Tewksbury & Company Blog

Prohibition or Prejudice by the Numbers

In a United State of America where only 15% of the public approve of the actions of Congress is at 15%¹. Simply put, that means 85% of the American public thinks they are doing a bad job. Once again, Congress is considering some astronomical increases in tobacco taxes for cigarettes and pipe tobacco. When you delve deeper into the reasons behind the proposed tax increases it just does not add up. After studying the history of Prohibition while in the wine business for over 30 years, it looks, smells and feels a lot like the pre-prohibition era in the US.

Let’s face it, increasing tobacco taxes by the largest single increase on any product in US history in 2009, how much better is the economy getting along today? Really, this is a simple case of smoke free individuals and organizations who have tried hard to find a kinder and simpler way to ostracize those who smoke tobacco. Let’s face it, “a full 28% of people aged 18-25 use cannabis annually, and over 11% are using cannabis more than 100 days per year, more than the 9% who use less than monthly. But by ages 26-34, all those figures drop by half or more (so much for the new Pot 2.0’s addictive powers.) By ages 35-49, even though chronic and occasional/rare use drops by half again, there are still one out of twelve middle-aged Americans using marijuana at least once per year”². Now let’s compare these figures to the latest survey of US adults using tobacco. In 2008 20% of all US adults reported using tobacco products.³ Reports in 2009 show that consumption of tobacco had actually increased by 1%. Isn’t it interesting that the number of pot smokers are higher than either the approval rating for Congress and the percent of adults using tobacco? By the way – When was the last time you heard of increasing, or even starting to tax, Marijuana?

This leads us to the point of a not-so-well disguised basis for Prejudice. Webster’s Dictionary describes prejudice as: injury or damage resulting from some judgment or action of another in disregard of one’s rights; especially : detriment to one’s legal rights or claims: preconceived judgment or opinion: an adverse opinion or leaning formed without just grounds or before sufficient knowledge: an instance of such judgment or opinion: an irrational attitude of hostility directed against an individual, a group, a race, or their supposed characteristics. Using these descriptions, the anti-smoking groups and individuals fit this category exactly.

There is a marked difference in controlling any potentially dangerous substance that is legal under our country’s laws and a simple case of prejudice. Many of these anti-tobacco activists have been the very same group that has fought for years to end discrimination against race, sexual orientation and many other social, economic and ethnical issues. But when pressed on the issue of using prejudice against tobacco, alcohol, marijuana, an individual’s weight and other “social evils”, they go right back to Webster’s description of prejudice above. If this is not the epitome of hypocrisy, then what is? 

We challenge the political leaders of this country to justify why they have not “outlawed” such things as tobacco, sugar, etc. if they are indeed so bad for us, in their opinion. It appears to many of us that if these things are indeed so bad for the people why are they so focused on taxing these things rather than outlawing them. It is time for Washington and our state legislatures to admit that this is simply a matter of prejudice and attempting to tax out of existence those “dangerous” products rather than outlaw them. What? Did they learn that excessive taxation or prohibition only add to their dismal national approval ratings? Or, will we see these same politicians continue to show their sad example of being prejudice to those who use these products while continuing to turn their heads to other issues they choose to be “acceptable” and continue their selected attacks on those of us who have supported the economy of our state and federal governments through the already excessive taxes we currently pay? What do you think?

¹ Gallup/CBS Poll February 5, 2010

² Research by NORML  (April 12, 2009) in Society / Drug Law

³ Institute of Medicine