TOBACCO

March 28, 2000

I am getting tired of talking about our own government's oppresshre, ruthless assault on tobacco. You may say -- "Who cares? I don't smoke." 'Well, neither do I!! But the assault on tobacco has serious implications. What about personal property rights? '''hen your friends come over to your house, don't you think that you should be the one to decide if they can smoke or not. What's the difference, if you own a bar, a pool hall, a restaurant. Your customers come in and you say, "you are welcome to watch the finals of the NCAA but sorry -- no cigars. Now you may argue some people don't want to be around a lot of smoke. My answer, "Fine, then don't come to my private place of business! Go somewhere else because we smoke here!" An industry that hasn't had many breaks lately just got one. The Supreme Court said that the Federal Drug Administration doesn't have the authority to regulate tobacco as a drug. Surprise, surprise. Recall David Kessler, FDA administrator in 1996, had a dream that he had found new authority for his vision of regulation. Too bad David, it was a pipe dream.

Fifty million people in the United States smoke. I know tobacco is not the magic potion for eternal life, but it is legal. Some would argue that it is no more harmful than liquor. Yet, there is no national outrage or attack on liquor.

I remember three or four years ago the FDA made Philip Morris take an advertisement for Marlboro off of a billboard at the Super Bowl in New Orleans. The Marlboro man came down. All the while the TV sponsor of the game was, you guessed it, beaming beer ads into el'ery home.

Where is the justice? Interesting, a Canadian court just issued a verdict -their court will not allow the Canadian government to interfere with smoking in a private place of business. What a novel idea, sounds almost American!