RJ Reynolds' latest argument against Prop E: It doesn't ban the sale of all tobacco products

Yesterday I received this mailer -- they are coming just about every day now -- from RJ Reynolds arguing that voters should not support San Francisco's law prohibiting the sale of flavored cigarettes because it still allows the sale of unflavored tobacco products.

Of course, that is the point of the law.  People who want tobacco would still be able to buy tobacco products, just not in the kid-friendly flavors.

At least Reynolds admits that if voters uphold the law people will not be able to buy menthol cigarettes, the main economic interest RJR, makers of Newport menthol cigarettes, is probably trying to protect.  (RJR could keep selling Camel regular cigarettes under the law.)

This argument is a lot like the argument that the tobacco companies unsuccessfully made against the tobacco tax (Proposition 56) that it did not put enough money into anti-smoking activities.  Voters saw through that hypocracy and overwhelmingly passed the tobacco tax, which is helping rapidly reduce smoking here in California.
 

Add new comment

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
13 + 2 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.