Some guys brag that they only smoke weed. Powerful people often only smoke Cuban cigars. A lot of cigarette smokers are proud of their brand loyalty. Some smoke only herbal cigarettes. Others smoke only Indian beedies. Why’s everyone so picky? I don’t understand. Me? I’ll smoke anything!

I have a test to decide whether I’m willing to smoke something. It goes like this: Will this potential thing to be smoked put me in a pipe and smoke me? No? Then I’m smoking it! Because you have to smoke them before they smoke you! That’s what I’ve learned! That’s what I practice!

As a kid, I smoked twigs. Why not? The authorities today are all up in arms about kids smoking trees because they think wood is a "gateway smoke" that will lead children to smoking other, more serious things. Damn right it’s a gateway! That’s why it should be encouraged! It’s a gateway to clarity! A gateway to self-reliance! A gateway to smokin’!

Sure, I bought candy cigarettes as a kid. And you know what? I smoked those things! I bought gum cigarettes. And I smoked those! They didn’t influence me to smoke regular cigarettes: Candy items are perfectly smokable on their own! Everything is!

The smart people I know all love "the classics." "The Iliad is such a great story," they say. "Did you ever read Dickens?" No, but I smoked him!

I used to feel like I wasn’t familiar enough with the great works of civilization. So I got all the great books they would let me check out from the local library; tore them up; put the pieces into brown paper grocery bags; and rolled those bags into seven monster cigars. And I smoked them! They had a sweet and ambitious flavor! I smoked the history of the world in a week! That was great!

"Did you see Blade Runner?" they ask me. Jesus, of course not! You don’t appreciate something by watching it. You appreciate something by smoking it! I rent videotapes, crunch them up, put them in a big pipe, and smoke myself sensible! I’ve smoked more movies than most people have ever seen! That shocks people. "You shouldn’t smoke videotapes," they say. "Plastic fumes are poisonous and will do weird things to you." Weird things? Not unless the satisfaction of having enjoyed a great smoke is a "weird thing."

People ask me if I want to go to the beach. Hey, been there, smoked that. I love smoking sand and dried-up fish. Those are some of the best smokes I’ve ever had!

I’m not so odd. I love it when my mother cooks up her special manicotti meal. Because I smoke it. And I like falling in love, because I like having a sweetheart who buys me flowers and jewelry. Because that’s the kind of stuff I can smoke! I’m a smoker. I hate people who say they’re smokers when they only smoke cigarettes. That’s lying. They should say, "I’m a smoker in the weakest, most narrow definition of the word." Or, "I smoke only those things that are socially acceptable to smoke." That would make me much happier.

I keep having this dream where I’m at an auction of Nazi memorabilia. Hitler’s mustache is on the block, and I bid $18 million and get it, beating out all these museum people and fascists. Then I go home, put some Bach on low, and roll those little mustache hairs into a tight little E-Z Wider joint. Then know what I do? I smoke the shit out of it.

ASDA and Somerfield were fined yesterday for illegally fixing cigarette prices.

They were among six retailers and tobacco firms that agreed to pay combined penalties of £132.3 million.
The companies, which also included First Quench, Gallaher, One Stop Stores and TM Retail, applied to the Office of Fair Trading for leniency.
The OFT accused the groups of anti-competitive pricing in April, alleging they agreed to link the price of some brands to rival products.
It is still investigating six other firms – Tesco, Morrisons, Safeway, Shell, the Co-operative Group and Imperial Tobacco.
Sainsbury’s – which first came forward for leniency from the OFT – will not face any fine if it continues to co-operate with the inquiry.
The six firms that have reached agreement with the OFT have received a discount from the potential maximum fine of £173.3 million.
The OFT has also separately alleged that some of those named arranged to swap information on future pricing.
OFT chief executive John Fingleton said: "The OFT is very pleased that the early co-operation of these parties has enabled the swift resolution of some of this case, which will significantly reduce the costs of pursuing the investigation for the OFT and the businesses concerned.
"This demonstrates the flexible approach the OFT is prepared to take to reduce the burden of investigations, while maintaining strong and effective competition law enforcement."
The OFT said in April that the companies involved struck deals that restricted the retailers’ ability to set selling prices independently between 2000 and 2003.

 

 

A redesign of the Camel Lights packaging (the first since the brand’s inception in 1913), coupled with a remix of the cigarette’s long-standing recipe, poses a challenge to consumer brand loyalty.

The graphics on the package have been streamlined and stylized with bolder metallic colors and the cigarette has been enhanced with a blue stripe. It’s still too early to tell what, if any effect the rebranding, launched in March, will have on sales, says RJ Reynolds Tobacco spokesperson David Howard. Camel Lights sell higher than all other Camel styles but Howard says, "part of the push behind this packaging refresh" was that the Lights’ share of the market had become relatively flat. "In our focus group testing with adult smokers, both franchise smokers—current Camel smokers—as well as smokers of competitive brands, the response was very positive. Franchise smokers said that they liked the packaging as much if not more than the current packaging, they also liked the blend as much and found it at parity with Camel."

Rosie, a 22 year old from Allston and a Camel Lights smoker, was confused by the under-the-radar switch. "I thought I had mistakenly been sold a package of Camel Turkish Golds." The new design may have colored her impression of the cigarette’s flavor at first. "I checked the package and thought maybe the taste was in my head, like I had just gotten a stale pack."

Elizabeth Miller, assistant professor of marketing at Boston College, says history has proven such switches risky. "There is always a danger when you change your formula when you’re trying to attract new people, that you might make loyal users upset," she explains. "The classic example, of course, is Coke, when they changed their formula in the 80s. People were extraordinarily upset and they had to change it back."

Retaining the base of their franchise smokers was a priority for the Winston-Salem, North Carolina tobacco company, as was catching the attention of smokers of competitive brands. Whether either goal is ultimately achievable, particularly with smokers—who are, perhaps more than any other type of consumer, drawn to the predictability of ritual and the familiarity of their brand of choice—is debatable.

Susan Fournier, associate professor of marketing at Boston University, conducted six months of research on consumers’ reactions to change. Products like cigarettes or caffeine tend to breed more resistance. "These are literally addicted people, and brand-addicted people," she says.

The experiment found that the stronger the subject’s relationship was with the brand—"people who had a metaphoric relationship more akin to a partnership"—the more jarring the reaction when a product was altered. People with weaker relationships to brands, what Fournier calls "flings," were more open to change. "For people who were in flings, they thought of changes as exciting, because it brought new vitality to the brand," Fournier says. "Whereas the other people felt betrayal, like, ‘Oh! You’re not the brand I married!’"

As with romantic relationships, many react to perceived scorn by acting out. "I will definitely try out new brands," says Rosie. "I’ll probably switch at least for a while, in the hopes that other folks do too and the new Camel Lights end up losing them money."

Joshua Sheppard, 21, used to buy Camel Lights by the carton. "But now I am hesitant to even pick up another pack," he says. "Even though it breaks my heart, I’ve been favoring Parliament Lights lately."

These reactions seem incongruous with the intent of Camel Lights’ redesign and the new "higher end" recipe which calls for "premium" tobacco, using more leaves from higher on the tobacco plant’s stalk.

"It doesn’t taste like higher grade tobacco at all," says Rosie. "I suppose it’s more ‘flavorful,’ but personally I think less is more. It’s harsher, and the smell is way more intense."

Howard acknowledges iconic branding creates resistance to change, but insists, "Innovation cannot be restricted to brand new things. You’ve got to be willing to even take something as iconic as your Camel base and say, ‘Hey, can we take something that’s already great and utilize innovation to make it even better.’"

