BIRGUNJ, Oct 4: A man in Rautahat died on Saturday night allegedly due to physical torture by Indian Seema Surakshya Bal (SSB) personnel across the border.
SSB personnel from Sitamadhi Base Camp at Jamuniya arrested and tortured Mukul Raya Yadav, 35, of Surmajuwa VDC-8 in Rautahat district when he was on way to bordering Indian town of Ghodasan to sell tobacco.
Yadav died a few hours after he arrived home following torture by the Indian border security personnel on Saturday night, according to family members. Yadav arrived home late night in critical condition after the SSB men set him free.
Yadav, before breathing his last, had told family members that SSB men detained him for four hours and beaten up severely for no apparent reason.
Locals closed bordering Bankul Bazar on Sunday protesting the death of Yadav. They also chanted strong slogans against the SSB and demanded compensation to the victim´s family and punishment for the guilty.
Late Yadav is survived by four sons and two daughters.
Meanwhile, local administration in Rautahat has taken up the issue with local Indian authority, according to Chief District Officer of Rautahat Kamalesh Kumar Sinha. "They have told us that they would investigate the incident," Sinha.
The body has been taken to the district headquarters Gaur for post mortem.
Locals in bordering villages have alleged that the SSB personnel have stepped up their excesses in recent months. They complain that SSB men often beat up and manhandle locals living in bordering areas of Bara, Parsa and Rautahat.
Oct 5, 2009
Oct 1, 2009
Ontario Government Launches $50B Tobacco Lawsuit
TORONTO – The Ontario government announced earlier this week that it is suing tobacco companies for $50 billion “for past and ongoing health-care costs linked to tobacco-related illness,” CBC News reports.
Ontario's action follows the lead of at least two other Canadian provinces.
"Ontario is taking the next step towards recovering taxpayer dollars spent fighting tobacco-related illnesses,” said Ontario's Attorney General Chris Bentley. “We are joining British Columbia and New Brunswick in initiating a lawsuit to recover health-care costs from tobacco companies.”
Ontario said that the $50 billion figure represents the cost that it has paid providing health care for smokers since 1955.
Earlier this year, Ontario passed a law, The Tobacco Damages and Health Care Costs Recovery Act, that allows it to sue to recover past, present and ongoing tobacco-related damages.
The New York Times writes that the defendants in the case include the Altria Group and some of its Philip Morris subsidiaries, British American Tobacco of London and its Canadian unit Imperial Tobacco as well as R. J. Reynolds and JTI-Macdonald, a Japan Tobacco unit that is in bankruptcy proceedings.
Eric Gagnon, a spokesman for Imperial Tobacco, called the Ontario government “hypocritical” for filing a lawsuit, adding, “What’s happening is double dipping…You’re taking a billion dollars of taxation out of the industry every year, then you turn around and sue the industry.”
Ontario's action follows the lead of at least two other Canadian provinces.
"Ontario is taking the next step towards recovering taxpayer dollars spent fighting tobacco-related illnesses,” said Ontario's Attorney General Chris Bentley. “We are joining British Columbia and New Brunswick in initiating a lawsuit to recover health-care costs from tobacco companies.”
Ontario said that the $50 billion figure represents the cost that it has paid providing health care for smokers since 1955.
Earlier this year, Ontario passed a law, The Tobacco Damages and Health Care Costs Recovery Act, that allows it to sue to recover past, present and ongoing tobacco-related damages.
The New York Times writes that the defendants in the case include the Altria Group and some of its Philip Morris subsidiaries, British American Tobacco of London and its Canadian unit Imperial Tobacco as well as R. J. Reynolds and JTI-Macdonald, a Japan Tobacco unit that is in bankruptcy proceedings.
Eric Gagnon, a spokesman for Imperial Tobacco, called the Ontario government “hypocritical” for filing a lawsuit, adding, “What’s happening is double dipping…You’re taking a billion dollars of taxation out of the industry every year, then you turn around and sue the industry.”
Sep 29, 2009
Browne defends alcohol and tobacco hikes
Government's move to increase to cost of alcohol and tobacco will help save lives, says Minister in the Ministry of Finance Mariano Browne.
Browne defended the increases at the Senate sitting yesterday saying that Government intends to promote healthy living and in effect reduce the amount of money it spends on health care.
He also said this measure would prevent young adults from consuming too much alcohol and tobacco.
"We are acutely aware and we are sensitive to the fact that cheap booze puts it in easier reach of young adults and in some instances children. On this basis alone we consider that the new rates on excise duties on alcoholic beverages and tobacco are indeed long overdue and well justified," he said.
