www.bewet.fora.pl

tonyqpmszx

Legal threats over plain cigarette packaging have no basis in law. My late father, a Presbyterian minister,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], joked that on occasions he would write sermons with the following note to himself: ”Shout here, the argument is weak.” The tobacco industry is shouting very loudly about the Australian government’s proposals for plain packaging of cigarettes.
The industry claims the proposed legislation would be illegal and it would be entitled to massive financial compensation if such laws were passed. In line with my father’s approach, it needs to shout much, much louder because its legal arguments are anaemically weak. The plain packaging proposals would restrict cigarette companies to identifying their brands with simple words in plain font only. No artwork would be associated with or part of the branding of the cigarettes.
The intent is that smokers could continue to obtain the brand of their choice,marlboro red cigarettes, but the visual appeal of the packets to non-smokers,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], especially children, would be reduced. The pictorial warnings were proposed in July 2006 under the Cigarette and Other Tobacco Products Act, 2003. Back then,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], the proposal was to print warnings in the form of pictures of skull and bones, real-life pictures of cancer patients, dead bodies, and a child dying due to the effects of smoking and mouth cancer lacerations and tumours. However, the warnings that came into effect last year were milder.
Health experts said the government should also focus on the implementation of new warnings as tobacco companies were violating the rules. Washington, D.C. – By increasing cigarette taxes by $1 per pack, the states could raise more than $9 billion in new annual revenue to help close severe budget shortfalls, while also reducing smoking and saving lives, according to a new report released today by a coalition of public health organizations. A national poll released along with the report finds that 67 percent of voters support a $1 tobacco tax increase.
The poll also found that voters far prefer higher tobacco taxes to other options, such as other tax increases or budget cuts, for addressing state budget deficits. * By a margin of 59 percent to 35 percent,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], voters prefer a candidate for state office who supports the tobacco tax over one who opposes it. This preference is expressed by majorities of Democrats, Republicans and Independents.
“We have irrefutable evidence that raising the tobacco tax lowers smoking rates among adults and deters millions of children from picking up their first cigarette,” said John R. Seffrin,wholesale marlboro red cigarettes supplier, PhD, CEO, American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network. “An increase in tobacco tax rates is not only sound public health policy but a smart and predictable way to help boost the economy and generate long-term health savings for states facing deepening budget deficits.”
“When it comes to saving lives and injecting new revenue in depleted state coffers, we should not hesitate to support measures that will accomplish both,” said Nancy Brown, CEO of the American Heart Association. “Raising tobacco taxes will protect children and adults from tobacco use,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych],[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], reduce health care costs and revitalize critical health and education programs that too often fall victim to state budget cuts.”
“During these tough economic times, cigarette tax increases are both popular among voters and can significantly reduce long-term smoking-related health care costs,” said Charles D. Connor, American Lung Association president and CEO. “Spending some of the revenue on maintaining or increasing funding for tobacco prevention and cessation programs makes cigarette tax increases even more effective.”