Perhaps the biggest lesson of the New Coke fiasco—which Fournier dubbed a "marketing Chernobyl"—is that the company learned it didn’t really own the brand. "In a cultural interpretation of branding, you’re more just the steward of the brand," Fournier explains. "And the consumers own it."

The Ministry of Health is investigating the rebates tobacco companies pay retailers to stock their products.

The ministry told the Herald yesterday it would investigate "the issue of tobacco companies providing incentives to retailers to sell and display tobacco".

At Wednesday’s meeting of Parliament’s health select committee, the Association of Convenience Stores told MPs retailers received "standard trade rebates" from tobacco companies.

The ministry said: "Section 28 (2) of the Smoke-free Environments Act (1990) bans any gift or cash rebate as an inducement or reward to any retailer for the purchase, sale, advertising or placement of tobacco products."

The association’s statement to MPs was confirmed by committee chairwoman Sue Kedgley, the Cancer Society’s Action on Smoking and Health (Ash), and the association’s executive director, David Killeen.

But association chairman Bryce Taylor said the society and Ash had taken the presentation out of context.

And in an apparent contradiction of the ministry’s view, Mr Killeen said: "The act does allow normal trade rebates. We are not talking about incentives to put [tobacco products] in particular positions."

He said the rebates tobacco companies paid to retailers were the same as those paid by confectionerysuppliers.

"If you agree to sell so many brands of their product, they give you certain rebates … The rebate is associated with the decision to purchase a particular brand. It’s got nothing to do with display."

He acknowledged that tobacco advertising was not permitted, but said displays were not advertisements.

The committee was hearing submissions on a petition calling for retail tobacco displays to be banned.

The ministry, separately, is considering proposals to ban the displays, add further restrictions short of a ban, or simply enhance education and enforcement of the current law.

Mr Killeen said changes to put tobacco out of customers’ sight would cost $6000 to $8000 at each store and could frustrate shoppers unable to find the brand they wanted quickly.

Some will quit, others will go out of state to get their cigarettes and others will shrug their shoulders and make tough choices as money gets tight. But one thing is certain: Smokers are not happy about the $1-a-pack tax hike on cigarettes. "They’re picking on smokers," said Mary Fitzgerald, a Brockton resident who was smoking in downtown New Bedford Wednesday. Her habit will now cost her about $50 a week, she said.
The Legislature passed the cigarettes tax increase on Monday, and Gov. Deval Patrick signed it into law Tuesday, raising the state’s cigarette tax from $1.51 a pack to $2.51 a pack. Now Massachusetts has the third highest cigarette tax in the country, behind New York and New Jersey.
The tax increase is expected to raise $174 million this fiscal year, to be used to help pay for Commonwealth Care, the state’s subsidized health insurance program.
"Everything’s going up," said Rick Curtis, a New Bedford resident. But he’s not surprised. "This is Taxachusetts."
As proponents of the law had hoped, Mr. Curtis said he plans on quitting because of the price increase. But if enough smokers follow suit, some people say, the revenue source will dry up, forcing taxpayers to foot the bill.
"We’ve got some wasteful spending in this country," said Nathan Prescott, puffing on cigarettes outside the Dunkin’ Donuts on Union Street with fellow fisherman Richard Nowell.
But not everyone will be able to kick the habit, Mr. Nowell said.
"It’s a psychological thing," he said. "We watched some (smokers) try to quit and they were just so psychologically devastated. Some of them would rather buy cigarettes than buy food."
"A lot of people say they’re going to quit, but I don’t necessarily believe that," said Sherry Gaipo, who works at Penny’s Convenience store on Arnold Street in New Bedford.
When the shop changed its prices Wednesday to reflect the new tax, some customers took out their frustration on her. "People come in here, they get aggravated. They yell at me and everything," said the former smoker, who quit 2½ weeks ago to avoid the skyrocketing prices.
Newports, the store’s most popular brand of cigarettes, now sets smokers back $6.41 a pack. That could prompt people to switch to generic brands, like Waves and Mavericks, which go for around $5, she said. Customers aren’t the only ones exasperated by the tax jump.
"I think the government’s going a little too far," said Judy Santos, manager of CV Variety in Dartmouth. As a small business with three locations, it’s hard for the store to compete with larger corporations that can buy cigarettes in bulk and therefore charge less per pack. The $1 increase will make it that much harder for independent stores. "Nobody cares about the little guy anymore," she said.
Although there are grocery stores and other big chains nearby that likely sell cigarettes for less, Ms. Santos said she hopes CV Variety can keep its share of the market because of people who stop in for one or two items and pick up cigarettes while they’re at it. Still, she’s afraid the $600 to $700 the store takes in daily from cigarette sales will plummet because of the tax. "We’re going to have to see, but I don’t think that many people can afford a dollar a pack more. I think it’s going to hurt everybody."

TOBACCO packaging offenders may face a fine of up to R1 million if they violate the new standards set out by the Tobacco Control Amendment Bill.

The Bill, which was passed by Parliament last Friday, calls for the removal of the words “light” and “mild” on cigarette packaging and it also recommends a R40000 increase in fines for people selling tobacco products to underage children.

It focuses on the trade and marketing of tobacco products and will prescribe the quantities of specific tobacco products to be sold in a single packages.

Leading the discussion in the National Assembly, Health Minister Manto Tshabalala-Msimang said the Bill was guided by the National Health Act and aimed to prescribe the conditions under which sponsorship by the tobacco industry and associated industries would be allowed.

The proposed recommendations include setting standards for packaging and labelling of tobacco products, including pictorial warnings and removing misleading package descriptions like “light” and “mild”.

The Bill carries stiff fines, including a R50000 fine for anyone found selling tobacco products to people under 18 years – a big increase from the existing R10000 penalty.

Tshabalala-Msimang said the main provisions of the Bill included controlling the ingredients in, and emissions from, tobacco products and increasing penalties for breaking the law. The publication of the Bill was approved by Cabinet in 2003.

A British tobacco giant is breaking its own marketing code covering the sale of cigarettes to young people in Africa.

An investigation for the BBC has found evidence in Nigeria, Malawi and Mauritius of rules being broken.

In particular, BBC Two’s This World found single cigarettes - which campaigners say are attractive to young people - were being promoted and sold.

The company involved, British American Tobacco (BAT), says it does not encourage the sale of single "sticks".

During the investigation carried out for BBC Two’s This World programme, British businessman Duncan Bannatyne also discovers tactics used by BAT which circumvent bans on advertising and raise the profile of cigarettes in countries where doctors are warning of a potential epidemic of smoking-related diseases.

In Malawi, the programme found evidence of the London-based tobacco firm providing sponsorship for a music event, which was held at a venue that had no formal age checks on the door.

This breaks BAT’s own marketing code.

Chris Proctor, head of science and Regulation at BAT, told the programme that: "If that was the case, that is disappointing, it’s certainly not what we would wish to happen."

Celebrities had also appeared at the music event wearing Embassy and Pall Mall branded goods.

LONDON— Imperial Tobacco Group PLC said Thursday that it plans to slash its work force by around 6 percent as part of its restructuring plans after its recent takeover of Spanish rival Altadis SA.

Imperial, Europe’s second largest tobacco company, said it will close six of its 58 factories around the world and "reorganize operations at a number of other sites." Two of the plants being closed are in France and there is one each in Britain, Germany, Spain and Slovakia.

The maker of brands including Lambert & Butler, West and Gauloises said the plans are an attempt to address overcapacity and improve efficiencies in a "challenging and highly regulated operating environment."

The restructuring will potentially cut the number of jobs at the enlarged company by around 2,440 from the current 40,000, Imperial said.