He said this initiative will steer young smokers and drinkers away from these habits as they tend to be more responsive to price.
"Raising the duties on alcoholic beverages and on cigarettes is justified because the $1.6 billion on tobacco and alcohol tax revenue over the past three years does not even come close to off-setting the staggering public health and safety cost of alcohol and tobacco consumption," he added.
Browne stressed that alcohol consumption causes a number of diseases to the heart, stomach and liver.
With respect to smoking, Browne said people who stop the habit even well into middle age avoid the risk of lung cancer. He said those who stopped smoking before avoid 90 per cent of the risks related to tobacco consumption.
"It is in fact this Government's objective to reduce the financial budget of the State for health care treatment of medicinal or medical conditions associated with lifestyle health risks that emanate from alcohol and tobacco consumption," said Browne.
Browne defended the increases at the Senate sitting yesterday saying that Government intends to promote healthy living and in effect reduce the amount of money it spends on health care.
He also said this measure would prevent young adults from consuming too much alcohol and tobacco.
"We are acutely aware and we are sensitive to the fact that cheap booze puts it in easier reach of young adults and in some instances children. On this basis alone we consider that the new rates on excise duties on alcoholic beverages and tobacco are indeed long overdue and well justified," he said.
He said this initiative will steer young smokers and drinkers away from these habits as they tend to be more responsive to price.
"Raising the duties on alcoholic beverages and on cigarettes is justified because the $1.6 billion on tobacco and alcohol tax revenue over the past three years does not even come close to off-setting the staggering public health and safety cost of alcohol and tobacco consumption," he added.
Browne stressed that alcohol consumption causes a number of diseases to the heart, stomach and liver.
With respect to smoking, Browne said people who stop the habit even well into middle age avoid the risk of lung cancer. He said those who stopped smoking before avoid 90 per cent of the risks related to tobacco consumption.
"It is in fact this Government's objective to reduce the financial budget of the State for health care treatment of medicinal or medical conditions associated with lifestyle health risks that emanate from alcohol and tobacco consumption," said Browne.
Sep 25, 2009
Tennessee attorney general warns against selling individual cigarettes
Lose the “loosies,” the Tennessee Attorney General’s Office warned today.
Removing cigarettes from the pack and selling them individually must be stopped, several state agencies warned the public and businesses.
Single cigarette sales pose a health threat to young people because they are usually easier and cheaper for them to purchase than a full pack.
Health officials are concerned that the availability of individual cigarettes may attract young people as an easy way to begin smoking.
The Attorney General’s Office recently sent 23 tobacco retailers alleged to have sold single cigarettes a warning letter, advising them to stop because such action is illegal in Tennessee. The letters were based on complaints received by the Tennessee Department of Agriculture. Tobacco retailers may be subject to penalties of up to $1,000 per violation under the law for selling single cigarettes.
“We will prosecute those who ignore the law by continuing to sell single cigarettes after we’ve warned them not to do so,” Atty. Gen. Bob Cooper said.
Removing cigarettes from the pack and selling them individually must be stopped, several state agencies warned the public and businesses.
Single cigarette sales pose a health threat to young people because they are usually easier and cheaper for them to purchase than a full pack.
Health officials are concerned that the availability of individual cigarettes may attract young people as an easy way to begin smoking.
The Attorney General’s Office recently sent 23 tobacco retailers alleged to have sold single cigarettes a warning letter, advising them to stop because such action is illegal in Tennessee. The letters were based on complaints received by the Tennessee Department of Agriculture. Tobacco retailers may be subject to penalties of up to $1,000 per violation under the law for selling single cigarettes.
“We will prosecute those who ignore the law by continuing to sell single cigarettes after we’ve warned them not to do so,” Atty. Gen. Bob Cooper said.
Sep 23, 2009
For cigarette smokers, a more bitter taste
In less than a week, clove cigarettes and all other flavored tobacco will be pulled from the shelves, substantiating the Food and Drug Administration's first directive controlling the sale of tobacco products. "It continues to be a shock every day for customers," said Co-owner of Davis Newsbeat, Janis Lott.
On June 22, President Barack Obama signed into law, the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, effectively giving the FDA wide ranging authority to regulate tobacco.
Flavored tobacco was the first targeted because critics say artificial additives like cherry, grape, chocolate, and spiced cigarettes such as cloves, appeal to youths and lays the groundwork for a smoking addiction. The law only applies to rolled cigarettes, and menthols were spared in this particular prohibition.
