The Stogie Guys

When Maryland Senate Minority Leader David Brinkley – a politician who’s against the proposed statewide smoking ban – was asked if the law would finally come to fruition this year, he simply quipped, “It’ll happen.” The Republican from Frederick even went so far as to say “it’s inevitable.”

The dubiously-titled Clean Indoor Air Act of 2007 would place the entire (OK, it’s not that big, but it’s still a state) Old Line State in the freedom-squelching ranks of sixteen other states, not to mention over 250 local governments, who have already adopted fascist smoking bans.

Five Maryland counties – Howard, Charles, Prince George’s, Montgomery, and Talbot, for those of you keeping score at home – currently have their own bans in place. And the Baltimore City Council is currently considering a city-wide ban, which they may vote on by the end of this month.

This is the third time Annapolis has tried to pass through a statewide ban. While nothing is certain, those in favor of controlling the actions of consenting adults and violating the property rights of business owners are not-so-cautiously optimistic.

Will this bill pass? “Absolutely,” says Delegate Barbara Frush.

It’s enough to make freedom-oriented citizens like myself sick. Fortunately, as a Virginian, I try not to spend too much time north of the Potomac River as it is. (Maybe just an evening game at Camden Yards every once and a while.)

Sadly, even if the ban does not pass this year, a quick look at the overly intrusive policies of Maryland’s government suggest it will sooner or later.

My advice to Marylanders? For now, smoke ‘em while you’ve got ‘em. Once the ban passes, I’ll be happy to have a drink and a cigar with you in The Commonwealth.

–Patrick A

Tags: cigars

Here are a pair of news items that show how seriously dangerous, and at the same time how laughably absurd, smoking bans are.

Smoking Ban Takes a Life

Smoking ban advocates claim that such bans improve health because any minute exposure to second hand smoke could theoretically be the one that causes cancer. (Of course, by that reasoning, so could a sole char-broiled burger, a single glass of chlorinated water, being exposed to the sun’s rays for just a minute, or any one x-ray.)

Still, one thing is for sure: Smoking bans kill people. In the most recent incident, sixty-five year old Murray Miles Patterson caught hypothermia and later died because he was forced out of his long-term care facility in Toronto into sub-zero temperatures by the Smoke-Free Ontario Act.

But Patterson is not the only victim of smoking bans. Since 2001, three Kansas University students have fallen to their deaths while smoking. Kansas has a strict no smoking policy, despite requests from students for specific smoking rooms. And that’s just at Kansas University…

The Stogies Go Marching On

Meanwhile, in the nation’s capital, a group of high-ranking military officers and defense officials (including Secretary of Defense Robert Gates) defied the district’s smoking ban while holding their traditional “Wallow of the Military Order of the Carabao” annual gala:

Hotel officials “tried to tell” guests “they couldn’t smoke cigars and they said, ‘Nope, you signed the contract before the law’ … so everyone lights up a cigar and the whole room is just thick with smoke,” the source told The Politico’s Amy Doolittle. For the record, we’re told it’s the last time the event will take place at the now smokeless venue.

Which begs the question: Does anyone seriously think these military men are criminals for breaking the smoking ban law? Doubtful.

–Patrick S

On Friday we mentioned that the Virginia State Senate looked close to passing a state-wide smoking ban. What follows is a closer look at that bill.

The ominously-titled “Virginia Smoke Free Air Act” would repeal the also ominously-titled, but significantly less-restrictive, “Virginia Indoor Clean Air Act.” The Virginia Indoor Clean Air Act only requires restaurants over a certain size to provide a non-smoking section and forbids local governments from passing any ban that is more restrictive.

Currently, the Virginia Smoke Free Air Act has been referred out of the Senate’s Committee on Education and Health. (Curiously these bills never go to a committee on civil liberties or property rights.)

