The Stogie Guys

President Obama signed the so-called “Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act” into law on June 22, placing tobacco under the jurisdiction of the FDA. While the bill, passed by the House and Senate last week, is primarily directed at cigarettes, it could have significant ramifications for cigars and other tobacco products.

Specifically, it includes restrictions on tobacco advertising (mandating all cigarette ads be black and white text only and eliminating tobacco sponsorships of sporting events); bars “flavored” cigarettes (including clove, spice, and “candy flavors” but not menthol); requires larger warning labels on packaging; prohibits describing cigarettes as “light,” “mild,” or “low tar;” mandates ingredient disclosure; and gives the FDA the sole authority to approve all new tobacco products.

Not once does the new law specifically refer to premium or handmade “large cigars,” but that doesn’t mean it isn’t a major threat to cigar manufacturers and the choices available to cigar smokers. Nearly every provision in the act would be a significant blow if applied to cigars.

So it is clear that the precedent has been set for the regulations to be applied to cigars as well, possibly even without an act of congress. Recently, when I spoke to a number of cigar makers at Famous Smoke Shop’s Cigar Expo, they expressed growing concerns over the prospect of FDA regulation of tobacco.

Charlie Toraño called FDA regulation of cigars a “grave threat” and predicted that politicians could move to regulate cigars sooner than three years from now. He was particularly worried about the marketing restrictions, and noted that holding promotional events where they give out free samples would almost surely be prohibited. He also observed that no one in the industry was prepared for ingredient disclosure, which would cost huge sums in testing and documentation.

Nick Perdomo also talked pasionatly about the threat from the bureaucracy on his business. The combination of FDA regulation, SCHIP tobacco taxes, and smoking bans led him to call the government his “biggest competitor.”

But perhaps the most striking comment on the FDA bill came from someone all too familiar with oppressive government. Jaime Garcia, son of famed cigarmaker Don Pepin Garcia and a top maker in his own right, told me through a translator that coming from Cuba, he couldn’t believe that in America so much power would be given to the government to control his business.

–Patrick S

photo credit: Art of Obama

There are, of course, many issues at stake in the election, and we probably won’t be voting solely on cigar-related policies. But that doesn’t mean cigar issues aren’t an important factor in who gets our vote. So here’s our take on who we think cigar smokers can trust to defend their rights.

As detailed in Monday’s article on Obama and McCain, neither candidate offers a particularly impressive agenda. When push comes to shove, we suppose McCain is marginally better on cigar issues as a whole, but not in a particularly meaningful way.

Not to mention that his record suggests he is likely to flip-flop on tobacco issues (after all, he spent a decade trying to jack up taxes on cigarettes before only recently opposing such a hike). So while the pragmatist in us says a begrudging vote for McCain, the idealist says there must be a better choice. And there is.

Libertarian presidential candidate Bob Barr agrees with us on every important issue: taxes, regulation, smoking bans, trade, and Cuban sanctions. His position can be summed up with this quote: “Washington should leave smokers and other tobacco users alone.” Here, here!

And he’s a cigar smoker too, even talking about smoking cigars with Stephen Colbert of the Colbert Report. All that makes it a real shame that he hasn’t a snowball’s chance in hell of getting elected. Still, maybe a vote for Barr would help send a message that we smokers are tired of being mistreated by Washington.

But, in our opinion, far more important than who you support for president is who you support in your state and local races. These elections are easier for individual voters to impact, and this is the level where smoking bans are being passed at an alarming rate. By researching which candidates are for or against smoking bans and then getting involved, you can be an important factor.

Tell your cigar smoking friends which candidate is an ally of smokers’ rights and which is an enemy. Also, call up the campaigns to thank the good ones, as well as let the bad ones know that the smoking issue is why you won’t be supporting them. We suggest you do this year-round but, not surprisingly, politicians are likely to be most responsive to the views of their constituents just before an election.

Be your vote national or local in scope, we encourage you—our cigar smoking brethren—to put in a little effort and make sure your voice is heard. Only then can we expect the loathsome, self-interested politicians and bureaucrats at the federal, state, and local levels to heed our warning to respect our rights.

–Patrick A & Patrick S

photo credit: BobBarr2008

In a week and one day, millions of Americans will head to the polls to vote for the next leader of the free world. Both major candidates are former cigarette smokers: Republican John McCain smoked two packs a day until he quit three decades ago, while Democrat Barack Obama admitted having a cigarette as recently as this summer despite “quitting” early last year.

But being a former smoker (or even a current one) doesn’t make a politician good when it comes to taking positions that affect cigar smokers. Below are four areas where the next president could have a major impact on stogie enthusiasts with a look at the positions held by McCain and Obama in each area.