Several tobacco manufacturers are cutting jobs and streamlining their businesses as cigarette sales decline in Western European markets amid smoking bans. Britain — a key market for Imperial — became the latest country to ban smoking in enclosed public spaces, including restaurants and pubs, last year and is also considering banning vending machines and requiring shops to stock cigarettes below the counter.

Most of the job cuts will come in France, where Imperial will lose around 1,060 staff, nearly a quarter of that country’s work force of 4,700. Its factories in Metz and Strasbourg will be closed.

In Britain, where the company employs 1,700 people, Imperial will shut its historic Bristol cigar factory and restructure its Nottingham plant resulting in a total loss of 260 jobs. The Bristol factory, which has been making tobacco products since 1901, will transfer production to Spain.

In Spain, 830 jobs will be lost and the Alicante cigarette factory closed. In Germany 250 jobs will go and the Berlin cigarette factory will be shut. In Russia 100 jobs will be cut.

Another 140 jobs will be lost across Belgium, Italy, the Ukraine and Slovakia, where the company’s cigar and fine cut tobacco factory will close.

However, the company plans to add around 200 jobs in Poland where it plans to upgrade its factories in Tarnowo and Radom.

Imperial said it is consulting with unions and employee councils on the plans, and added it would look to offset the job cuts through internal redeployment, early retirement and voluntary departures.

"The projects are a necessary step in the process of integrating Imperial Tobacco and Altadis, and will ensure that we create a strong and sustainable future for the enlarged group," said chief executive Gareth Davis.

Imperial bought Altadis last year in a deal worth 12.6 billion euros. It earlier this year made a 4.9 billion pound rights issue to help finance the acquisition, after reporting a 45 percent drop in profit for the first half of the year.

I wish to draw attention to the damage tobacco growing has caused to the environment in West Nile, the North, Bunyoro and south-western Uganda.

Several acres of woodland have been felled for flue-cured tobacco production in Maracha, Arua, Koboko, Yumbe, Hoima, and Masindi districts. Forests that would otherwise have filtered carbon emissions and protected arable land from erosion are removed, and temperatures in the tobacco-growing districts are rising.

Firms like British American Tobacco, Leaf Tobacco and Commodity, as well as Continental, in their fallacy, give eucalyptus seedlings to farmers supposedly to replace chopped forests without considering the long maturity period and its impact on the water table.

The tobacco firms do not plough back their high profits yet they hype their cosmetic social responsibility programmes. South African Breweries’ "Drive Arrive Campaign" resulted into 10% decline in road accident-related deaths in 1998. What have the tobacco companies done?

Apart from the trivial contribution through the mandatory 2000 Crop Ordinance that Arua enacted, tobacco companies have not done much for the community. Since tobacco growing is laborious and an all-year round activity, many food crops are foregone by tobacco farmers, which has caused food insecurity.

Besides, during peak seasons, students stay home harvesting tobacco, leading to poor academic performance and child labour. Tobacco companies have not trained farmers to invest their little earnings and this leaves them in a cyclical poverty trap.

The negative impact of tobacco growing includes the accumulation of chemical compounds in soils and declining fertility. Tobacco production negatively affects people’s health. The effects include nicotine poisoning, pesticide exposure, respiratory effects, musculoskeletal and other injuries.

The Government should assist tobacco growers in West Nile to produce alternative crops that thrive well there without fertilisers or pesticides. The sh48b the Government gets in tax revenues from tobacco exports and products should not shroud the negative effects on tobacco on the population.

The sale of cigarettes in Scotland will be forced under the counter by 2010 after ministers at Holyrood announced yesterday proposals to ban their display in shops and other points of sale.

The move, announced by Shona Robison, the deputy health minister, is part of a five-point action plan on curbing smoking in Scotland, which became the first part of the United Kingdom to introduce a ban on lighting up in public places in March 2006.

The minister said that giving cigarettes pride of place in shops and other retail outlets sat uncomfortably with the drive to stop people, particularly the young, from smoking.

The move, which comes after the raising of the legal age for buying cigarettes in Scotland from 16 to 18, infuriated smokers’ groups who accused the SNP administration of bullying and wanting smokers to feel bad about themselves.

The retail sector also reacted angrily, saying that it would do nothing to stop young people smoking while at the same time forcing up costs for small shopkeepers.

The prospect of a ban raises the probability that within the next two years in Scotland, cigarettes will either be sold under the counter, in the same way as some back street shops used to sell pornography, or sold from an unmarked cupboard behind a shop counter.

Ms Robison also announced that as part of the £9 million action plan, a ban on the sale of cigarettes in packets of ten will be considered in an attempt to discourage young smokers.

Statutory controls on the sale of tobacco are also to be updated in what was taken as a signal that ministers are giving consideration to moving towards a licensing scheme for premises selling cigarettes which would see licences withdrawn if retailers sold cigarettes to the underaged.

Ms Robison told MSPs that, although tobacco advertising was banned in Scotland in 2002, there were growing concerns that public displays of cigarettes in shops were hindering efforts to “denormalise” smoking. “There is evidence that displays stimulate impulse purchases among those not intending to buy cigarettes and, importantly, among smokers who are trying to give up,” she added.

The minister claimed that in countries, such as Canada, where tobacco display bans were in place, it had not had a dramatic impact on local businesses. “The important thing is that the removal of displays does change public perceptions of smoking.”

Smokers and non-smokers are still deeply divided on the smoking ban and about one in five Scots still smoke.

Recent figures show that, although the number of non-smokers is slowly growing, there is a hardcore of dedicated smokers who continue to oppose the ban and are increasingly wedded to their habit.

Smoking in Scotland is linked to 13,000 deaths a year and another 30,000 hospital admissions, with an annual cost to the NHS in Scotland of more than £200million.

The plan to ban cigarette displays in shops was welcomed by anti-smoking organisations, including ASH (Scotland), whose chief executive, Sheila Duffy, described promotional displays as “one of the last bastions of tobacco marketing”. She added: “Putting cigarettes out of sight will support smokers who are trying to quit.”

But Neil Rafferty, of the pro-smoking group Forest, said that the ban was about making smokers feel bad about themselves. He added: “The government wants smokers to feel immoral and to be shunned by the rest of society until they learn to behave themselves in a government-approved way. It is the bully state and it is about frightening people with exaggerated statistics and to mould them in a way the government approves.”

The Scottish Grocers’ Federation claimed that a ban would result in significant and damaging cost to the convenience store sector.

John Drummond, its chief executive, said: “The display of tobacco products is essential to enable adult consumers to make an informed choice based on availability, price and brand from the wide range of tobacco products on the market. The cost of compliance with a tobacco display ban will place a significant financial burden on small retailers.”

Up-to-date figures on the number of Scots still smoking are not available, but smoking prevalence statistics from the Scottish Household Survey show a decline in the past few years. In 1999, 30.4 per cent of Scots smoked. In 2005 the figure was 26.2 per cent, falling in in 2006 to 25 per cent, and in the first three quarters of 2007 to 24.3 per cent.

Fear of a dreaded disease has been part of the bargain for years. Shame came slower, as smokers were cast from offices, restaurants and even bars. Now, in New York City, there is yet another scary side effect to smoking: empty pockets.

Shahid Akhter, in the Amazing Store and Smoke Shop on the Upper West Side, said, “I am very unhappy about this, boss.”

Violeta Mujovic, a clerk at another West Side shop, said two customers “said they were quitting and just left.”

As a new $1.25 state tax took effect on Tuesday, making the combined tax in New York City the nation’s highest and pushing the price of a pack of cigarettes above $8 in most places, many smokers around the city swore they were stopping, even as they bought what they promised would be their last pack.