And while the bill purposefully make this clear, it will ban smoking in all bars by defining “bars,” along with almost everything else – including, at times, private clubs – as public places:

“Public place” means any enclosed area to which the public is invited or in which the public is permitted, including but not limited to, banks, bars, educational facilities, healthcare facilities, hotel and motel lobbies, laundromats, public transportation facilities, reception areas, retail food production and marketing establishments, retail services establishments, retail stores, shopping malls, sports arenas, theaters, and waiting rooms. “Public place” shall include a private club when being used for a function to which the general public is invited; however, a private residence is not a “public place” unless being used as a child care, adult day care, or healthcare facility.

In short, with the small exceptions of tobacco shops, tobacco factories, labeled “smoking” hotel rooms, and private residences (with caveats on that listed above), this constitutes a complete statewide ban on smoking. A more cynical person might be thankful that a ban on smoking in multi-unit houses wasn’t included, as is being considered in Belmont, California.

Yet enforcing such a draconian ban isn’t easy, and it would surely be expensive to have police officers go bar to bar checking for cigarette butts. But the anti-smoking zealots have “solved” this by forcing proprietors to enforce the ban. So after telling restaurant and bar proprietors that their establishments are “public places,” the bill then goes on to forcibly enlist them to enforce the law against their own customers:

Any proprietor of any establishment, building, or area that is subject to the smoking restrictions provided in this article who fails to comply with such restrictions shall be subject to a civil penalty of not more than $200 for the first offense and $500 for any subsequent offense.

Overall, the proposed Virginia smoking ban is just like every other smoking ban: a paternalistic infringement on individual liberty and property rights.

It surely makes a mockery of the motto on the state flag: “Thus Always to Tyrants.”

–Patrick S

CAO International Inc., the Nashville-based stogie manufacturer famous for its Criollo, Brazilia, Italia, and Flavours lines, was acquired by Henri Wintermans Cigars last week.

The Dutch company is affiliated with ST Cigar Group Holdings Inc., which produces over 1.3 billion miniature machine-made stogies each year.

As of last night, neither the CAO website, CAO President Tim Ozgener’s blog, nor the Wintermans Cigars website made any mention of the transaction or the price.

But Mr. Ozgener did tell Cigar Aficionado that CAO is continuing with business as usual and that he will remain president at least until his five-year contract expires.

“Our goal is to be the No. 1 cigar brand in the world, known for quality, distribution, prestige,” he said. “It was in an effort for CAO to become more of a global brand. With this deal, we’ve saved about 20 years.”

According to the article, the deal also seems to make sense for Wintermans Cigars.

Wintermans has very little presence in the United States, and no long-filler cigar assets prior to the acquisition. Of the 1.3 billion cigars it sold in 2006, 1.1 billion were sold in Europe, and only 4 million in the United States. Acquiring CAO nearly quadruples its U.S. business in terms of units – CAO sold about 12 million cigars in 2006, more than 90 percent of them in the United States – and thrusts it into a solid position in the market for premium, handmade cigars.

For now, only time will tell what the acquisition means for CAO fans in America.

–Patrick A

Tags: cigars

Last December – following the passage of ballot initiatives in Nevada and Ohio – over half of all Americans were living in a state, county, or municipality with a smoking ban in place.

Yet within “a few years,” all of America could be smoke-free. That according to Bronson Frick, professional mouthpiece for the anti-smoking group that goes by the Orwellian name “Americans for Nonsmokers’ Rights.”

The group, which has previously been known to use false and misleading information to whip its donors into an anti-smoking frenzy, recently trumpeted on their website that 50.2 percent of Americans now live under anti-smoking laws. More recently, in an Associated Press article, Frick said the group has plans to make these bans nationwide:

”The movement for smoke-free air has gone from being a California oddity to the nationwide norm,” said Bronson Frick, the group’s associate director. ”We think 100 percent of Americans will live in smoke-free jurisdictions within a few years.”

But smoking bans haven’t just been spreading from state to state, city to city. They are also becoming increasingly extreme. And much like the anti-smoking movement as a whole, these most extreme bans are gaining traction in California:

The Southern California city of Calabasas broke new ground for the United States in spring 2006 when it banned smoking in all public areas, including sidewalks. As of March 1, Emeryville will have anti-smoking laws almost as tough as Calabasas, with new widespread smoking bans, including in parks and on footpaths.

