Anti-tobacco stance might cost Democrats
By Norman E. Kjono
In “Keeping Clinton at a Distance,” Noam M. Levey of the Los Angeles Times wrote that Montana Democratic Sen. Max Baucus may be entering treacherous territory with his 2008 bid for a fifth term in the U.S. Senate. Levy reports that “Despite recent gains by Democrats in the Rocky Mountain West, party officials across the region are anxious that their congressional candidates might get dragged under by Hillary Rodham Clinton’s presidential campaign.” Western states constituents tend to be self-reliant folks who live the spirit of free enterprise. It appears that the more western voters know about Democrat’s current frontrunner for the presidential nomination the faster they run from her and the Democrat party. Hillary Clinton is certainly a polarizing candidate, however, the reasons for Baucus to be deeply concerned extend beyond one candidate. All eight Democratic candidates for the presidential nomination supported expanding smoking bans during the New Hampshire debate. Clinton stated in April 1993 that she does not believe people should be permitted to smoke and banned smoking in the White House. Democrats don’t get it about the impact of smoking bans on bar and tavern revenues. That’s been borne out by data about Colorado’s ban on indoor smoking. A sharp reversal of bar revenue increases during six previous quarters occurs after Colorado’s smoking ban. Smoking bans tilt the nicotine market to “smoke free” pharmaceutical nicotine patch and gum distributors. Voters get it: Democrats steal the future of small bar and tavern owners through mandates that reward pharmaceutical interests. Increases in full service restaurant revenues after the Colorado smoking ban show that, absent the choice to enjoy a smoke with their beverage, bar patrons are migrating to restaurants, creating a change in the competitive structure of the hospitality industry. The vast majority of Colorado bar and tavern licensees are mom-and-pop neighborhood establishments and the majority of Colorado restaurants are chain franchises. The smoking ban becomes a transfer of wealth from local small business owners to big franchises. Voters get it: Democrats reward big corporate interests and do so at the expense of local mom-and-pop small business owners. What small business owner or employee would vote for a candidate who supports public policy that steals their economic future, while causing an artificial change in the competitive structure of their industry? What bar patron who smokes while enjoying a beer in a neighborhood tavern would vote for a candidate who throws them out the door along with the anti-tobacco bathwater? Voters increasingly get it: Democrats as lead by Hillary Clinton are the embodiment anticompetitive special-interest agendas — everyday folks, plus the mom-and-pop neighborhood hospitality establishments that cater to them, be damned. On Oct. 2, President Bush vetoed an expansion of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program passed by Democrats. It was the right thing to do for several reasons. The $35 billion expansion of federal payment obligations is financed by a 61-cent per pack increase in cigarette taxes. This tax would fall hardest on middle- and lower-income people. The new children’s insurance revenues would also vastly expand revenues for pharmaceuticals because those dollars also fund purchase of more prescription drugs. Voters get it: Democrats pick the pockets of their middle and lower income constituents to add billions to pharmaceutical sales. Targeted tobacco consumers, 45 million strong, are fed up with being the designated ATM for politicians’ mercantile social experiments. All taxpayers — smokers and nonsmokers alike — will ultimately fund expansion of children’s health insurance if the 110th Congress passes U.S. Food and Drug Administration regulation of tobacco. That current bill before Congress authorizes sharp reductions in the nicotine content of cigarettes, thereby strongly tilting the nicotine market to zero-taxed pharmaceutical nicotine patches, gums and inhalers. All taxpayers will be taxed to make up for the lost cigarette tax revenue. Voters get it: today’s taxes on smokers are tomorrow’s stealth tax increases for everyone. Perhaps Baucus merely understands the degree to which many Democratic politicians will loot their own constituents to throw billions at pharmaceuticals. He is, however, quite correct to anticipate a strong backlash from voters. Kjono is a columnist for Forces.org.