Telling It Like It Is
During March, 2006, Jacob Sullum of “Reason” magazine penned two fine articles on smoking and its relationship to government.
In the first titled, Clean Air Calabasas Sullum refers to the Los Angles suburb of Calabasas,which basically outlawed smoking everywhere including outdoors, as a “smoke-free, family-friendly atmosphere of moralistic intolerance”. Sullum’s assessment is right on the money. Sullum further points out, and rightfully so, that supporters of the “smoke free city” mentality predict that this intolerance will spread to the entire state of California and ultimately the nation.
Owing to our nation’s habit of adopting every idiocy which arises in California, such dire predictions may not be without merit. Oklahoma smokers must be vigilant, otherwise similar smoking bans will surface, first at the local and ultimately at the state level. The best protection against this type of idiocy is best expressed in the smoker’s rights motto which states, “I smoke and I vote”. We must make that message very clear to those at all levels of government.
Sullum’s second article, State Cigarette Mob Can’t Kick the Habit he touches upon the mutual “protection racket’ existing between the states and big tobacco. A scandal which has arisen as a result of the Master Settlement Agreement between the big tobacco companies and the states.
This agreement between tobacco companies and the states while encouraging all parties involved to mumble platitudes of “smoking is bad for your health and you should not smoke” in reality links the financial interests of state government and tobacco companies in a ‘common cause’.
Sullum hammers his point home with the words of Colorado Treasurer Mark Hillman:
Because the settlement payments are tied to cigarette sales, Mark Hillman notes, states are sending “a mixed message to citizens that ‘We want you to stop smoking’ because it’s terrible for your health, but ‘We need you to keep smoking’ to pay for government programs.” Nowadays the states rake in more money from smokers than the cigarette companies do. Big Government and Big Tobacco have not just joined forces; they’ve become synonymous.
As we pointed out here in “Tobacco’s Double Addiction“, the state of Oklahoma is so addicted to tobacco money that the Attorney General is in panic at the thought that Oklahoma’s kickback from tobacco companies might be reduced. So much so that he has hit up the state legislature for funds to hire more attorneys, just in case.
Who knows whether the Attorney General was motivated to enter into the Master Settlement Agreement for the potential health benefits of Oklahoma smokers or if he was simply in it for the money. There is no doubt where his motivation now resides. One needs only to follow the money to understand what is important to Oklahoma Attorney Drew Edmondson today.
April 8th, 2006 at 12:10 pm
The most basic element of freedom is the ability to use your own property as you see fit. Granted, there are legitimate “public good” issues for limited free use, but the exercise thereof should be strictly limited.
A long time ago, we gave up the right to own property. Now, local, state and federal government agencies can, by fiat and without court or legislative action, limit your use of your own property.
I’m wondering what’s next. Fat people? Perfumed people? Offensive people? Laughing too loud?