Obama signs strongest anti-smoking bill ever

Tuesday 23rd June, 07:04 AM JST

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

› Login to comment

Latest 15 of 37 Total Comments Show All

SushiSake3 at 04:51 PM JST - 23rd June

Yet another sign that when candidate Obama spoke about change, he meant it. :-)

As I mentioned earlier, Bush opposed this legislation that actually helps prevent Americans from getting costly diseases and that works to slash associated healthcare costs borne by taxpayers.

But Bush and the Republicans never did have Americans' best interests at heart.

No, this thread is not about Bush, but I just found the contrast in positions of the current and former presidents very interesting indeed. :-)
apecNetworks at 04:54 PM JST - 23rd June

The underlying irony of all this is, on the West Coast, health care services were good from the taxes of abundent sales of tobacco and liquor. W/ those revenues shrinking to nothing, they had to go for gas taxes (political suicide). The states would be in a better situation if smoking and partying ran amok, especially health care - sooooooooo ironic.
SushiSake3 at 04:56 PM JST - 23rd June

Where I'm from, smoking is banned in all workplaces, pubs, schools, indoor meeting places, restaurants and cafes, and the only places you can buy a pack of fags is - or should I say, was - in a pub.

And there are no tobacco vending machines.

Some would decry this as a sign of an overbearing State, but I just feel thankful that I can go anywhere and not have to breathe some inconsiderate twit's second hand smoke.

Hands down - that's awesome. :-)
teleprompter at 06:12 PM JST - 23rd June

He is so well-spoken!

" I’ve been chewing Nicorette strenuously. "
RomeoRamenII at 07:14 PM JST - 23rd June

Yet another "Do as I say, not as I do" from Obama.
SushiSake3 at 08:08 PM JST - 23rd June

President Obama pushes through the most positive tobacco legislation ever and Republicans **still **moan.

Let's not forget the guy they backed opposed the passing of this legislation that helps safeguard the lives of, among others.....Republicans.

Republicans really don't need anyone to help them look pathetic. :-)
BeaverCleaver at 09:42 PM JST - 23rd June

I hate cigarettes. Even more than I hate cigarettes I hate people who will not stop at violating people's rights trying to get rid of the things. People smoking outside is fine. People smoking in their own house is fine. People smoking at establishments catering to smokers is fine.

Do I care what candy flavors they add to tobacco? Only if the additives are harmful to the health. And they are putting a whole bunch of additives in cigarettes that are dangerous to health every day, and have been for decades. The government has business regulating that. They do not have business regulating flavors.

Americans have clearly lost sight of what freedom means.
adaydream at 11:04 PM JST - 23rd June

skipthesong, your smokefree neighborhoods... you talking about people not allowed to smoke in their own homes? < :-)
Alphaape at 11:05 PM JST - 23rd June

The underlying irony of all this is, on the West Coast, health care services were good from the taxes of abundent sales of tobacco and liquor. W/ those revenues shrinking to nothing, they had to go for gas taxes (political suicide). The states would be in a better situation if smoking and partying ran amok, especially health care - sooooooooo ironic.

apecNetworks good points. I am not a smoker, and I agree that it can be bad for you, but this will definately cause a dent in a lot of state taxes. Earlier this year, Obama signed (on Apr 1 I guess the April Fool's joke is on those smokers who voted for him) a law that raised the Federal Tax on a pack of cigs from .67 to $1.01. If you were a smoker, you basically saw a tax increase of $30/month or $360/year (assuming a pack a day habit, if you smoked more, obivously it would cost you more). This hidden tax will hit those the most in the lower income brackets since they will have to pay that, in addition to local and state "sin taxes" that are going up as local governments try to find more revenue sources. So they are going to tax themselves out of income since it is getting where a person can't afford a pack, and I guess next they will have to go after something else to find tax revenue.

Don't get me wrong, I think this is a good move, but I think it is just going to be felt elsewhere when state governments find new ways to make up for the loss revenue. Stopping kids from smoking is fine, but if an adult is aware of the consequences, then I say let them smoke if they want. Just make sure it is in their designated smoking areas.
harmoneeikaiwa at 01:42 AM JST - 24th June

Reminds me of what my father used to say when I was a kid and I was mad at him for saying it. "Don't do as I do,do as I say."
adaydream at 03:01 AM JST - 24th June

Alphaape when I smoked I used to get upset at how they raised taxes on the "SIN" items, tobacco and alcohol.

I never understood why they didn't raise taxes on "Fat Foods", etc. < :-)
apecNetworks at 05:01 AM JST - 24th June

To Alphaape:

Actually, I am talking in the past tense, not about something that may happen. The business model I am discussing has already occurred. It has already resulted in hidden inflation, practiced widespread (check any particular state). I looked at this issue when European Governments were resisting zero tolerance of second hand smoke from the US. Taxes leading to inflation.
apecNetworks at 05:27 AM JST - 24th June

The "net result" is, everyone is healthier, but poorer. ;)
zurcronium at 05:39 AM JST - 24th June

I doubt seriously that even now the revenue generated in taxes by governments in the US come even remotely come close to capturing the huge costs to the medical system caused by tobacco to smokers and those around them when they smoke. Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer in the US now and contributes to heart disease which is the leading cause of death.
Alphaape at 09:35 AM JST - 24th June

zurcronium, I did just a rough guess on what taxes could possibly be generated from cigarette taxes. Just looking at the Fed tax of $1.01/pack; 1 month would get the Feds $30.3/month and $363/year from one smoker. Multiply this by an estimate of 20 million smokers (just guessing there are probably more than that) and you get the Feds about $7.2 billion/year. That's just if each of those person I am guessing is just a single pack a day smoker, if they smoke more, then obviously it would go up.

So, there is a lot of money that is generated on cigarette taxes, which I see will probably be the next thing that the Feds will be after those who traffic in them illegally, and that the Indians will move cigarette sales on their reservations and casinos to the fore front more so than gambling in the near future to capture that market.

At least I can say that since I am not a smoker, Obama did keep his promise to me to not raise my taxes (well at least my income tax) since I am not a smoker.