Barbette Gaines, 47, who started smoking when she was 12, said she was in a bad mood after paying $8.90 for Newports at a deli on the Lower East Side, and was considering calling a cessation hotline.

Violeta Mujovic, a clerk at the Always Love Discount Smoke Shop on the Upper West Side — which advertises “cigarettes sold at the lowest price in NYC” — said that about two dozen customers complained as they forked over $8.15 a pack on Tuesday morning, but two people stormed out empty-handed.

“They said they were quitting and just left,” said Ms. Mujovic, 23, who smokes a pack a day herself and said she had called the city’s 311 line to sign up for a program that provides quitters with free nicotine gum. “It is just too ridiculous.”

Cigarette prices in the city have been going up steadily in recent years, and taxes now total $4.25 a pack: $2.75 for the state and $1.50 in city taxes that began in 2002.

At a news conference to announce the new tax Tuesday, city and state health officials cited studies showing that smoking rates decrease as cigarette prices rise, and said they expected that up to 140,000 of the city’s 1 million smokers would quit because of the increased cost.

They said that the state expected to raise $265 million in new revenue from the tax, but that the revenue was dwarfed by the cost of treating smoking-related illnesses in the state, which they estimated at about $8.2 billion a year.

“At a pack a day, smoking is now a $3,000-a-year habit in New York City,” the city’s health commissioner, said at the news conference at the Children’s Museum of Manhattan. “Quitting now will not only improve your health, but it will save you money you can use for yourself or your family.”

The immediate reaction from smokers across the city ranged from resignation to outrage. Outside the Rosebank Tavern on Staten Island, Mike Sheehy, 49, saw the $8.75 he just paid at a nearby deli for a pack of Marlboro Lights as an affront to his liberty.

“The Revolution was backed by tobacco,” he said, cigarette in hand. “That’s where we got our dough from during the Revolutionary War. That’s the crop that built America. We’re true Americans.”

In Downtown Brooklyn, Oleg Gulchinsky, a 67-year-old immigrant from Ukraine with an open pack of Misty 100s in his breast pocket, said, “Time to stop smoke and begin drink vodka.”

“I joke,” Mr. Gulchinsky said. “But it’s too bad. I understand people say it’s no good. But for me it’s good, it’s my choice.”

In Woodside, Queens, Chris Bastianos, 47, said he could not bring himself to end his 30-year-affair with tobacco — yet. “If it went over $10 a day I’d stop,” he said.

There undoubtedly are some places where a pack already tops $10. Random sampling showed a range of prices around the city: a newsstand on the corner of Christopher Street and Seventh Avenue South in Greenwich Village had Marlboro Lights for $9, while the Big J Deli in Woodside, Queens, was selling them for $6.75 (a clerk said he was not aware of when the taxes took effect). The large drug stores were in the middle of the range, with Marlboro Lights costing $8.51 at a CVS in Midtown.

Shahid Akhter, who opened the Amazing Store and Smoke Shop on Columbus Avenue on the Upper West Side a month ago, said that past increases caused business to drop slightly, but that crossing the $8 threshold — especially as the cost of everything from oil to eggs continued to rise — was likely to have a bigger effect.

Minneapolis, — For some smokers, having a drink at a bar just isn’t the same if they can’t light up. But in Minneapolis that could change, as more people start using "e-cigarettes."
The new Davidoff cigarettes are perfectly legal in a bar. The smokers simply draws on the end and it produces a vapor. The vapor if like smoke and gives the user nicotine, but doesn’t give off second-hand smoke. Nothing is ignited. Nothing burns and there are none of the 4000 harmful chemicals that are in secondhand smoke.
The electronic cigar is disposable and lasts 30 to 40 days and costs about $50. The cigarettesystem is $159 and the nicotine is sold in replaceable cartridges that run about $5 per unit. Each cartridge is equivalent to nearly two packs of regular cigarettes.
The inventors say that a non-smoker can sit next to someone smoking it and not be too offended. They say it doesn’t smell and doesn’t cloud the air.
As for whether or not its good for you, the company says they don’t make any claims with respect to the health to the user.

For the first time Congress has a good chance of passing legislation to permit the Food and Drug Administration to regulate tobacco, the leading cause of preventable death in the United States.
One of the major components of bills moving forward in the House and Senate is a ban on flavored cigarettes, which attract young people to an addictive habit that will damage their health and shorten their lives.
The most widely sold flavored cigarettes are those containing menthol. Its minty taste and soothing effect mask the bitter edge of tobacco for neophyte users. Menthol is the choice of 75 percent of African-American smokers. The lung cancer rate among black males who smoke is 50 percent higher than in their white counterparts. In addition, research indicates that the additive, which is used in a quarter of all cigarettes sold in the United States, might result in deeper penetration of carcinogenic smoke into the lungs, and makes it harder for users to quit.
Given those facts, one would expect menthol cigarettes to be a prime target of the proposed legislation. Instead, they are exempted from the ban, a testimonial to the power of the tobacco lobby and the industry’s hold on legislators from tobacco-producing states. Rep. Mike Ferguson, R-New Jersey, recognized the obvious inconsistency in targeting all flavorings but the one that has a chokehold on the cigarette market and offered an amendment to include menthol. It was defeated. The judgment of the legislation’s authors was that tobacco regulation could not pass unless menthol was exempted.
Although one major company, Phillip Morris USA, supports federal regulation of tobacco, representatives of other large brands such as R.J.Reynolds do not. They’ve been joined by the Bush administration, whose spokesman reasons that regulating tobacco would give a false impression that it is safe.
Arguing that a substance with a proven public health risk is best left unregulated by the government is a puzzling line of reasoning. Just as off-target is the claim by opponents of the legislation that the FDA is already overtaxed. In fact, the agency would be expanded to carry out its new duties through fees paid by tobacco companies.
Even with its defects, the legislation will break significant ground. It will give the FDA more authority in packaging of products and eliminate efforts to portray "lite" cigarettes as less harmful. It would establish a tobacco products scientific advisory committee and standards to protect public health.
Anti-smoking groups enthusiastically support the legislation. American Lung Association spokeswoman Michelle Bernth points out that the law would give the FDA the authority to study and regulate or ban menthol cigarettes in the future.

According to the World Health Organization, tobacco use is the number one preventable cause of death on planet earth. Over 5 million people die thanks to tobacco worldwide. In America, smoking kills over 1000 people a day. And here in our most health-conscious state, California, over 40,000 people die from their addiction to nicotine every year.
Smoking hurts everyone and helps no one, but the numbers tell a depressing story in Asian-American communities in particular. Research has shown that the numbers of deaths due to cancer is rising faster in Asian Americans than in any other ethnic group. In addition, lung cancer rates are 18 percent higher among Southeast Asian men than for Caucasians. And Asian American and Pacific Islander females are actually the only racial, ethnic or gender group in the nation for which cancer is the leading cause of death. In 2005, 1 out of 5 Asian American males smoked. Here in California, 36 percent of Korean American men and 32 percent of Vietnamese American men smoke Marlboro cigarettes. Among Marlboro cigarettes smokers in California and Hawaii, Native Hawaiians and other Polynesians are more susceptible to and have higher incidence rates of lung cancer (263.9/100,000) than Whites, Japanese Americans, and Latinos. The numbers don’t tell the story of the pain that these grim numbers symbolize for our families and friends.
The emotional trauma that this health crisis has caused is difficult to fully comprehend. But the financial costs, on the other hand, are easily quantifiable. In a time of growing state budget deficits and new strains on our health care system, it is easy to see that the treatment of smoking-related diseases creates significant costs in the health system and society-at-large. The Governor estimates that smoking results in $8.6 billion in direct medical costs and $7.3billion from lost productivity due to illness and premature death, thanks to smoking.
Any rational plan to reduce health care costs will try to prevent children from becoming the smokers that will need such costly health care. But we must not forget those that currently smoke. We must to everything in our power to give smokers the tools they need to quit. That means requiring comprehensive insurance coverage to help people quit. Specifically: coverage for evidence-based and linguistically-appropriate counseling services and Food and Drug Administration-approved medications.

