in the action in California. Their VP, Ray Story, maintains that they do not represent their product as being healthy or safe, their product carries health warnings on the package, and his company discontinues business relationships with retailers who have been found to sell the product to minors.

So what's the real issue? I think that Jerry Brown desires another term as Governor and he doesn't want to see any programs cut during his desired tenure. Cutting programs tends to piss off constituents, even if We The People don't want to pay for said programs. Keep the tobacco taxes rolling in and we get to keep programs that make us feel all warm & fuzzy.

Sorry, but this is a win-lose to me and the only people who will be winning are those who are interested in collecting tobacco taxes for selfish gain. Smoking is a legal activity if you are over 18-years of age. If smoking is so damn dangerous, it stands to reason that our benevolent leaders would want us to quit. Here is a tool that is helping smokers quit and it is being persecuted. That's wrong.

I doubt that Jerry Brown would have had my vote anyway, but he sure as hell won't be getting it now.