Tobacco is one of the largest industries till this day, about 15 billion cigarettes are sold on the daily. It currently is sold to 18+ year olds all around the United States except in Hawaii and California where it is now only 21+. Although Oregon is now the third state to successfully pass the law to have the age minimum change to 21 year olds. It has already kicked in a couple of different cities and as of January first it will be all of Oregon. This law has so many questions being raised by civilians all around and has also made several other states begin to fight for their tobacco age to raise. Tobacco has been known to kill teens and adults for a very long time but it also makes people question if it’s fair for the senate to take away the privilege for young adults to make their own decisions for their own body. Since the debate has so many factors involved I believe that the main question is, was it fair and wise for Oregon to raise the legal purchasing age for tobacco and nicotine products to 21+?
Tobacco is a widely known and used substance by people all around the world, it has been grown for over 8000 years in America and been used by Americans for about 2,000 years. It started by being used during cultural and religious ceremonies and then became a daily thing to smoke/chew for people all around. Most people know the general idea about what tobacco is but most don't know exactly what it is, tobacco is simply, “a preparation of the nicotine-rich leaves of an American plant, which are cured by a process of drying and fermentation for smoking or chewing” (Oxford dictionaries). It's important to know the background of this plant because it has been a part of people’s life for so long, so for it to suddenly to start changing for people in Oregon and other states to only be used by 21+ year olds just like alcohol is concerning for a large amount of people. The research for this specific essay is all about how Oregon is changing its age though; Oregon is a pretty large user of tobacco and nicotine products overall and compared to other states. As shown on CDC (Center for disease control and prevention), 16.3% of 18+ years in Oregon are smoking cigarettes on the regular, to put that into simple numbers that is over 476,000 people in Oregon. In the United states the range of tobacco users is 9.3% to 26.5%, Utah being the lowest smoking population and Kentucky being the highest. Oregon is ranked as the 11th most used tobacco used state, so to have a law being passed here to raise the age is a fairly large deal and debate.
This law being passed in Oregon is a lot more complicated than just banning teens from cigarettes. It has a lot more tied into it that a lot of the public would not know without doing research on it. It is a concern of mine knowing how much impact this law is having on the freedom of purchases that 18-20 year olds will not have anymore. The law was officially passed on March 23rd by the Oregon senate and it was a surprise to a lot of people. Sen. Elizabeth Steiner Hayward (D-NW Portland and Beaverton), a staunch anti-smoking advocate, was the chief sponsor of Senate Bill 754 (or the “Tobacco 21 bill”), which was passed by the the Oregon Senate by a shocking 19-8 vote. Which shows professional adults are way more willing to help teens from tobacco addiction then their are that believe it’s the teens right as a young adult to decide what goes inside their bodies. The law bans all tobacco and nicotine use until your 21 years old, it bans e-cigarettes, vaporizers, cigarettes, dip and cigars. It also makes it illegal to go into smoke shops, which means it will be illegal to buy bongs,pipes,bubblers, all pieces and more. To have smoke shops be illegal for these teens since these pieces (bongs,pipes etc) are sold for tobacco use or marijuana once your 21 also means getting ahold of legal highs such as salvia, kratom, whip its and legal pills such as xplode will be very hard to get in legal terms and will probably raise the sales for online legal high shops. All of this is so sudden and is a big shock to an 18 year old like me and for lots of other newly legal adults, it will especially be a shock and a hardship for young adults who are already consistent users of these products.
This new law had lots of complicated debates inside the senate and still has lots of debate and fight with the public. One thing that was fought over a lot was if a grandfather clause would be allowed. After lots of talk and debate the grandfather clause was declined by the Oregon senate which means if you're already 18-20 and have been smoking the law still makes it illegal for you to purchase and use these products. This specific clause was debated a lot because 18+ year olds have had the right to smoke and they have been using these products for awhile now and in all honesty are probably already addicted to it, so it’s gonna be a hard transition for them to be suddenly cut off. Even though the actual tobacco law was not split that evenly, the grandfather clause was evenly split on both sides. Commissioner Jay Bozievich called for a grandfather clause that would allow anyone who turned age 18 before April 13 to be exempt from the new age limit. Jay’s reasoning of why grandfather clause should be allowed in Oregon was said during a public hearing, he said, “Eighteen-year-olds who are already addicted shouldn’t have to quit cold turkey, let’s be fair to those who are already addicted at a legal age, rather than making their addiction illegal.” and he also said, "You don't criminalize an addiction, you treat it." ( Jay Bozievich ). After he said all of this people started speaking their opinions and saying why grandfather clause should not be allowed. During the same public comment, Tamara Miller of Eugene argued against such a clause by saying, "If we are going to protect kids in this community, why not protect them all now?"( Tamara Miller ). Even though it was a two sided argument the grandfather clause was declined. The state of Oregon has made it clear they want all young teens to be saved from this deadly substance and that they are doing it save a lot of people, not to punish people or take away some of their freedom.