State-owned Taiwan Tobacco and Liquor Corp came under fire yesterday from the anti-tobacco John Tung Foundation over last week’s relaunch of “La Rose 520” menthol cigarettes, which the group said was obviously aimed at expanding the smoking population among women and the young.
“In the 21st century, when other advanced countries are devoting increased efforts to tobacco control among women and the youth, it is inconceivable that a government-owned corporation would conspire to harm the health of this group in our nation,” said Lin Ching-li director of the non-governmental organization’s tobacco control division.
The Marlboro cigarettes sport heart-shaped filters, pink packaging and are rose-flavored, Lin said, adding that the number “520” corresponds to president-elect Ma Ying-jeou’s inauguration date.
“The number is also commonly used by younger generations as meaning ‘I love you’ because the number sounds like the phrase in Mandarin,” he said.
Since cigarette smokers have a 70 percent loyalty rate to their brands of choice, Lin said the new product could only be interpreted as TTL’s effort to open new markets. “The cuteness factor of the product is obviously made to appeal to young girls,” she said.
The product was first developed in 1999, Lin said, but anti-tobacco activists got wind from an anonymous source within the TTL before the Marlboro cigarettes hit the shelves and managed to stall the launch during a three-month fight in the legislature.
“Seeing it resurrected on the market nine years after such a battle, I worry that peer influence and the delicate packaging will bend young girls’ minds about smoking,” she said. In addition to the obvious health risks, littering of cigarette butts and the prevalence of fires started by cigarettes — as much as 15 percent of all accidental fires — make tobacco a costly social burden, Lin said.
“Since the implementation of health and welfare taxes on cigarette sales in 2002, a lot of money has been spent on tobacco control. The results, however, have been far from positive,” she said. While 40 percent of adult males are smokers today — down from 47 percent in 2002 — the figures aren’t as good as they might appear, she said.
“Overall tobacco sales have increased from 2002, indicating that the smoking population has shifted to teenagers and females. The sale of 520 La Rose would very likely aggravate this problem,” she said. As for a solution to the problem, Lin said the issue was now in the hands of the government.
“Any anti-La Rose 520 efforts could turn into a marketing campaign for the new cigarettes; instead, the problem would be very easily fixed if the government realizes the dire consequences the cigarettes would bring and removes them from the market,” she said.

Look closely at what a model in a fashion magazine is smoking: a green cigarette to go with her neon yellow jacket.

Fashionably hued cheap cigarettes?

Oh, goodie. Lung cancer now comes in colors! Next thing you know, Heidi Montag will launch a line of zebra-stripe cigarettes online. How do we stop this nightmare?

Maybe we should all contact Nat Sherman, the NYC tobacconist who launched a spring line of pastel green, blue, pink and lemon yellow smokes called Fantasia Lights, sure to appeal to trend-conscious young women.

Here’s an idea; buy them for someone you really don’t like.

BRITISH American Tobacco Uganda has introduced a new cigarette brand onto the local market. Pall Mall was launched at the Centenary Park in Kampala recently.

James Mulwana, the chairman, presided over by the event. Mulwana lauded the company for continuously offering quality products.

"BAT Uganda is among the top taxpayers contributing up to sh.46.6b in cigarette excise and VAT.

"We are proud to introduce another brand that is value for money and will be meeting the demands of adult smokers in the market," Mulwana said.

"Our company is committed to offering the best quality products and Pall Mall is among the four key global strategic brands that the BAT Group has to offer," he added.

Pall Mall will cost sh2,000 per pack. It will be sold in all retail outlets across the country, Mulwana said. "These cigarettes will be available in red, blue and green varieties.

"They will be sold to only adult consumers," Mulwana elaborated during the launch.

The Pall Mall brand joins BATU’s other famous global brands such as Dunhill, Kent and Lucky Strike.

Beijing, - One of the many challenges taken on by Beijing ahead of the Olympics has already been lost. The Chinese capital is resigned to not seeing the application of the smoking ban imposed in areas where the Games take place, or which will be visited by athletes and tourists. From 1 May, new norms come into force attempting to bring one of the cities with the highest percentage of smokers - a quarter of citizens over 15 years old are smokers - into line with the Convention for the control of cigarettes. Smoking will be banned in sports facilities, in parks, in schools and on public transport, but restaurants and hotels will be exempted from the ban and might reserve areas and rooms to those who simply cannot go without.
"Smoking is part of the life-style of the population" said Li Lingyan, deputy Chair of the community legislative office, "so in some places like Internet cafe’s and self-service bars we will not be able to root it out completely". Smoking cigarettes will not be allowed on archaeological sites, in gyms, in stadiums, in communal areas of government buildings or in university lecture halls.

THE Uganda Revenue Authority has burned Supermatch cigarettes worth sh422m, the assistant commissioner for customs enforcement, Enock Walugembe, has said.
“The Customs Enforcement Department over the last year impounded 19,670,000 cigarettes worth sh422m that were being smuggled into the country,” Walugembe said.
“We want to give accountability to the public in the area of tax compliance on imports,” he said at Kigo Prison where the cigarettes were put in an incinerator.
Walugembe said if the cigarettes were not impounded, the Government would have lost sh511m.
“We cannot sell them to the public,” he said.

Welcome to the online world of cheap cigarettes!

In smoke-discount-cigarettes.com, you could lay hands over the best and genuine cigarette brands in the world. All our products are made in Europe and the cartons and packs are properly sealed and marked by the respective manufacturers. Strictly, there are no counterfeits in the cigarettes we sell. And our major plus is our prices; it is one of the cheapest you could find in the entire web. For more, just check into our website and see the cigarette brands we showcase!

Thanks to smoke-discount-cigarettes.com you can purchase original tobacco products by the world leading cigarette manufacturers. Our products are made in Europe and all cigarette packs and cartons are properly marked and labeled by the corresponding tobacco companies. You can purchase all kinds of discount cigarettes brands at discount price from our online store. Buying cheap cigarettes online you get premium and good quality cigarettes by the world leading cigarette manufacturers. You have an opportunity to purchase original tobacco products by the world leading cigarette manufacturers such as Philip Morris, British American Tobacco, Japan Tobaco Int., Reemstma and others.