In other words, mint is out, but menthols are acceptable. According to Lott, Nat Sherman's Hint of Mint packaging will soon read "menthol," but it's contents will be unaffected. As for cloves, Lott said, "there is a contingent of people who buy these cigarettes," adding that flavored tobacco constitutes about 15 percent of the cigarettes sold at Newsbeat. Kretek International Inc., which imports Djarum-brand cloves from Indonesia, holds a 97 percent U.S. market share with its line of Djarum clove cigarettes, a staple of Indonesian smoking culture. The U.S. market for clove cigarettes is about $140 million annually, with about 1.25 million clove smokers.Cloves have been imported to the U.S. since the 1960s and are mostly smoked by people younger than 30.
With America as Kretek International's fifth largest importer, the company has found a loop hole in the FDAs ban. Kretek is now manufacturing cigars, close to the size of a cigarette and flavored with clove, vanilla and cherry. The difference? Cigarettes are wrapped in thin paper, cigars in tobacco leaves. While the cigars also are made with a different kind of tobacco, the taste is similar. The cigars come 12 to a pack, rather than 20 for cigarettes, but cost nearly half as much.
But the Djarum-brand facelift may not appeal to all smokers. Andy Singh, owner of the Tobacco Store in Woodland, said a customer recently purchased ten packs of the clove cigarettes in anticipation of the prohibition.
Oddly enough, that same customer first told Singh that selling flavored cigarettes would become illegal on Sept. 22.
"I don't smoke so the customers know better than I do," Singh said. But delayed notification from either the FDA, or state and county agencies that manage tobacco licenses, according to Lott, means little time to inform customers and scale back on purchasing from vendors.
It wasn't until Monday that the FDA issued a letter to members of the industry warning of prosecution to those selling what they labeled as "adulterated products," beyond Sept. 22.
The letter reads, "manufacturers, distributors, and retailers may be subject to injunction actions, civil money penalties, and/or criminal prosecution for violating the requirements of the Act."
Lott ordered several cartons of cloves requested by customers, but for the most part is pairing down purchases. Singh has stopped purchasing the cigarettes and said he will throw away what remains after the cutoff date.
Lott said the decision to ban flavored tobacco is politically driven and indicative of a "nanny state." "Eliminating tobacco products all together will never happen because it's easy to vilify and it's easy to tax," she said. "I don't know what's right or wrong, I just have to go with the flow."
Future directive under the FSPTCA include the revision and strengthening of cigarette warning labels that will also contain a list of ingredients, as well as the elimination of the terms light, low, and mild on tobacco products.
On June 22, President Barack Obama signed into law, the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, effectively giving the FDA wide ranging authority to regulate tobacco.
Flavored tobacco was the first targeted because critics say artificial additives like cherry, grape, chocolate, and spiced cigarettes such as cloves, appeal to youths and lays the groundwork for a smoking addiction. The law only applies to rolled cigarettes, and menthols were spared in this particular prohibition.
In other words, mint is out, but menthols are acceptable. According to Lott, Nat Sherman's Hint of Mint packaging will soon read "menthol," but it's contents will be unaffected. As for cloves, Lott said, "there is a contingent of people who buy these cigarettes," adding that flavored tobacco constitutes about 15 percent of the cigarettes sold at Newsbeat. Kretek International Inc., which imports Djarum-brand cloves from Indonesia, holds a 97 percent U.S. market share with its line of Djarum clove cigarettes, a staple of Indonesian smoking culture. The U.S. market for clove cigarettes is about $140 million annually, with about 1.25 million clove smokers.Cloves have been imported to the U.S. since the 1960s and are mostly smoked by people younger than 30.
With America as Kretek International's fifth largest importer, the company has found a loop hole in the FDAs ban. Kretek is now manufacturing cigars, close to the size of a cigarette and flavored with clove, vanilla and cherry. The difference? Cigarettes are wrapped in thin paper, cigars in tobacco leaves. While the cigars also are made with a different kind of tobacco, the taste is similar. The cigars come 12 to a pack, rather than 20 for cigarettes, but cost nearly half as much.
But the Djarum-brand facelift may not appeal to all smokers. Andy Singh, owner of the Tobacco Store in Woodland, said a customer recently purchased ten packs of the clove cigarettes in anticipation of the prohibition.
Oddly enough, that same customer first told Singh that selling flavored cigarettes would become illegal on Sept. 22.
"I don't smoke so the customers know better than I do," Singh said. But delayed notification from either the FDA, or state and county agencies that manage tobacco licenses, according to Lott, means little time to inform customers and scale back on purchasing from vendors.
