NJ Mulls Hiking Legal Smoking Age to 21

CNS News ^ | 04.28.03

[Coleus]

NJ Mulls Hiking Legal Smoking Age to 21

By Jeff McKay CNSNews.com Correspondent April 25, 2003

(CNSNews.com) - When it comes to tobacco, New Jersey has been a leader at making it harder and costlier to smoke. Now, legislators want to raise the legal age for buying tobacco, a step that would make it the only state in the nation where you must be 21 to smoke.

The bill's primary sponsor, Assemblyman John McKeon (D-West Orange) believes this bill would benefit teenagers and be easier to enforce.

"The statistics are clear -- 95 percent of all smokers start before they are 21," said McKeon. "In terms of age, it is very hard to tell the difference between a person who is 16, 17 or 18. Making the age 21 would make enforcement easier."

The bill's co-sponsor, Assemblyman Joseph Cryan (D-Union), himself a restaurant owner who might lose profits under the ban on smoking in restaurants, said the ambiguity needs to be cleared up over who is an adult.

"The age for tobacco use should be 21, just like it is for alcohol," said Cryan. "We must consider the health of young people because of the damage smoking does to the body, as well as the long-term financial considerations because of the high cost of medical care for people who have cancer or emphysema."

Most states in the nation have set the legal age to smoke at 18 years old - including New Jersey - though Alaska, Alabama and Utah have raised the age to 19. New Jersey would be the only state in the nation to ban the sale of cigarettes and other tobacco products to people under the age of 21.

A 2001 state study showed that about one-third of New Jersey high school students use tobacco products.

In a series of anti-smoking maneuvers, the state banned smoking on school property, then extended that law to bars, restaurants and nearly all workplaces. The state's cigarette tax is the third highest in the nation.

While New Jersey has done much to stem its use, tobacco has become an important part of the state's attempt to bridge a massive budget gap.

New Jersey received $3.5 billion from the over $200 billion tobacco settlement between tobacco companies and the states. Over $1 billion was borrowed from New Jersey's settlement to narrow the state's budget deficit. Even more money will be directed to the state's 2004 deficit, virtually wiping out the money that was supposed to go toward long-term health care, education and anti-smoking activities.

While McKeon and Cryan want to increase the smoking age to 21, Democratic Governor Jim McGreevey is mulling over hiking the cigarette tax for the second consecutive year to $1.90 per pack, which would make the state cigarette tax the highest in the nation. New Jersey currently taxes cigarettes at $1.50 per pack.

While states such as New Jersey and New York have banked on tobacco taxes to generate income, this logic may have backfired, as sales of cigarettes on the Internet - which are exempt from these inflated taxes - have steadily grown, replacing sales in stores. A report by the Small Business Survival Committee showed 88 percent of storeowners surveyed reported that the cigarette tax has hurt their tobacco sales.

Pro-tobacco groups believe raising the age to purchase tobacco products is just another example of politicians going too far.

"This is another example of demonizing tobacco. If you can fight in a war at 18, you should be able to smoke," said Audrey Silk, founder of New York Citizens Lobby Against Smoker Harassment. "If enforcement is the issue, then I guess these politicians don't realize there are such things as I.D. cards. There are laws on the books just enforce the laws."

While McKeon's bill has yet to be debated in New Jersey's State Assembly, he does expect a fight, both from some assembly members and the tobacco lobby.

"This is a societal question. We will abide by whatever the New Jersey Legislature decides," said Tom Ryan, a spokesman for Phillip Morris, which is focusing on the state's proposed tax increase. "These are not good solutions for New Jersey's budget problems."

"I'll be happy to take them on. This bill is simply the responsible thing to do," added McKeon.

[Coleus]

`

[Mears]

Now the kids can have the person buying the beer for them pick up some cigs at the same time.

When will these idiots get it,laws don't change behaviour.

[IYAS9YAS]

Let's see, how many dead and wounded in Iraq were not of legal drinking age or even the legal smoking age (21 and 19)?

[Pearls Before Swine]

I can see it now... Kids having juvenile records for trying a few cigs out behind the school.

This is the kind of authoritarian foolishness that increases the glamor of the habit.

[Coleus]

Where there is a will, there's a way.

[exit82]

Only the idiots in Trenton could come up with this waste of time.

Are there any villages that we could export these idiots to?

[Sonny M]

Help me out here freepers, under what part of the law, was raising the drinking age legal? I'm assuming the 10th amendment is whats used, but does that contracdict the 21st amendment and the 9th amendment? What was the supreme court reasoning on that case?

[Coleus]

And who is going to pay for the enforcement, court time, rehab, etc.???

[Coleus]

The 10th amendment? Abraham Lincoln took care of that a long time ago.

I think each state passed their own age-appropriate laws for drinking. In this case the 10th amendment is working.

As far as drunk driving, the 10th amendment was pushed aside since the feds will with hold our money until the states change the legal limit to .08 by a certain year. True the aren't forcing us in one way, but the other way is extortion. They take our taxes then don't give the states the money until we do what the feds want.

[firewalk]

Thanks for the pings to things for NJ

[Just another Joe]

I think each state passed their own age-appropriate laws for drinking.

You are correct.
The states also set their own age for allowing one to use a tobacco product. Most have the minimum age set to 18, some to 19.
I agree with Audrey Silk, You can be forced to fight in a war and die for your country but you can't buy cigarettes or a beer.
Quite the hypoctirical stance to take for a state, huh?

[timm22]

"The age for tobacco use should be 21, just like it is for alcohol," said Cryan. "We must consider the health of young people because of the damage smoking does to the body, as well as the long-term financial considerations because of the high cost of medical care for people who have cancer or emphysema."

Just another example of the unjust double standards young people must face in this country. To the nanny statists, an 18 year old is old enough for all of the responsibilities of adulthood, such as paying taxes, being held fully accountable for crimes, and being able to risk their lives for the nation's defense.

But of course, to the nanny statists, they are too immature and irresponsible to enjoy a beer with their dinner, take a smoke break, or purchase a handgun for protecting themselves or their families.

And if you consider a 17 year old, who faces most of the same responsibilities as his or her 18 year old counterpart, you can add voting, watching a dirty movie, or purchasing ANY firearms to the list of prohibited activities.

[Dimensio]

I may be remembering incorrectly, but IIRC the drinking age laws are all state-determined. It's just that the Federal government will withold highway funds to states whose minimum drinking age is less than 21. As such, it's technically not a federal matter, at least not in a direct fashion that could be managed by the courts.

[pepsi_junkie]

I love it. Let the kids see thate very person who wants to stop them from making their own decisions has a (D) next to their name.

[Quick1]

Keep things up like this, and they'll be added to the War on Some Drugs. Remember kids, the government knows what's best for you!

[07055]

"We must consider ...the long-term financial considerations because of the high cost of medical care for people who have cancer or emphysema."

Anti-smoking fanatics always mention these increased health costs but I think they are lying.

People who get lung cancer tend to die within a relatively short time.

Yes, there are medical costs for some time. But, then the smoker is dead and the government saves the Social Security payments he would have otherwise received.

Has there ever been a study on the long term differences in medical costs for smokers vs. non-smokers?

[SMGFan]

Okay, why can't anyone make smoking by those under 18 illegal?

[Coleus]

I asked the same question.

[Coleus]

Has there ever been a study on the long term differences in medical costs for smokers vs. non-smokers?>>

That's a good question.