Tobacco Taxes

Industry insiders say a massive tobacco tax, such as the one proposed in the so-called SCHIP bill, is the most immediate threat to the cigar industry. This year only President Bush’s veto stopped what would have been a 256% increase in cigar taxes, meaning an increase of up to $3 per cigar. Obama clearly favors funding programs with tobacco taxes. He voted for the SCHIP cigar tax increase and has pledged to sign the bill into law. His campaign calls the senator “an ardent supporter of SCHIP.”

McCain’s position on tobacco taxes has been far less clear. He voted against versions of the SCHIP bill with the tobacco tax increase and has criticized the tax, taking the position that “it makes no sense to encourage people to live healthier…while making the government even more dependent on having people smoke.” However, McCain has a long history of advocating for tobacco taxes, specifically on cigarettes. Only a year ago he was quoted as saying, “I still regret we did not succeed” when asked about past efforts to increase cigarette taxes by $1.10 per pack.

Smoking Bans

Smoking bans have traditionally been a matter for state and local governments. Still, a national smoking ban (for so-called “public places” like restarants and bars) remains a possibility.  McCain’s views on this issue are not entirely clear, but he did not join fellow Republican Mike Huckabee in promising to sign a natinoal smoking ban.

Meanwhile, Obama seemed to indicate support for a national smoking ban but seemed to prefer keeping bans a state issue. In a New Hampshire debate, Obama told the audience, “If we can’t provide these kinds of protections at the local level, which would be my preference, I would be supportive of a national law.”

Regulation

As we’ve written before, Food and Drug Administration regulation of tobacco has the potential to be very damaging for cigar smokers. John McCain has been a advocate for regulating tobacco under the FDA since the mid-1990s when he co-sponsored a bill to that effect.  Indeed, the issue has been called “one of the most significant efforts of his congressional career.” In the past year, however, critics of McCain claim he has backed away from that position, despite the fact that he remains a co-sponsor of the FDA bill. The Arizona senator has continued to criticize the portrayal of smoking by Hollywood, perhaps indicating that he still would favor FDA regulation if it didn’t include increased tobacco taxes.

Obama is also a co-sponsor of the bill to regulate tobacco through the FDA. Anti-tobacco advocates say FDA regulation of tobacco is “inevitable” under a McCain or Obama presidency.

Trade

Trade policies might not initially appear to be an area of interest. But since virtually every handmade cigar is either rolled in other countries or rolled in the U.S. with tobacco from foreign countries, reducing barriers to trade is vital to preserve and increase cigar smokers’ access to a wide variety of cigars at reasonable prices. There are two major policies where trade most effects cigar consumers: (1) the Cuban embargo/trade sanctions currently makes some of the world’s highest-regarded cigars illegal for Americans; and (2) the DR-CAFTA free trade agreement eliminates or lowers trade barriers with cigar-producing countries such as the Dominican Republic, Honduras, and Nicaragua.

McCain has “typically voted in support of sanctions on Cuba” and demanded free elections before the embargo is lifted. Obama seems more open to changing the U.S. policy toward Cuba, “calling for travel and remittance restrictions on Cuban-Americans to be lifted” and expressing that “he would engage in bilateral talks with Cuba to send the message that the United States is willing to normalize relations with Cuba upon evidence of a democratic opening.”

Obama opposes CAFTA and voted against it. On his website, you’ll find an article titled “Why I Oppose CAFTA,” citing labor concerns and the loss of American jobs. McCain voted for CAFTA and consistently supported similar trade agreements.

–Patrick S

photo credit: AGORAVOX

Yesterday, the House of Representatives voted 326-102 to place tobacco under the jurisdiction of the Food and Drug Administration. The move would give FDA bureaucrats the ability to regulate tobacco as well as tobacco advertisements, a power that both Health and Human Services Secretary Michael Leavitt and FDA Commissioner Andrew von Eschenbach oppose. In a statement (pdf) released today, the White House threatened to veto the bill if the Senate passes a version pending there and sends it to President Bush’s desk:

“The bill would mandate significant added responsibilities for the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that conflict with FDA’s mission of ensuring the safety and effectiveness of drugs, biologics, and medical devices…

Requiring FDA to oversee the regulation of tobacco products would not only distract the agency from its oversight of food, pharmaceuticals, and medical products but could be perceived by the public as an endorsement that these products are safe, resulting in more people smoking.”

Speaking in favor of the bill, Representative Christopher Van Hollen Jr. (D-MD) made clear that the goal of the bill wasn’t to make cigarettes safer, but to regulate tobacco to reduce its use: “[Smoking] has a huge cost to our society. We have an opportunity to put an end to that…”

The bill would be a significant step towards the FDA declaring all tobacco products unsafe and thus prohibited. As we’ve written before, in an interesting twist, the law forbids the FDA from certifying that some forms of tobacco are safer than others, despite a mountain of evidence, meaning that the only “regulation” the FDA would have at its disposal would be limits on advertising or bans on certain types of tobacco products.

