Posted on 08/08/2006 5:32:31 AM PDT by SheLion
Senator Susan Collins introduced legislation on Aug. 3 to help crack down on illegal sales of tobacco to children by banning the shipment of cigarettes and other tobacco products through the U.S. mail.
Specifically, the bill would add cigarettes and smokeless tobacco to the U.S. Postal Service's list of restricted, non-mailable products. A first violation of mailing such a product would be liable for a civil penalty of up to $5,000 or 10 times the estimated retail value of the tobacco products, including all federal, state, and local taxes, whichever is highest. Civil penalties of up to $100,000 would be imposed for each subsequent violation.
The Senate went into recess on August 4.
This is not the first action taken against Internet sellers of cigarettes.
In January Philip Morris USA reached an agreement with a coalition of 37 Attorneys General aimed at combating the sale of the company’s cigarettes over the Internet and through the mails. In addition, in March 2005, the Attorneys Generals also announced that the major credit card companies had all agreed to stop processing credit card payments for the Internet retailers. And, later in the year, both DHL and UPS agreed to stop shipping packages for the vendors engaged in these illegal sales.
The USPS has continued to ship cigarettes because under postal law packages are sealed against inspection unless there is probable cause, according to USPS spokesman Gerry McKiernan
In September 2005, the agency adopted a formal policy recognizing that it cannot knowingly permit mail to be used to further activities deemed unlawful by state and federal authorities. As a result, the agency currently makes it illegal to mail alcoholic beverages and guns.
However, the USPS policy authorizes postal employees to accept packages suspected of containing untaxed or under-taxed cigarettes because, there could be souvenirs in the package. However, “its pretty obvious if it’s a gun, don’t you think,” asked Mr. McKiernan.
If enacted, McKiernan, “we will comply, but we hope guidance will be offered on how we can effectively enforce this legislation.”
Sen. Collins said Internet sales of tobacco are growing, but effective safeguards against illegal sales to young people are virtually non- existent on the more than 400 websites selling tobacco, making it easier and cheaper for kids to buy cigarettes.
She added that the delivery of cigarettes and other tobacco products through the mail creates opportunities for tax evasion.
Collins said that 20 percent of cigarette-selling Websites do not say anything about sales to minors being prohibited and more than half require only that the buyer say they are of legal age. Another 15 percent require that the buyer type in their date of birth and only 7 percent require any drivers license information.
Collins said Internet "stings" conducted by Attorneys General in at least 15 states found that children as young as 9-years-old are able to purchase cigarettes easily. Moreover, since Internet cigarette vendors typically require a two-carton minimum purchase, many high school and middle school buyers of Internet tobacco also end up serving as suppliers of cigarettes to other kids.
In March, Senator Charles E. Schumer, D-NY, and New York State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer announced that they had teamed up to support legislation to stop the shipment of cigarettes and smokeless tobacco through the U.S. Mail.
Schumer said his bill would prohibit mailing cigarettes through the USPS, impose fines of at least $1,000 per offense and jail time for repeat offenders, and give state Attorneys General the ability to pursue those who ship tobacco in violation of the law.
The bill has not yet been introduced.
Yea really! Bend over!
Those who do not learn from history are condemned to repeat it.
Hilarious stuff!
It's really all about the tax money.
This business that it's about the children is getting pretty old!
You are very smart. We have been trying and trying to tell our anti-FReepers just this. They laugh at us, but let me tell you, when cigarette revenue dwindles in the state coffers, guess what! These anti-FReepers are going to be hit and hit hard.
But............we tried to tell them! Let's see how they think we smokers stink THEN! heh!
Simple solution Tax the Meth , then she will worry about that.
That's pretty neat, Randall!!!! I like it!
Doesn't Maine already have the highest tax burden in the US?
(Maybe some other state is sneaking up on first place and Susie wants to make sure Maine stays in the lead.)
Collins is a total RINO. She will want to regulate the Internet and blogs such as this, next/also. She thinks government knows best, just like socialist Hillary Klinton.
Naa. That itty bitty greenhouse is the perfect size to supply enough for two smokers. Any more and they'd just go bad.
I can't sell the tobacco I grow without a license. Illegal.
You must live in a tree. "The self centeredness of the smokers agenda is so transparent." There are only special interests, and the most special interest of all is me.
I've rolled many a leaf, and never used a paper! Now, I buy them already rolled!!!
No, in fact I would be completely opposed to that.
So you are saying it's NOT the responsiblity of the parents to police their kids activities and the 'nanny state' government should do it for them?
Yeah. Just what we need. MORE government control of our lives.
This is complete BS. It's NOT for the kids. It's for the TAXES!
I just read an article where Maine is the third highest tax state in the Union. We have gluttons in the state house.
And thus you have bought the shiny wrapper of a tax bill. If the aim is to prevent children from purchasing cigarettes, aim the penalties towards sales to minors. But the bill doesn't do that. If mommy and daddy want to give a credit card to a minor (hey, you could also shut down that avenue), let them take the heat if junior abuses it by purchasing contraband. But you do not close off something to thousands of adults because one or two enterprising youts find a way to beat the system. I find your post at odds with your screenname ... 'sup wid dat?
Is that picture even anatomically possible?
It looks like that rhino needs a step-ladder.
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.