It wasn't until Monday that the FDA issued a letter to members of the industry warning of prosecution to those selling what they labeled as "adulterated products," beyond Sept. 22.
The letter reads, "manufacturers, distributors, and retailers may be subject to injunction actions, civil money penalties, and/or criminal prosecution for violating the requirements of the Act."
Lott ordered several cartons of cloves requested by customers, but for the most part is pairing down purchases. Singh has stopped purchasing the cigarettes and said he will throw away what remains after the cutoff date.
Lott said the decision to ban flavored tobacco is politically driven and indicative of a "nanny state." "Eliminating tobacco products all together will never happen because it's easy to vilify and it's easy to tax," she said. "I don't know what's right or wrong, I just have to go with the flow."
Future directive under the FSPTCA include the revision and strengthening of cigarette warning labels that will also contain a list of ingredients, as well as the elimination of the terms light, low, and mild on tobacco products.
Sep 21, 2009
A Pennsylvania tax idea goes up in smoke
HARRISBURG - When it came to raising new sources of desperately needed revenue, stogies and chaw appeared to be the lowest-hanging fruit.
Every other state imposes excise taxes on smokeless tobacco, and all but one other - Florida - do so on cigars. And the idea was widely popular in the Keystone State, public-opinion polls showed.
So how did the ripe-for-the-picking products avoid being affected by the cornucopia of taxes that top lawmakers announced last week would balance the state budget?
Johnna Pro, press secretary for the House Majority Appropriations Committee, has a theory.
"Because the majority of people negotiating the budget are cigar-chomping men," she said. "It's sexism."
That tongue-in-cheek reasoning aside, Pennsylvania lawmakers have clearly rebuffed an idea that most agree could have generated $38 million in new tax revenue this year.
Last week, leaders of three of the four caucuses announced that they had reached a budget agreement on a $27.9 billion spending plan. They said the package provided $1.2 billion in new revenue that the state could count on for years to come, including a 25-cent-per-pack hike in the cigarette tax.
But still no tax on smokeless tobacco or cigars - a proposal that seven out of 10 Pennsylvanians support, polls have shown.
Antitobacco groups said they were stunned that the products were not included in the plan as they had been led to believe by top legislators.
"It makes zero sense," said Kevin O'Flaherty, the Northeast advocacy director for the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids. "It's fine to raise the price of cigarettes. . . . But it increases the disparity in price between cigarettes and other tobacco products, and that encourages kids to use those products."
Already, he said, the rate of 16- to 25-year-olds in Pennsylvania using those products is twice the national average.
Senate Democrats supported taxes on cigars and smokeless tobacco, and Brett Marcy, a spokesman for House Democrats, said that caucus had supported the proposal but was unsuccessful getting Senate Republicans to sign off.
"We agree that it is a commonsense tax and a ready source of revenue," he said. "But the political realities being what they are dictated that it may not be possible this budget year.
"There was just not an appetite in the Senate Republican caucus to look at those options."
Erik Arneson, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Dominic Pileggi (R., Delaware), said leaders dropped the cigar and smokeless-tobacco tax because of its minimal effect on closing the budget deficit.
"The amount which would be raised . . . is so relatively small that it is immaterial to producing a balanced budget," Arneson said.
Yet the parties did reach compromises on other, even smaller, budget items. For instance, they agreed to take $25 million annually from the profits of the state-run liquor-store system and use it for general government functions.
Gov. Rendell has vowed to veto the three-caucus compromise budget, arguing that it is built on "phony" and overly optimistic revenue figures that, when they don't materialize, will put the state in this very position next year. He also said the spending plan shortchanged education.
Legislative leaders from the three caucuses spent much of yesterday in closed-door talks with administration aides in hopes of ending the budget standoff. Senate Republican leaders said late yesterday that a final budget agreement could be hashed out today, setting the stage for approval by the bipartisan conference committee as early as tomorrow. The state, which began its fiscal year July 1, has been operating under a stopgap spending plan.
Rendell repeatedly has said that taxing snuff, chewing tobacco, and cigars was a no-brainer, and he has expressed frustration that the General Assembly hasn't agreed with him.
"It is a special interest that continues to be treated as special," said Gary Tuma, Rendell's press secretary. "The administration favors taxing these products as other states do. Not doing so defies logic."
The tobacco taxes also weren't in the revenue mix in another compromise plan offered by Rep. Sam Smith (R., Jefferson), the leader of House Republicans, who were not party to the three-caucus budget agreement.
