Sunday, May 31, 2009
A smoking case of collusion
Luanne Traud
Recent columns
- My daughter, the voter
- A few new Voices would be nice
- A rush to legislate
- An elementary problem with SOLs
From the RoundTable blog
When I smoked, my favorite warning label on the side of the pack said: "Smoking by pregnant women may result in fetal injury, premature birth and low birth." Since I wasn't pregnant, no health worry there. Right? Anyway "may" is different than "will."
My brand of choice was Marlboro Lights. They weren't as strong as regular Marlboros. I knew this because they didn't stink as much, they didn't burn my throat as badly and the taste was milder. Employing the logic of an addict, I could then reason they were healthier -- wait, that's not correct, I knew even then that there is no such thing as safe smoke. They were, I rationalized, less unhealthy. Maybe it would take longer for disease and death to find me.
Phillip Morris encouraged me to think this way. A U.S. Court of Appeals recently upheld a 2006 racketeering verdict against Phillip Morris, R.J. Reynolds, Brown & Williamson, Lorrilard Inc., and others. As it turns out, the tobacco makers were no better than gangsters looking to hang onto their territory without taking to the mattresses.
The companies had a gentlemen's agreement that none would bloody the other by claiming to have a safer cigarette, thereby all could avoid having to disclose that "light," "ultra-light," "low-tar," "mild" cigarettes are as dangerous as regular-strength brands -- knowledge the gentlemen knew and buried.
The U.S. government began prosecuting the case in 1999. It has taken nearly a decade to get this far, and it isn't over. The tobacco giants plan to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. This means they probably won't have to change labels or start warning smokers anytime soon.
Not that small labels integrated into a pack's design are all that effective in convincing someone who has just plunked down $4 for a fix to throw the pack in the garbage. And youth, especially, aren't going to care whether cigarettes contain carbon monoxide (another lame "warning") or that quitting now would greatly reduce serious risks to their health.
Once nicotine has a hold on you, nothing short of vigilant willpower or death will free you. I would imagine smokers would still rationalize away the danger even if packs were plastered with Mr. Yuk stickers and they were required during the purchase to view the skeletal-like remains of a person dying from lung cancer. So powerful is the addiction.
It's one people who never smoked can't understand. I'm with them on wanting clean indoor air. I await with anticipation the nonsmoking restaurants Virginia will soon have. I am like most former addicts: grateful that I haven't had a cigarette in many years, fearful that it would take but one to be right out there, huddled some winter day with the sidewalk smokers.
But I also understand the frustration of smokers. Smokers feel they are being picked on and pick-pocketed. The federal government in March increased the pack tax from 39 cents to $1.01. Virginia flirted briefly with doubling its tax from 30 to 60 cents. Gov. Kaine wanted the $155 million more it was estimated to bring in to help offset the $400 million a year Virginia pays in smoke-related Medicaid expenses.
Even when I smoked, I understood that taxing cigarettes was society's attempt to collect restitution for treatment and cessation programs. Plus, if the tax is high enough it can serve as a financial curb to force smokers if not to quit to at least cut down.
What is harder to understand is the town of Vinton's plan to impose a cigarette tax (perhaps as high as 30 cents) in order to bail out the general fund. Smokers aren't using a disproportionately higher amount of town services, so why should they pay?
Because they are an easy target. Smokers are pariahs in today's society, though older ones were hooked when it was socially acceptable.
While it could be argued that younger smokers certainly are aware of the dangers before they take that first drag, they haven't a clue as to addiction and the power it has to make smart people do stupid things.
The tobacco companies understand it well. The problem is they run a business in which they kill a great number of their customers, though not before taking thousands of their dollars. They have a product with no beneficial use. In order to stay in business, they need always to solicit and hook new customers. They'll always outsmart us.
Traud is a member of The Roanoke Times editorial board.
