California bill will eventually ban all tobacco sales

English

Some California lawmakers want to eventually ban all tobacco sales in the country’s most populous state by filing a law to ban the sale of cigarettes and other products to anyone born after January 1, 2007.

If the law is signed into law, it will mean that 2,073 people wishing to buy cigarettes will have to show identification to prove they are at least 67 years old.

“We can ensure that the next generation of children in California will not become addicted to smoking,” said Assemblyman Damon Connolly, a San Rafael Democrat and sponsor of the bill.

The proposal is likely to face strong opposition from the tobacco industry, which will struggle to maintain access to its largest market in the US. If the ban became law, the industry could sue to block it. He can also challenge the polling station ban by asking voters not to let it go into effect.

“(The ban) will impact a lot of jobs and reverberate throughout the California economy,” said Charles Janigian, president of the California Tobacco Retailers Association.

Connolly and others are confident the ban will last if they can get it through the Legislature. It is modeled on a similar law passed in New Zealand last year that bans the sale of tobacco products to anyone born after January 1, 2009. In the US, the city of Brooklyn, Massachusetts, passed a local law banning the sale of tobacco products across its border to anyone born after January 1, 2000—a law that the courts have so far allowed to remain in effect.

In 2020, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law a law banning the sale of most flavored tobacco products in the state. The tobacco industry asked voters to block the law, but in November voters allowed it to go into effect.

“This is the logical next step,” Connolly said. “The goal here is to lead, actually change the conversation beyond our state lines, and really try to move the needle forward in a direction that’s good for public health.”

The bill will not penalize people for using or possessing tobacco products. Instead, it will penalize retailers for selling to them. Connolly said he is open to amendments that could create an exemption for religious and cultural use. But he said the ban would not affect marijuana, which is legal in California to smoke recreationally.

“Tobacco and marijuana are not apples to apples,” he said.

The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says smoking marijuana contains many of the same toxins and cancer-causing chemicals found in tobacco smoke. The agency says more research is needed, but limited evidence has shown a link between chronic marijuana smoking and testicular cancer.

The ban could also hurt the state’s revenue, as California collected more than $1.5 billion in tobacco taxes in 2021, according to the California Department of Revenue Administration.

“In the end, the state is the loser,” Janigyan said.

Connolly said the ban would save taxpayers money, citing the “huge impact of nicotine and tobacco on our public health system.”

“Preventing the next generation of Californians from becoming addicted to smoking should be a priority for everyone who cares about our state’s health and the well-being of our children,” Connolly said.

English