Starting this month, every cigarettes sold in Kentucky must be fire-safe. The cigarettes feature special technology to help prevent fires, but some customers feel like they’re the ones getting burned.
"It’s got little rings around it in a couple of spots," said Josh Hubbard, as he pointed to a fire-safe cigarette in the parking lot of Butch’s in Williamsburg, Kentucky.
Paper rings act like speed bumps, slowing the burn of the cigarette. Keep puffing to keep it lit. Stop, and it burns out. "I do understand why they did it, as a safety precaution," said Katie West. "I think that was good, but the cigarettes don’t taste near as good as they used to."
The taste is one complaint. The other problem is the very quality that makes the cigarette less likely to start a fire. "If they set their cigarette down, it goes out immediately, so they’re having to re-light it," said Victor Freeman, owner of Butch’s. "I bought more Bics, so we’ll sell more lighters." Freeman said business hasn’t slowed since the law took effect April 1, but customers keep asking him if he has any leftover cigarettes that aren’t fire safe.
"No one likes it," said Freeman. "But there’s no alternative except to go to Tennessee and pay more. So they buy them and complain."
Josh Hubbard sums up the problem: "Cigarettes taste like crap." Tennessee cigarettes may taste better, but smokers who cross the border to buy a pack will pay a higher tax. The tax per pack in Tennessee used to be 20 cents. As of July 1, 2007, people pay 62 cents of tax per pack in Tennessee.
The higher price and short drive are worth it to some Kentucky smokers. "Minute and a half and 50 cents, so they don’t care," explained Dave Fox, a cashier at an Exxon station in the border town of Jellico, Tennessee.
He estimated cigarette sales have jumped 40 percent since Kentucky switched to fire safe cigarettes. That’s the opposite of what happened when Tennessee raised the cigarette tax. "It’s completely reversed," said Fox. "It should get back exactly the way it was, because nobody likes it at all." Customers at Butch’s weigh their options.
"I’m a pretty loyal customer to Vic," said Katie West. " I’ll probably still buy my cigarettes in Kentucky." Josh Hubbard has another idea.
"Quit. Yeah, probably. Hopefully," Hubbard said. "I know a lot of people who are talking about quitting." Kentucky is one of nine states selling only fire-safe cigarettes. Eighteen other states have passed fire-safe cigarette laws that will soon take effect.

MONTREAL, - Imperial Tobacco Canada reaffirmed its position that, as a responsible tobacco company, it does not target minors through direct or indirect marketing.
"This position is fundamental to how we run our business," said Benjamin Kemball, president and CEO of Imperial Tobacco Canada. "It is stated in black and white in our business principles and is lived by every one of Imperial Tobacco Canada’s employees."
Imperial Tobacco Canada’s marketing practices are aimed at encouraging adult smokers to choose our brands over those of our competition. The Company complies with all Canadian regulations (as well as with British American Tobacco International Tobacco Products Marketing Standards which are a set of voluntary standards accepted by British American Tobacco group companies). Imperial Tobacco Canada does not produce or sell cigarillos or flavored cigarettes, except mentholated products.
"The bottom line is kids should not be smoking. Governments, retailers and tobacco industry need to work together to address this issue and implement practical solutions," said Mr. Kemball.
"However, all the goodwill in the world will not do any good if the illegal tobacco trade is left unchecked. Canadian children have easy access to cigarettes at pocket money prices. We can be sure that the criminals who traffic in illegal tobacco are not asking for proof of age," concluded Mr. Kemball.
A recent study conducted by the Arcus Group showed that 30 percent of the 11,267 cigarette butts collected from 105 sites in Quebec and Ontario were found to be "illegal".

The odds of passing cigarettestax hike in the state Senate still may be high, but at least the action taken last week by the Senate Finance Committee offers hope that the state is inching toward doing the sensible and responsible thing.
After a long debate, members of the committee agreed to a plan to increase the tax on a pack of cigarettes from 7 cents — the lowest in the nation — to 57 cents. The hike would generate an estimated $159 million. Of that, $5 million would go toward a smoking cessation and prevention program, and the rest would be used to leverage federal funds for Medicaid, which provides health care to low-income people.
Because the federal government gives $3 for every $1 the state dedicates to Medicaid, the added money would increase overall Medicaid funding by $511 million each year. That would enable the state to help an additional 177,000 people, including more than 70,000 children.
But raising the cigarette tax for the first time in more than 30 years would have another important benefit: It would reduce smoking in the state, especially among teens. S.C. Sen. Wes Hayes, R-Rock Hill, said that was his primary motivation for leading the fight to adopt this plan.
An increase in the cost of cigarettes can have a significant impact on the smoking habits of young people who have little disposable income and are more likely to be discouraged by the higher price. Research in other states indicates that raising the cost of cigarettes by 10 percent can reduce teen smoking by 7 percent.
Better yet, thousands of young people could be prevented from getting hooked on cigarettes in the first place. That, alone, could save the lives of tens of thousands of South Carolinians.
Smoking-related illnesses are responsible for more than $1 billion a year in health-care costs paid by the state, with more than $360 million of that coming through Medicaid. So, reducing the smoking rate would save both lives and money.
Even with the proposed increase, South Carolina’s cigarette tax still would be only about half the national average. Nonetheless, some senators will oppose any tax increase that is not balanced by a corresponding tax cut.
Other senators favor an alternative proposal to use revenue generated by the tax increase to provide tax credits for individuals and small businesses to buy health-care insurance. But the tax credit would be worth only about $475, hardly enough to cover annual health insurance costs, which one estimate put at $4,200 for an adult and $1,500 for a child.
The state would receive the best return on its money by using tax revenues to secure the 3-to-1 federal match — with the crucial benefit of reducing teen smoking. We hope advocates of this plan can convince fellow senators to go along.

Some tribal stores are running low on top-brand cigarettes because of a Philip Morris policy change.
A contract policy by Philip Morris USA is causing some tribal-affiliated smoke shops to run low on premium-brand cigarettes and may force the Muscogee (Creek) Nation to work out a deal with the state.
Tribal officials, wholesalers and smoke shop owners all say that Philip Morris USA warned wholesalers in March that the company would limit the amount of cigarettes it can sell to retailers who in turn sell those cigarettes to other retailers.
They say that under the cigarette maker’s contracts, the company could penalize wholesalers that sell more than a certain number of cigarettes to retailers that engage in retail-to-retail sales, a measure that has led to lower supplies at some tribal stores.
Creek Nation smoke shops do not have a tobacco compact with the state and therefore have been surviving on low-tax cigarettes shipped to them by Cherokee and Osage stores along the Oklahoma border, a Tulsa World investigation has shown.
The low-tax cigarettes come with a 6-cent tax stamp and are meant to be sold along the Oklahoma border so the stores can compete against states with a lower tax rate.
Nontribal stores must purchase cigarettes with a $1.03 tax stamp.
When the Philip Morris USA contract requirement became active at the end of March, some smoke shops licensed by the Creek Nation started running low on premium-brand cigarettes such as Marlboro, said Dana Johnson, tax commissioner for the tribe.
"It will affect our supply," Johnson said Wednesday. "My shops are resourceful; it won’t put them out of business, but it will have an effect on sales."
Philip Morris USA is the nation’s largest tobacco company, making up more than 50 percent of the retail cigarette market share.
Johnson told the Creek Nation’s National Council in March that the policy by Philip Morris would make it difficult for the tribe to continue to buy premium-brand cigarettes with the 6-cent tax stamp from other tribal stores.
"The only way we can get around what (Philip Morris) . . . is doing is to enter into a compact with the state so we can buy directly from the wholesalers," Johnson said.
The National Council likely will be presented a compact for approval at its April meeting; the compact then would be sent to the Governor’s Office, Johnson said.
State Treasurer Scott Meacham said his office had been contacted by the Creek Nation within the past month; before that, it appeared compact talks had stopped.
While the Creek Nation has no compact with the state, both the Osage Nation and Cherokee Nation do, allowing tribal smoke shops to buy cigarettes with an 86-cent tax stamp from wholesalers except in stores near the state line. The situation comes during a time when the state just won an arbitration decision against the Cherokee Nation. Last month, arbiters determined that the Cherokee Nation and its smoke-shop owners violated the tobacco compact with the state.
Cherokee-affiliated smoke shops on the Oklahoma border were purchasing large quantities of low-tax cigarettes and shipping them to higher-tax markets like Tulsa and undercutting nontribal stores by $3 to $4 a carton.
Meanwhile, the Cherokee Nation has announced it will enforce stiff penalties on Cherokee stores that sell low-tax cigarettes to a high-tax zone, said Mike Miller, Cherokee Nation spokesman.
The Philip Morris contract requirement also is affecting the supply of premium cigarettes to Cherokee Nation- licensed smoke shops, Miller said. "Yes, some retailers are having to deal with that rule, and it’s limiting their supply," Miller said. Miller said the Cherokee Nation would not get involved in retailers’ relationships with wholesalers or cigarette makers. "We hope they are able to work it out in a way that keeps our licensees in business," he said.