"When you listen to the governor and the Democratic leaders, they are literally saying 'tax it because it is not taxed,' " said Steve Masking, Smith's spokesman. "We don't believe that something should be taxed just for the sake of taxing."
Sharon Ward, director of the Harrisburg-based Pennsylvania Budget and Policy Center, said she believed Republicans were sticking to their "no-new-tax pledge" and "listening to their inner Rush Limbaughs" when they decided to forgo the smokeless-tobacco and cigar taxes.
"It's discouraging that they would bypass a revenue idea that has virtually no impact on Pennsylvanians and minimal impact on industry," she said.
Every other state imposes excise taxes on smokeless tobacco, and all but one other - Florida - do so on cigars. And the idea was widely popular in the Keystone State, public-opinion polls showed.
So how did the ripe-for-the-picking products avoid being affected by the cornucopia of taxes that top lawmakers announced last week would balance the state budget?
Johnna Pro, press secretary for the House Majority Appropriations Committee, has a theory.
"Because the majority of people negotiating the budget are cigar-chomping men," she said. "It's sexism."
That tongue-in-cheek reasoning aside, Pennsylvania lawmakers have clearly rebuffed an idea that most agree could have generated $38 million in new tax revenue this year.
Last week, leaders of three of the four caucuses announced that they had reached a budget agreement on a $27.9 billion spending plan. They said the package provided $1.2 billion in new revenue that the state could count on for years to come, including a 25-cent-per-pack hike in the cigarette tax.
But still no tax on smokeless tobacco or cigars - a proposal that seven out of 10 Pennsylvanians support, polls have shown.
Antitobacco groups said they were stunned that the products were not included in the plan as they had been led to believe by top legislators.
"It makes zero sense," said Kevin O'Flaherty, the Northeast advocacy director for the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids. "It's fine to raise the price of cigarettes. . . . But it increases the disparity in price between cigarettes and other tobacco products, and that encourages kids to use those products."
Already, he said, the rate of 16- to 25-year-olds in Pennsylvania using those products is twice the national average.
Senate Democrats supported taxes on cigars and smokeless tobacco, and Brett Marcy, a spokesman for House Democrats, said that caucus had supported the proposal but was unsuccessful getting Senate Republicans to sign off.
"We agree that it is a commonsense tax and a ready source of revenue," he said. "But the political realities being what they are dictated that it may not be possible this budget year.
"There was just not an appetite in the Senate Republican caucus to look at those options."
Erik Arneson, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Dominic Pileggi (R., Delaware), said leaders dropped the cigar and smokeless-tobacco tax because of its minimal effect on closing the budget deficit.
"The amount which would be raised . . . is so relatively small that it is immaterial to producing a balanced budget," Arneson said.
Yet the parties did reach compromises on other, even smaller, budget items. For instance, they agreed to take $25 million annually from the profits of the state-run liquor-store system and use it for general government functions.
Gov. Rendell has vowed to veto the three-caucus compromise budget, arguing that it is built on "phony" and overly optimistic revenue figures that, when they don't materialize, will put the state in this very position next year. He also said the spending plan shortchanged education.
Legislative leaders from the three caucuses spent much of yesterday in closed-door talks with administration aides in hopes of ending the budget standoff. Senate Republican leaders said late yesterday that a final budget agreement could be hashed out today, setting the stage for approval by the bipartisan conference committee as early as tomorrow. The state, which began its fiscal year July 1, has been operating under a stopgap spending plan.
Rendell repeatedly has said that taxing snuff, chewing tobacco, and cigars was a no-brainer, and he has expressed frustration that the General Assembly hasn't agreed with him.
"It is a special interest that continues to be treated as special," said Gary Tuma, Rendell's press secretary. "The administration favors taxing these products as other states do. Not doing so defies logic."
The tobacco taxes also weren't in the revenue mix in another compromise plan offered by Rep. Sam Smith (R., Jefferson), the leader of House Republicans, who were not party to the three-caucus budget agreement.
"When you listen to the governor and the Democratic leaders, they are literally saying 'tax it because it is not taxed,' " said Steve Masking, Smith's spokesman. "We don't believe that something should be taxed just for the sake of taxing."
Sharon Ward, director of the Harrisburg-based Pennsylvania Budget and Policy Center, said she believed Republicans were sticking to their "no-new-tax pledge" and "listening to their inner Rush Limbaughs" when they decided to forgo the smokeless-tobacco and cigar taxes.
"It's discouraging that they would bypass a revenue idea that has virtually no impact on Pennsylvanians and minimal impact on industry," she said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)