Cigarette High Taxes and Tobacco Profits

Cigarette makers have a certified history of deception, distortion and lying. And let's not forget fraud and racketeering. Those aren't my words. Credit U.S. District Judge Gladys E. Kessler of Washington, D.C. She wrote in a landmark 2006 ruling that for more than 50 years the tobacco industry had "lied, misrepresented, and deceived the American public, including smokers and the young people they avidly sought as 'replacement smokers,' about the devastating health effects of smoking." Be the first to know! Sign up for FOX40 breaking news alerts. Moreover, she said, "they suppressed research, they destroyed documents, they manipulated the use of nicotine so as to increase and perpetuate addiction, they distorted the truth … so as to discourage smokers from quitting." The judge went on and on, and here's just one more shot: "Their lethal product" causes "an immeasurable amount of human suffering and economic loss and a profound burden on our national healthcare system." Kessler found the major cigarette makers guilty of fraud and racketeering under the federal RICO Act. The Supreme Court later rejected, without comment, the tobacco companies' appeal. So, among other sins, the tobacco industry has suppressed research, distorted the truth, profited from human suffering and driven up healthcare costs. One could argue that this sordid history does not necessarily mean they're distorting and deceiving in their current campaign ads attacking Proposition 29, the California ballot measure that would raise cigarette taxes $1 per pack to finance cancer research — and which is very likely to reduce tobacco profits by prompting smokers to quit and teens to never start. Maybe tobacco companies can kick the habit of prevarication. Maybe a leopard can change its spots. But voters should be a mite skeptical. This came to mind as I watched a tobacco-funded TV ad featuring a male actor in a white lab coat. He was saying that Prop. 29 would impose "nearly a billion dollars in new taxes on California" — actually about $800 million and all of it on tobacco users — but that the measure wouldn't require the money to be spent in this state.