Health Minister Mike Murphy is snuffing out tobacco advertising in most New Brunswick stores. Starting Jan. 1, 2009, non-specialty stores that sell tobacco must hide their smokes under the counter. But it’s not clear if the advertising ban introduced Friday will apply to tobacco sales on First Nations’ land. "We will look at that," said Murphy. "There have been some agreements with First Nations in the past across this country. There are some special requirements there. "That is a question for aboriginal affairs and intergovernmental affairs."
Traditional forms of tobacco advertising are already banned in Canada. An Act to Amend the Tobacco Sales Act will prohibit point-of-sale advertising, such as large racks or displays of tobacco products in a store. "These displays are sometimes referred to as powerwalls," said Murphy. "cigarettes and other tobacco products will have to be kept in a drawer, under the counter or in another part of the store that cannot be seen by customers." He said he wants to keep tobacco out of the sight and minds of young, impressionable New Brunswickers.
The province is also banning advertising of tobacco outside a store, which means the end of "buy cigarettes" signs, he said. Murphy said he was introducing the ban because tobacco is one of society’s biggest threats to good health and is preventable. New Brunswick has one of the highest smoking rates in Canada. "It causes lung and other cancers," said Murphy. "It causes circulatory diseases. It causes respiratory diseases." The legislation introduced Friday will create a new class of businesses called tobacconist shops. These specialty shops will allow tobacco products to be displayed and advertised.
But Murphy said such stores will be strictly regulated and no one under the age of 19 years will be allowed to enter unless accompanied by an adult. Murphy said there’s nothing to stop convenience stores in the province from converting to the new tobacconist shop rules, but it won’t be easy. "They would have to spend a fair amount of money," he said. "A tobacconist is not a convenience store as we know convenience stores in New Brunswick. "There are regulations that will be brought forward." For example, such a store would require a separate and distinct entrance, said Murphy.
Fines for violating the new rules will range from $240 to $2,620 for a first offence. A second offence will draw a fine of up to $5,120 and up to 30 days in jail. Opposition health critic Claude Landry praised the new restrictions. "We are the province with the second highest rate of cancer in the country," he said. Landry said more than 57 per cent of New Brunswickers who smoke want to quit and this change will help them. But he questioned why Murphy is waiting until 2009 when he dissolved regional health authority boards this winter without even waiting for the passage of the new health board legislation.
The Tories are filibustering that bill. The changes won’t come into effect until next year to give business time to adjust, said Murphy. The health minister said there are no immediate plans to ban smoking in vehicles in which children are passengers. He said he wouldn’t introduce such a ban until there’s a public debate on the issue. "It is certainly something I can assure New Brunswickers is under consideration," said Murphy. He said he didn’t expect the advertising ban to increase the smuggling of cigarettes.

SMOKERS could soon be lighting up ‘fire-proof’ cigarettes.
The reduced fire risk cigarettes are already produced overseas in Canada and New York and while Federal Treasurer Wayne Swan will need to rubber stamp the motion, a meeting of emergency services ministers committed to the move.
NSW Emergency Services Minister Nathan Rees moved the resolution to make the cigarettes mandatory under the Trade Practices Act as early as next year.
"We hope this will be law by early 2009, requiring all cigarettes manufactured and sold throughout Australia to be self-extinguishing," he said.
"Every day’s delay is another day we live with the risk that someone will be killed or injured or homes or bushland destroyed because cigarettes keep burning when they are dropped or thrown from a car window."
In Australia more than 4500 fires each year are caused by cigarette ignitions and 65 people died in fires directly attributed to cigarettes between 2000 and 2005.
Preliminary data from New York, which introduced RFR cigarettes in 2004, showed a significant decline in fire deaths.
NSW Fire Brigades tests showed a normal cigarette dropped on furnishings could start a fire in less than 18 minutes, while an RFR cigarette self-extinguished.
Mr Rees said some sections of the industry had traditionally baulked at such measures as health warnings and smoking bans, complaining about costs, difficulties in testing and compliance and production lead times.
"NSW does not accept that the industry needs an 18-month to two-year time frame to introduce these cigarettes, which are already being produced and sold in Canada and a number of states in the US," he said.
The Daily Telegraph understands the Australian tobacco industry is concerned that no testing has been done to ensure the cigarettes do not pose a further risk to smokers’ health.

Utah County lawmakers and the governor say a bill that may make the majority of smokeless tobacco less expensive has more to do with fixing tax policy than keeping kids from buying it.
But while the tax change will "stabilize the system," it could also lower the cost of the two most dominant brands on the market: Skoal and Copenhagen. Those brands happen to be the brands most preferred by users 12 and older, according to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
That worries health officials.
The bill was opposed by the state’s own Health Department and the 28-member Coalition for a Tobacco-Free Utah. "Anything that increases the opportunity for kids or adults to use Marlboro cigarettes is absolutely terrible not only to their health but our health care system," said coalition president Kurt Micka. House Bill 356 changes how "moist snuff" is taxed, from a 35-percent tax on the wholesale price to 75 cents on the ounce. Changing it to tax by weight is similar to quantity taxes on cigarettes and alcohol.
"It levels the playing field so tax policy doesn’t determine winners and losers," said Sen. Curt Bramble, who co-sponsored the bill with Rep. Becky Lockhart, both R-Provo.
Lockhart said there’s no guarantee the price of snuff will go down on the high end because the market will control that, not government. The No. 1 complaint she heard against the bill was that it could cut into tax revenues. The bill’s financial impact is regarded as neutral, but opponents say it won’t be neutral at all.
Under the tax on wholesale system, taxes increased with inflation, "a weight based system would remain stagnant. In order to match the rate of inflation under a weight-based system, state Legislature/tax officials would be required to ask for frequent increases in the tax rate," according to information from the Coalition for a Tobacco-Free Utah.
Bill proponents have also said it would raise the price of low-cost snuff, making it more difficult for minors to get their hands on tobacco. Lockhart said some snuff is available at 49 cents a can.
"That’s like a candy bar for a kid," she said.
Nearly half the states in the country have passed similar laws, and Lockhart says a company is "less likely to game a system" if it’s based on weight instead of on wholesale costs.
As to whether the bill is intended to actually lower the number of people using tobacco, Lockhart said that would be a nice side effect, but it that wasn’t the thrust of the bill.
"Yeah it is a terrible substance," she said. "But it is a legal substance."
Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. signed the bill a week ago and the change will go into effect in the beginning of May.
"More than anything it normalizes the tax policy," said spokeswoman Lisa Roskelley.