Most people think that since alcohol and weed is also 21 and has a severe punishment if caught underage with it that it will be the same if caught with tobacco, although that's not true at all. The punishment/fine is actually a lot less serious. Being caught with tobacco products/all other things being banned while being 18-20 has no punishment, just a $50 fine. They decided to make it like this due to the fact they want to help saves these kids lives, not punish them and put a record on their file such as a mip (minor in possession). Although being caught with a personal possession amount of tobacco products is a lot different than being caught selling these products illegally. Being caught distributing is seen as a crime and will have actual consequences like if you were selling alc or weed. The main driver for making this law happen was to help young teens not to get into this substance and to lower death from tobacco use. Although a fair amount of teens and adults look past the good that the senate is trying to do and just see it as a way to be cruel and take away our rights to make our own adult decisions. In my eyes this shows that lots of adults believe that even though being 18 means your a legal adult in the laws eyes, it doesn't mean you're ready to make large decisions for yourself such as smoking. It’s a sad thing to not be trusted to make your own decisions after being told what to do for my whole life although after seeing that according to CDC there are 5,000 tobacco related deaths a year I understand what the senate's motives are. Oregon is one of many states that have been trying to get this law passed after good results occurred once Hawaii passed this law years ago.
California and Hawaii are two other states in the United states that have also made tobacco use 21+. Hawaii made the change two years ago and California quickly followed by also passing the law in May 2016. The law did a lot of quality things and also did some damage to the states and companies. After lots of research about impact it made in California I realized there are several pros and cons to this law and how impacts a lot of things. After this law was passed in California the cigarette tax was increased by US$2 a pack (with increases in e-cigarettes and other tobacco products). This is the first increase in cigarette taxes in California in 18 years. The tax raise that was put on these tobacco products are being used well though, The money is being used to fund healthcare for poor people and reinvigorate California’s tobacco control program. This change in tax was made because of the law being passed for only 21+ year olds to smoke and that law by itself cut teen smoking by 4.1% and by raising the taxes economists in California project that it will will cut smoking in all ages from today’s 9.4 percent to 7.1 percent in 2020; This is important to know for oregonians because if California is having lots of positive outcomes from raising the tax because of them making cigs 21+ there is a high chance Oregon might follow those footsteps. Which means Oregon might have higher prices on tobacco products and have a way lower tobacco use percentage statewide. All of this can be seen as pros except the price being raised for adults over 21 can be a con to some people but also can be a big pro, it shows how much teen and adult tobacco use is and will continue going down which means less tobacco related addictions and deaths and all the extra money being made is allowing poor people to have health care.
Even though in California and Hawaii there were lots of pros to the tobacco age being raised, there is also several cons associated with it. As said before the tobacco tax raise makes smokers have to spend more of their hard earned money on cigarettes even though they were already very expensive. The extreme drop in tobacco use is also impacting tobacco businesses sales by a large amount. Just one example of this according to a UCSF (University of San Fran Francisco) article a company named Big Tobacco now has $250 million a year in lost sales because of this change. These companies are fighting very hard to not let the tobacco use drop so low everywhere, and for it to continue being for 18 year olds. These large scale drops can eventually cause lots of job losses and cause small businesses to keep paying higher prices for these products. It impacts small businesses because lots of small shops make lots of there money because of tobacco products. But because of all these changes they have a lot less customers which is causing them extreme worry and for some to go out of business. A lot of the cons are economical issues for businesses but it’s still a big deal and impacts a lot of people. Some will say these large companies and even small companies deserve these sale losses because there selling and making these addictive and deadly products but these products have been around for a very long time and I believe it’s not bad of these businesses to be doing what they're doing since its legal and there just making what a lot of people like. Once this law is officially set all around Oregon it might be completely different from how California and Hawaii was impacted but there will still be lots of pros and cons to it and lots of people will still have there own opinions if it was fair for this law to be passed.
As a new 18 year old who just did an extreme amount of research on the age raise of tobacco products in Oregon, I have a very factual and detailed filled opinion on it. The law itself has so much tied into and has so many pros and so many cons affiliated with it and impacts a lot of teens,adults,businesses and more. Knowing all of this has made me come the conclusion that raising the age minimum to 21+ in Oregon was a fair and wise decision because they clearly want to save us teens because we have such a high rate of teen use and addiction instead of punishing us. although I believe that the grandfather clause should have been passed to allow already 18-20 should be legally allowed to keep buying these products and we should try to find a way for businesses to not be so significantly impacted by these new changes in such a bad way. I know my opinion wont be agreed on by everybody but it's a very backed up opinion that has lot of evidence behind it. It will always be a strong debate and with other states trying to pass this law we will start hearing more about it and medians will most likely be found to make it fair for both sides of the debate.