While the bill’s primary target seems to be cigarettes, it could have dire effects on cigar smokers. Besides being another step down the road to complete tobacco prohibition, FDA regulation may mean substantially limited advertising of cigars in magazines and also potentially on websites such as this one. If FDA mandates mean that cigar makers have to worry about nicotine (or other chemical) levels in cigars, it would stifle the creativity that has marked the cigar industry in recent years.

The bill also includes a prohibition on flavored cigarettes (although, oddly, it contains an exception for Menthol). While it is not clear that the flavored smoke ban would include cigars, if it does flavored cigars like Acid and Havana Honeys could be made illegal. Further, demands for “safer” tobacco products could mean a de facto prohibition for handmade cigars which, unlike cigarettes, cannot change their chemical makeup because they are entirely natural products.

–Patrick S

photo credit: FDA

As if massive tobacco tax increases weren’t enough, a Senate panel voted yesterday to subject tobacco products to regulation by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

The move would give FDA bureaucrats the ability to regulate tobacco as well as tobacco advertisements, a power both current and former FDA Commissioners don’t even want, citing limited resources and the fact that regulating tobacco as a “drug” the same way it regulates pharmaceutical drugs doesn’t fit into the FDA’s mission – potentially jeopardizing the health of cigarette smokers.

But while the health bureaucrat-types oppose FDA regulation of tobacco, an unlikely coalition supports it. Altria/Philip Morris, the world’s largest tobacco company, and anti-smoking groups teamed up to push FDA oversight. Both want to cut back the ability of tobacco companies to exercise their first amendment right to advertise their legal products, but for different reasons.

Altria/Phillip Morris knows that without the ability to advertise, its competitors can never challenge its dominance of the cigarette market. Meanwhile, anti-tobacco groups see pharmaceutical-style FDA regulation of advertisements a step towards the FDA declaring all tobacco products unsafe and thus prohibited.

In an interesting twist, the law forbids the FDA from certifying that some forms of tobacco are safer than others, despite a mountain of evidence. This means smokeless tobacco or cigar manufacturers cannot tell consumers that their products are safer than cigarettes even if such claims are empirically proven.

So how does this law affect cigar smokers?

Besides being another step down the road to complete tobacco prohibition, FDA regulation may mean substantially limited advertising of cigars in magazines like Cigar Aficionado, Smoke Magazine, and Cigar Magazine, and also potentially on websites such as this one.

In addition to harming publications that rely on advertising, such Draconian rules threaten to stifle the recent streak of innovation that has been seen in the premium cigar market, as introducing new products often requires an advertising campaign to inform potential consumers.

More drastically, future FDA regulation may mean the removal or reduction of certain chemicals – such as nicotine – from tobacco products. For cigar makers that simply roll together leaves with naturally occurring chemicals, the regulation of certain chemicals would spell the end for the entire handmade cigar industry.

–Patrick S

Tags: cigars

Michael Siegel isn’t your typical warrior for freedom of choice – especially when it comes to smoking. He’s a “public health” expert and a doctor who once pushed smoking bans in workplaces and still supports bans in restaurants and bars.

But Siegel says there has been a change in the anti-tobacco lobby and now calls the anti-smoking movement “a crusade.” On his well-read blog, Tobacco Analysis, he routinely calls out anti-tobacco groups when they make unsubstantiated claims to push their anti-smoking agenda.

To give you an idea, here is a selection of his exposés from just the past month. He…

• »Caught Tobacco-Free Kids lying about Philip Morris’ opposition to a FDA regulation of tobacco.

• »Uncovered the American Cancer Association’s false claims that tobacco companies lie about the ingredients of cigarettes.

• »Noted that the U.S. anti-smoking group ASH is advocating denying medical treatment to smokers.

• »Exposed Tobacco-Free Kids’ efforts to raise money for “brainwashing” kids.

• »Got a Minnesota anti-smoking group to backtrack on a misleading claim that 30 minutes of exposure to environmental smoke can lead to a heart attack.

• »Debunked a claim that 20 minutes of exposure to smoke could make a healthy adult’s risk of stroke the same as a pack-a-day smoker.

• »Got the American Lung Association to pull a TV advertisement equating smoking around children with the physical abuse of children.

As you can see, the anti-tobacco nuts keep Siegel busy with a never ending supply of bad science. And for his efforts to stop these rabid activists from playing fast and loose with the facts, Siegel has been called “a traitor” and a “tobacco stooge.”

Here at StogieGuys.com, we disagree with Siegel about the need for any smoking bans. Smoking is a personal freedom and responsibility issue, where owners of private property, like restaurants and bars, should be free – but never compelled by the government – to enforce bans.

Still, we’re glad Siegel’s there, exposing the lies of those who won’t be happy until there is global tobacco prohibition.

–Patrick S

Tags: cigars