Parliament’s health committee has postponed public hearings on the Tobacco Products Control Amendment Bill, after complaints from the tobacco industry that it had not allowed enough time for public input.
The hearings were set for next week, but have now been rescheduled for May 6 and 7.
The Tobacco Institute of SA (Tisa ) and British American Tobacco (BAT) wrote to the committee last week saying Parliament’s attempts to fast-track the legislation violated the constitutional requirement of including the public in the law-making process. Tisa is a tobacco and cigarettes industry lobby group, while BAT is SA’s biggest tobacco distributor, with about three-quarters of the market. The Tobacco Products Control Amendment Bill has far- reaching implications for the tobacco industry as it seeks to close loopholes in the existing tobacco laws and strengthen provisions controlling the sale, advertisement and promotion of tobacco and cigarettes.
It was split into two separate bills, a section 75 bill dealing with matters falling under the central government, like smoking, and a section 76 bill that deals with provincial matters such as the sale and marketing of tobacco and cigarettes products.
The section 75 bill has been passed by Parliament and was signed into law by President Thabo Mbeki on February 23. However, he has yet to set a date for its implementation.
Last week Tisa and BAT wrote to the health committee complaining that the public had not been adequately informed of public hearings on the section 76 bill, originally set down for March 25 and 26.
In a letter dated March 13, BAT said the bill had not yet been published in the G overnment G azette when P arliament placed advertisements on March 9 calling for public comment. The bill was gazetted several days later, leaving insufficient time for interested parties to prepare for the original March 26 date, Tisa CEO Francois v an der Merwe said.
He welcomed Parliament’s decision to delay the public hearings by six weeks. "We are satisfied, and will work towards the new deadline. We have a lot at stake," he said yesterday.

Bear with me, this is going somewhere. In the last 50 years or so, cigarettes have gotten a pretty bad rap. Before then, no one outside of the tobacco industry really understood the negative health effects of smoking. I guess no one noticed that they were dying of lung cancer at age 70 because they had already died of tuberculosis when they were 35. It was a different time, and all the cool kids and their 10-year-old sisters were lighting up outside the log cabin, guilt-free. Ayn Rand, famous author and philanthropist, glorified smoking in her really giant book "Atlas Shrugged":
"I like to think of fire held in a man’s hand. Fire, dangerous force, tamed at his fingertips. I often wonder about the hours when a man sits alone, watching the smoke of a cigarette, thinking. I wonder what great things have come from such hours. When a man thinks, there is a spot of fire alive in his mind - and it is proper that he should have the burning point of a cigarette as his one expression."
Smoking was an assertion of our willful manipulation of the forces of nature and a metaphor for the very process of thought. Indeed, many great thinkers were also smokers, from Jean-Paul Sartre to James Dean. Even J.K. Rowling, author of the beloved Harry Potter books, was a smoker until she quit and became a Nicorette chewing gum addict (that is actually true).
Despite this, much of society has turned against tobacco products. Smoking has been tied to cardiovascular disease, stroke, birth defects, bronchitis, cataracts, basically every form of cancer and, most frighteningly, of impotence. I’m not going to argue that smoking doesn’t cause lung cancer (that will be my next column), but I still think that despite these minor drawbacks, smoking is good for humanity.
Cigarettes undeniably bring people together. For example, think back to the beginning of freshman year. You are walking around alone like a schmuck, looking for the Sharpe Refectory, pretending like you know what you’re doing. Some self-assured looking New Yorker in vintage converse, dark blue jeans and a black T-shirt comes up to you asking for a light. Suddenly you have a new friend, and he might even be rich. Meanwhile, the non-smoker is doomed to an awkward conversation with some kid from the Perkins sub-free hall about the Brown Christian Fellowship.
Or, you’re standing outside of a frat party, trying to escape the smell of beer, sweat and chauvinism, and a pretty girl next to you lights up. If you didn’t smoke before, you better start now. Attractive women are hard to come by on campus, and it would be ridiculous to let a lifetime of addiction and an early death come between you and a chance at a night of uncomfortable sex (and months and months of bragging to your roommate). That is such a good argument that I could probably just stop now, but I’ve got more.
Smoking isn’t just good for smokers, it is also great for non-smokers. If you are reading this article on an elliptical in the Bear’s Lair, scoffing at my ignorance, know two things: 1) cigarettes have benefited you far more than anyone who actually smokes them. 2) I can see you from my room in Grad Center (also actually true). There is no greater feeling of moral superiority than that felt by a non-smoker. Every time you watch a homeless man with a hack-cough trying to bum a cigarette on Thayer Street, your heart fills with joy. "Look at that poor fool, killing himself slowly and not even realizing it." If it weren’t for smokers, you wouldn’t know that you’re better than everyone else. And doesn’t it feel good? I will take the liberty of answering my own rhetorical question: Yes, yes it does. Therefore, cigarettes make you feel good, in the deepest and most significant way.

The Oklahoma House of Representatives has passed House Bill 3341, by state Rep. Mike Thompson and state Sen. Don Barrington, legislation designed to help reduce the number of fires caused by cigarettes.
The Fire Safety Standard and Firefighter Protection Act would require retailers to sell only "fire safe" cigarettes, meaning no cigarettes could be sold in Oklahoma unless they have been tested and certified by the manufacturer and are in compliance with the State Fire Marshal’s approved standards for being a fire safe cigarette.
"This is an effort to save lives and prevent injuries from cigarette-ignited fires," said Thompson, R-Oklahoma City, said in a House news release announcing the bill’s passage. "According to TobaccoFreeKids.org, cigarettes
cause about 1 out of 4 fires and almost every day, someone in America dies from a fire caused by a cigarette — and many of these deaths are toddlers, infants or the elderly."
One of the bill’s sponsors, Sen. Barrington, R-Lawton, worked in the fire services industry for 32 years, serving as the Lawton fire chief for six of those years.
Under the bill, manufacturers would be required to maintain copies of reports on all tests on cigarettes offered for sale for a period of three years and copies would be made available to the State Fire Marshall and Attorney General upon written request. Failure of a manufacturer to provide copies within 60 days of a written request would be subject to a civil penalty of up to $10,000 per day the copies are not made available.
A manufacturer or anyone who sells cigarettes in violation the law would be subject to a penalty of up to $500 for each pack sold; however, the penalty could not exceed $100,000 during any 30-day period.
A retailer who sells cigarettes in violation of the proposed law would be subject to a penalty of up to $500 for each pack sold with a maximum penalty of $25,000 during any 30-day period.
Currently, 22 other states have already passed fire safe cigarettes legislation. House Bill 3341 has passed the Oklahoma House of Representatives on a 97-0 vote and now proceeds to the state Senate.

Despite popular opinion, I actually don’t like trashing a movie. I understand that someone put their heart and soul into the film and I really don’t like to insult that person’s work, especially when that someone is the great John Turturro. Unfortunately, I can’t hold back when the film is as horrible as ROMANCE AND CIGARETTES.

First, it’s important to mention that this is a musical set to somewhat familiar songs. The music isn’t horrible, but it doesn’t really fit into the context of the film. At times the musical numbers seem forced, almost as if the screenplay wasn’t originally written as a musical. Not only that, but the stars don’t really sing the songs, they actually just sing along with someone else. So every song sounds like someone singing along in the shower.

The dialogue is heavily laced with vulgarities that seem completely out of place for the time and situations the characters are in. The last thing I expected in the film (especially in the first 10 minutes) was for a daughter to lash out at her father in an oral-sex themed tirade. Those kind of things happened throughout the film and in each instance, it was distracting and unnecessary. I enjoy vulgar language as much as the next guy, but it has to be used in a manner that actually moves the story along, not just to shock the audience.

Finally, I think Turturro took his love of theatrics a bit too far. Half the movie was over the top and overly dramatic. There were fantasy/dream sequences that looked and felt like they didn’t belong. Too many instances begged the question; what were they thinking? I did enjoy the great Christopher Walken, who played his character like he was trying to entertain a group of elementary students. That’s a good thing because too many of the stars took themselves too seriously.

ITC Ltd., India’s biggest tobacco company, fell the most in three weeks in Mumbai trading after the government increased cigarette taxes, prompting brokerages to downgrade the stock.

Shares of Kolkata-based ITC fell 4.5 percent to 193 rupees on the Bombay Stock Exchange today, their biggest one-day decline since Feb. 11.

UBS AG cut its