Posted on 05/09/2005 5:21:35 AM PDT by SheLion
In a move opponents are labeling an invasion by the nanny state, the state Senate's Health Committee expects to take up, and probably approve, legislation this week that would raise New York's smoking age to 19.
The bill, sponsored by Charles Fuschillo Jr., a Republican of Long Island, was introduced April 18. The chairman of the Senate committee, Kemp Hannon, another Long Island Republican, confirmed that the legislation is on tomorrow's agenda and said he thought the bill would be approved by the committee, at which point it could be brought to the Senate floor.
Mr. Fuschillo's legislation would amend state public-health laws governing the sale of tobacco products, replacing "eighteen" with "nineteen" wherever a minimum purchase age is stipulated. Retailers would also be required to check identification for anyone appearing to be under 26, where previously ID scrutiny was waived for "any individual who reasonably appears to be at least twenty-five years of age."
Similar measures have been passed by the Health Committee in the state Assembly in previous sessions, and similar bills have had Senate sponsors in the past. This would mark the first time such legislation would make it to deliberation in a committee of the Republican-controlled Senate.
Mr. Fuschillo, who has sponsored and supported other anti-smoking bills, said this legislation was designed to reduce underage smoking by keeping cigarettes out of high schools. Because many high-school students are 18, he said, it was possible for seniors to obtain cigarettes for underclassmen, facilitating underage tobacco usage.
Raising the smoking age to 19, he and Mr. Hannon said, would help combat the problem and provide a deterrent to underage tobacco consumption.
"This is a public-health issue," Mr. Fuschillo said, "and we as a state should do all we can to limit access and ensure a healthy life for individuals."
Another Senate Republican, Martin Golden of Brooklyn, who as a member of the City Council voted against New York City's stiff smoking controls enacted at Mayor Bloomberg's urging, said he approved of Mr. Fuschillo's legislation.
"Any time you can get cigarettes out of kids' hands, it's a good idea," Mr. Golden said. "I still believe government shouldn't be in this, but if it's saving lives, and the jury's still out on it, I can be convinced."
To the chairman of the state Conservative Party, Michael Long, however, the state has no business legislating individuals' health or limiting citizens' access to a legal commodity. The Conservative Party - which has endorsed both Mr. Fuschillo and Mr. Hannon - has long supported smokers' rights and vocally opposed the city and state smoking restrictions enacted in 2002 and 2003.
If New York really wanted to keep tobacco out of high schools, Mr. Long said, it should enact laws cracking down on underage possession of tobacco, or raise the smoking age to 21, to match the age requirements for the sale of alcohol. Because there are also many 19-year-old high-school students, he said, increasing the smoking age by one year would not keep tobacco out of schools.
While Mr. Long said he would not support such measures, they would at least have a better chance of achieving Mr. Fuschillo's stated aims, he said.
"If they want to save lives, then they ought to have the courage to ban smoking altogether," he said of legislators who argue that tobacco usage is lethal and should be restricted by government.
Such a ban, however, is unlikely. "These same legislators don't mind using the tax money they get from cigarettes on their pet projects," Mr. Long said.
Indeed, overreaching government measures to restrict access to tobacco while its consumption remains legal are only counterproductive, Mr. Long said. Raising the smoking age and levying oppressive taxes on cigarettes as New York has, Mr. Long said, have only fueled a black market for tobacco, especially on the Internet, where consumers can more easily dodge taxes and bureaucratic obstacles. A black market, Mr. Long added, was impossible to regulate. Providing incentives to sell tobacco illegally, beyond state scrutiny, only increases the likelihood that minors would obtain cigarettes, he said.
Mr. Long also expressed frustration at the Senate's priorities, citing a report in the New York Post yesterday that the body was moving to legalize medicinal marijuana as it was looking to impose further restrictions on tobacco usage.
A self-described advocate in the Senate of limited government, Raymond Meier, a Republican of Utica, also questioned his colleagues' priorities. There are more pressing issues facing the Senate, Mr. Meier said, than "meddling in personal decisions." He called Mr. Fuschillo's legislation "government as mommy."
"We permit people at the age of 18 to vote. We require them to shoulder a lot of responsibilities. A lot of 18-year-olds serve in the military," Mr. Meier said. "They're smart enough to use tobacco."
The founder of New York City Citizens Lobbying Against Smoker Harassment, Audrey Silk, likewise found the discrepancy puzzling.
"We're going to have kids coming back from Iraq, and then tell them, 'Sorry, you can't buy cigarettes here'?" she said.