San Francisco now bans smoking in city parks, golf courses, and public squares, and Belmont made international news in November with its pending proposal to ban smoking citywide, except in detached, single-family homes.

And anti-smoking agitators seem determined to push their agenda into uncharted areas, such as adoption. One such group, ASH, proudly described a distraught couple that were refused an adoption because the husband smokes (though only outdoors):

A heartbroken couple has been told they cannot adopt a child because he smokes, even though he says he never smokes indoors. Indeed, the prohibition stands until he quits smoking for six months and provides medical documentation that he is no longer a smoker.

With bans and other anti-smoking laws on the march all across the country, it is important to remember that historically these trends don’t last. But, still, with so much anti-smoking fervor in the air (pardon the pun), now seems like a good time to review the case against smoker discrimination.

–Patrick S

Back in August we told you about Fidel Castro’s “imminent death” and the possibility for Cuban reform. While his passing was obviously not as imminent as everyone thought (because he’s still alive), his failing health is once again making headlines the world over.

On Tuesday, the Spanish newspaper El Pais reported that “a grave infection in the large intestine, at least three failed operations, and various complications have left…Castro laid up with a very grave prognosis.” The Associated Press reports that such infections carry a mortality rate “as high as 90 percent” for the elderly.

Cuba has released very little about the ruthless communist dictator’s condition, and a diplomat in Madrid even went so far as to say that the leak is “a lie” and “if anyone has to talk about Castro’s illness, it’s Havana.”

Since the evening of July 31, 2006, Castro’s brother, Raúl, has held the reins of the island nation’s overbearing government.

I thought yesterday’s news of Castro’s worsening condition would be an excellent opportunity to revisit this post and remind you that while it’s true we can’t expect major reform from Raúl anytime soon, many foreign policy experts believe he is more pragmatic than Fidel, and therefore more open to economic reforms.

Economic reforms that could, in time, end America’s hypocritical embargo on Cuban goods – like cigars.

–Patrick A

Tags: cigars

I’m a big fan of Washington, DC. After all, it’s my adopted home. Despite all the pockets of crime, the corruption, and a never-ending supply of power-hungry douchebags, the nation’s capital really is a wonderful city. The dynamic people, the history, the nightlife, the opportunity – it’s all here for the taking.

But, often due to the moronic government it houses (both national and local), Washington more frequently stands as a monument to politicians’ fallibility and mismanagement than it does to American ingenuity and freedom. Take these two recent, tobacco-related stories, for example:

A city-wide smoking ban (except for politicians)

As we reported in our latest Friday Sampler, DC’s fascist smoking ban went into effect on January 2.

The ban – which squelches freedom of choice in all restaurants, offices, bars, and nightclubs – includes an exemption for a few questionable locales: the ornate Speaker’s Lobby in the Capitol Building and all offices of senators and representatives.

So, basically, it’s OK to smoke indoors – as long as you’re a power-wielding politician.

Interestingly, new Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has indicated she plans to extend the ban to cover those locations. This is ironically one of the few issues on which I agree with Madame Speaker (and the only instance you’ll find me supporting a smoking ban).

If the good people of the nation’s capital can’t light up, the fat cats on The Hill shouldn’t be able to either.

What’s 14 percent between friends?

The DC ban also includes an exemption for businesses that suffer a five percent decrease in revenue due to the law – a scenario that’s quite likely, especially given Virginia’s tolerance of smokers.

But newly sworn-in Mayor Adrian Fenty is hinting that he wants to raise that threshold to 15 percent. Apparently the young politician considers a crippling 14 percent drop in revenue insufficient to warrant restoring property rights to the business owner.

The move is winning Fenty accolades from anti-smoking zealots and self-interested “health advocates,” but we’ll see how well his popularity holds up when Washington businesses start closing their doors.

–Patrick A

Tags: cigars