Skip to content

What does the transportation bill have to do with tobacco?

July 6, 2012

  What does the transportation bill which Barack Obama is expected to sign have to do with tobacco? On the surface that seems like a silly question with the obvious answer being nothing. After all, transportation and building highways is  one of the legitimate expenditures granted by the constitution in Article 1 Section 8, and transportation and tobacco are two separate issues altogether, but when it comes to the federal government nothing is quite as it seems and such is the case with the transportation bill even though most people prefer not to use public transportation but to have their own cars or a scooter to travel around the city.

  Buried deep in the transportation bill was an amendment which was added to the legislation which will change the definition of cigarette manufacturers to include those who own and operate roll your own cigarette machines, effectively shutting down these small businesses all across the country.

    For those who do not know: Loose tobacco is taxed at a much lower rate than cigars and cigarettes and because of this many people have opted to save money by rolling their own cigarettes and this led to a boom in the roll your own cigarettes business. Entrepreneurs went into business for themselves by purchasing rolling machines which afforded smokers with the opportunity to roll many cigarettes in minutes while paying half the price for name brand cigarettes.

  Needless to say, “big tobacco” wasn’t happy about small businesses moving in on their territory and they lobbied the government to crack down on these small businesses, and let’s face it, the government doesn’t really want people to quite smoking because quite frankly the government would lose too much money. The government simply wants the people to pay more to the government for the privilege to keep smoking and because many people found a way to legally avoid paying taxes on cigarettes the government had to step in and do something about this.

  So naturally the federal government was more than willing to partner with “big tobacco” to take down the little guy. The federal government and “big tobacco” are the winners here and the losers are the small business owners for they can no longer compete. And it mustn’t be forgotten that this bill was passed with bipartisan support, the Republicans are just as guilty as are the Democrats for putting tax revenues and special interests ahead of the people.

  We can debate whether or not this was a good idea, and we can debate whether or not this was a loophole which should have been closed, but the fact is we were never allowed to have this debate because this amendment was added to a totally unrelated bill with very little fanfare and most people probably didn’t learn about it until after the bill was passed, and that really is my biggest problem with this.

  Basically what happens in Washington is this: Controversial amendments, which the sponsors would rather not force a vote on alone, are added to popular bills because it is felt that neither side would risk the public relations disaster of killing a popular bill over an obscure amendment and usually that gamble pays off. It did here just as it did with the incandescent lightbulb ban.

  All bills should come to the floor for an up or down vote, and I don’t have a problem with related amendments being added to bills during the debate, but this amendment was in no way related to the transportation bill and it should have come to the floor for a vote on its own.

21 Comments leave one →
  1. July 6, 2012 10:17 pm

    Our Congressmen and Senators don’t want to change the process. They like it just the way it is because they all want to sneak their pet projects throigh this way. They could have an up and down vote on every bill and every amendment; but they woun’t do it.We get a lot of garbage laws passed this way.


    • July 7, 2012 8:17 am

      Exactly Jim, this is one of the biggest problems in Washington in my opinion. This is how many of them get away with spending measures which otherwise might not pass.


  2. July 6, 2012 10:43 pm

    It was a matter of time. That business has been booming for a few years now. Also, the states want to tax it as well.


    • July 7, 2012 8:18 am

      You are right, it was only a matter of time. My biggest problem is the way this was done by hiding the amendment in a totally unrelated bill.


  3. LD Jackson permalink
    July 7, 2012 7:54 am

    Okay, I don’t smoke, so I have no real skin in this game. Except for the fact that the two pieces of legislation are completely unrelated. Oh, and also that the government has no business taxing people just because they smoke. I may think it is a bad habit, but that is right of the individual. Leave it up to our government to come up with a way to tax anything and everything that moves or breathes.


    • July 7, 2012 8:20 am

      So much legislation seems to be passed this way Larry and I don’t think it would be too much to ask for to have all bill stand for an up or down vote on their own. Some would say this would take up too much time, if that is true than it means our government is doing too much.


  4. bunkerville permalink
    July 7, 2012 10:09 am

    You and I hit the same chord. Anyone want to bet that loading your own ammo will be next? I have been reading that there are shortage of supplies. Sure, keep your guns, the government will control the ammo. The exemplifies all that is wrong with our government.


  5. Georgia Peach permalink
    July 7, 2012 10:21 am

    Because our elected officials can’t seem to cut spending so they are thinking up ways to get more of our money, hopefully pissing off the fewest amount of people.


  6. allen permalink
    July 7, 2012 1:23 pm

    call it a “private club” charge yearly membership and usage fees.

    what are doing in here, mr. taxman?

    none of your goddamn business!!!!


    • allen permalink
      July 7, 2012 1:58 pm

      gah..that should be

      “what are WE doing in here, mr.taxman?”

      I blame the lack of coffee


  7. Riz permalink
    July 9, 2012 5:23 pm

    I have a stupid question–does anyone know who the dimwit was who originally inserted this? I’m just curious (and have a very angry smoker on my hands right now).


    • Riz permalink
      July 9, 2012 5:26 pm

      Never mind–found it finally. Senator Max Baucus from Montana, where no RYO shops exist. *headdesk*


      • July 9, 2012 8:57 pm

        You got it, and he had nothing to lose by this because it is already illegal in his state. He just pushed it onto the national stage.



  1. Saturday Links – We’re Famous Edition | What Would The Founders Think?
  2. Our government, BOTH parties, and their dishonesty needs to go « The Daley Gator
  3. Teeing it up: A Round at the LINKs (crony capitalism edition) | SENTRY JOURNAL
  4. Inkredulous Basterds - GOP, All-In, Taxes The Poor & Screws The Job Creators

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: