Menthol ban will be a bad, harmful idea
Over the past decade, Americans have increasingly embraced regulation and taxation of marijuana over the failed policy of prohibition. And yet, this spring, the Food and Drug Administration is widely expected to impose a prohibition on menthol cigarettes. This would be a foolish overreach that merely opens up the same sort of problems as the prohibition of marijuana.
“Last week, the proposed tobacco product standards for `Characterizing Flavors in Cigars' and `Menthol in Cigarettes' were entered into the Office of Management and Budget's system for reviewing regulatory documents,” announced Dr. Robert Califf, a commissioner with the FDA on March 3. “In my practice of cardiology, I saw too many people die or suffer irreversible illness due to tobacco products. These proposed rules are intended to help reduce this needless suffering.”
By now, American adults are well aware of the harms and risks of tobacco product use. That's a credit to ongoing public health campaigns educating Americans about such harms.
But in a free society, individuals ought to be allowed to make their own choices. It's with that principle in mind that Americans are free to engage in any number of activities or consume any number of products which are potentially harmful.
As we know with marijuana prohibition, or in the case of jurisdictions with either tight controls on or high taxes on tobacco products, people will always find a way to acquire products they wish to consume.
“While some smokers might quit in response to a ban, many will switch to non-mentholated cigarettes and many more will simply turn to the already-thriving illicit cigarette market, offering zero health benefit,” Michelle Minton, a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, told Filter, a New York City-based publication about drug policy.
It must be noted that menthol cigarettes are the preferred type of cigarette by Black smokers. The prohibition of menthol cigarettes, then, will only put Black smokers into the inevitable underground market.
“You cannot talk out of both sides of your mouth. You cannot agree that the Black community does not need more unjust interactions with police, yet also support bans and prohibitions that result in more police interactions, investigative stops, stop-question-frisk cases,” wrote USC law professor Jody Armour in an op-ed in these pages last year.
The government should back off of bringing down further restrictions and instead focus on persuasion and education.
We have learned that prohibition does not work. We have learned that markets will endure regardless of government policy. And we know that education efforts are a viable alternative. We should stick with education and persuasion, not prohibition.