Ms. Silk, who is the city Libertarian Party's candidate for mayor, said New Yorkers were "fed up" with the continuing attempts to "beat down" smokers, citing the public frustration with city and state tax hikes on tobacco products, in addition to opposition to Mayor Bloomberg's prohibition of smoking in bars and restaurants.
"It's Big Brother," Ms. Silk said.
"They're making our bodies belong to the state. And then there's the slippery slope," she said. "Already they're looking at food - what you should eat, what you shouldn't eat."
Ms. Silk expressed her concerns as the Associated Press reported yesterday that the city of Detroit was seeking to implement a 2% tax on fast food, the first of its kind in the nation.
Regardless of a person's views on the role of government or on tobacco, Mr. Fuschillo's legislation is unwise because it will not be effective, the executive director of the New York Public Interest Research Group, Blair Horner, said. The average age at which smokers begin to use tobacco, he said, was 14, and raising the legal smoking age to 19 from 18 would not affect youth tobacco consumption.
"We're serious anti-smoking activists," Mr. Horner said, "but there's no evidence that this will work."
He also said no major health agency or organization, such as the Centers for Disease Control, had advocated raising the legal smoking age.
"All you end up doing is treating 18-year-old adults as second-class citizens," Mr. Horner said.
Three states - Alaska, Alabama, and Utah - have smoking ages higher than 18, Mr. Horner said, and Alabama and Alaska have higher youth smoking rates than New York. Utah, Mr. Horner said, was not an indicative example, since almost 70% of the state's population belongs to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which prohibits tobacco usage.
According to a NYPIRG report, between 1997 and 2003, all three states saw tobacco usage among minors decrease at a slower rate than did New York.
Moreover, the results of increasing the drinking age to 21 from 18 suggested that raising the smoking age would be counterproductive, Mr. Horner said.
Adjusting the age at which citizens can legally purchase alcohol, Mr. Horner said, was intended to curtail drunken-driving accidents, which it succeeded in doing. At the same time, however, drinking between ages 12 and 17 increased dramatically
"If you're looking to reduce smoking related car crashes, you'd have a case," Mr. Horner said, but otherwise, Mr. Fuschillo's legislation would only "torture small businesses that have to deal with it," and undermine its sponsor's stated goal.
Opponents of the bill, however, were also critical of what they saw as its unstated political goal.
"This is just a charade," Mr. Long said. "Legislators will be able to stand in front of grammar schools, and pound their chests, and pat themselves on the back, and say how courageous they were."
The bill's critics called it "feel-good legislation" with few political drawbacks. "Eighteen-year-olds don't make campaign contributions, and they're least likely to vote," Mr. Horner said.
Mr. Long said the Senate's Republican majority would probably jump on the feel-good bandwagon if the Senate leadership decided to endorse the legislation, assuming it emerges from committee. The majority leader, Joseph Bruno, a 75-year-old from Rensselaer whom Mr. Horner described as a "health nut," could not be reached for comment yesterday but in the past has supported anti-smoking legislation.
I wish I had.
Ugh!
Heck, if they're worried about 18-year-old students, there's another method - knock off a year off of school. Everybody graduates in 11th grade. It won't make a difference, believe me.
Daaammmmm! I missed them!You're lucky, then. :)
That is SO disgusting! Lot of class THERE!!!! Is that you???!!!
EWWW!
Make it illegal or leave smokers alone. If it's so damned bad, then outlaw it and give the tax dollars up. Let the black market have it.
BTW, I still haven't broken my machine. Been cranking smokes out since Christmas without a glitch. Thanks again. Saving TONS of ca$h!
Also, don't vote Republican or Democrat if you don't want statist solutions and intrusive government interfering with your daily life. I don't know how many times I have to say this. The Democrats and Republicans are both equally in love with heavy handed state solutions to non-problems. If you think voting Republican is going to get you any smaller or less intrusive of a government, then you are sadly, sadly mistaken.
Any reason this jerk-off's screen name is still usable?? WTF!!!
Usable? I just looked it up and it read, "Nobody by that name."
"In fact I had to walk 10 miles to the library to get online access."
Uphill.... both ways..... 5 feet of snow..... killing wild animals with loose leaf notebooks i bet, huh??? : )
The dude who posted #8 is in dire need of a good 5 minute beating.LOL! Yeah, really!
I hope the Viking Kitties chewed his arms off slowly! :)
Oh, yeah. He should be neutered.
Unfortunately, I'm sure this slime ball will be back, and soon. :(
How are you, BTW? Long time, no FReep!
Must've just been removed, this guy had posted this say crap (no pun) almost 3 hours ago under the same name..... how he avoided banning is beyond me??
Yeah.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.