Post Office Sidesteps Fray on Illicit Sales of Cigarettes

NY Times ^ | May 29, 2005 | MICHAEL COOPER

[neverdem]

ALBANY, May 26 - As they move to thwart the illegal trade of cigarettes over the Internet, state officials have joined colleagues from around the nation in persuading the major credit card companies to stop processing payments for online cigarette sales. Additionally, the state has enacted a law prohibiting the shipment of cigarettes to its residents and banned private carriers, like FedEx, from shipping cigarettes.

But as state officials fight illegal online cigarette sales, one operation is not falling into line - the United States Postal Service, which officials say delivers the bulk of illegally purchased cigarettes to New Yorkers.

The Postal Service, citing concerns about the privacy of the mail and wary of putting postal clerks in the position of deciding which packages to accept and which to reject, is resisting the growing calls that it stop shipping cigarettes.

Its stance is exasperating law enforcement officials. "It is outrageous that the federal government - through the United States Postal Service - is knowingly acting as the delivery arm for these criminal enterprises," New York's attorney general, Eliot Spitzer, said in a statement.

The role of the post office in shipping illegally sold cigarettes is also attracting attention across the nation. Last month the National Association of Attorneys General asked the Postal Service to "adopt a firm policy prohibiting transportation of packages that the carrier knows or reasonably should know contains cigarettes sold illegally on the Internet." In Oregon, an online cigarette seller was charged in January with unlawful distribution of cigarettes and racketeering; the post office was not charged but was named in the indictment as part of the racketeering enterprise.

--snip--

Postal officials say that they are committed to fighting illegal activities conducted through the mail, but complain that their hands are tied.

[MamaTexan]

Congress has considered legislation that would ban the mailing of cigarettes.

US Constitution
Article I
Section 10
paragraph 1

Powers prohibited of States No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.

States have these as well.

If I purchase something, whether from an individual or a business, it IS a contract.

The post office is delivering these DESPITE what the states say simply because they cannot interfere with an 'obligation of contract'

Since the FBI is an ILLEGITAMATE division of government, they have been stopping the PLANES, but even they can't stop the mail!

If Congress DOES try it, we SERIOULY need to look at a class action lawsuit.

[neverdem]

I think state sales taxes on interstate commerce, especially with Indian Tribes, should be challenged as unconstitutional under the commerce clause, Article I, Section 8 - Powers of Congress:

"To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;"

[lockjaw02]

"The supreme court ruled it is alright for wine drinkers to buy on the Internet and avoid state taxes. But, they deny that same right to smokers. Both are legal products, why the difference?"

They didn't do it so that state residents could avoid state taxes. They did it because some states, like New York, prohibited shipping from out of state wineries while allowing shipments from those in state. Funny thing is this lawsuit was brought about by a small Virginia winemaker who had been fighting this un-Constitutional impediment to interstate commerce. Meanwhile, Virginia has been up in arms about how to stem the growing tide of imports of garbage into its landfills from New York.

Nobody cares about how they treat tobacco taxes and shipments because very few farmers still continue to grow it in only a few states.

[Ursus arctos horribilis]

"They didn't do it so that state residents could avoid state taxes. They did it because some states, like New York, prohibited shipping from out of state wineries while allowing shipments from those in state. Funny thing is this lawsuit was brought about by a small Virginia winemaker who had been fighting this un-Constitutional impediment to interstate commerce. Meanwhile, Virginia has been up in arms about how to stem the growing tide of imports of garbage into its landfills from New York.

Nobody cares about how they treat tobacco taxes and shipments because very few farmers still continue to grow it in only a few states."

Anyway one slices it, Internet wine buyers can avoid state taxes.

Maybe only a few farmers grow tobacco, but millions use it. Tobacco and wine, two legal products, are not treated equally under the law.

To wink, wink, at minors buying alcohol on the Internet, then to raise the alarm they might do likewise with tobacco, is naught but a sham.

Frankly, I would rather take my chances with teenage second hand smoke, than a kid drunk on mind altering wine coming at me across the centerline at 100 MPH.

[Collier]

The cigarette tax in NY is $3.00 a pack.