A "fire-safe" cigarette law will go into effect in Canada at the end of 2004. A similar law will hit New York in July. This sounds legitimate and reasonable. Think again. This goes to the heart of the problem of Private corporate links with PUBLIC government.

Why the "Fire-Safe" Cig Law is a Fraud.

Such laws sound nice. They sound "concerned" about "saving lives" and health and costs of fires. They seem to be aimed at the cigarette manufacturers, making it tough for them and lowering sales. Like so many forms of legislation, they are said to be "tough" and "for our protection".

The "fire-safe" cigarette laws may be based on an element of truth, that putting "speed bumps" in the cigarette paper wrapper will cause cigarettes to self-extinguish when not being puffed at the "speed-bump" rings. But this truth can be wielded in preposterous ways...such as about how lives could be saved by eliminating stairs. We could close all the beaches and swimming pools to save hundreds of lives. We do have the "Seat belts save lives" laws however.

The thing with seat belts is...the laws are not REALLY about saving lives...they are about saving money for insurance firms and about deflecting criticism of the grotesque highway sprawl and the lack of proper public transit. And, of course, belt laws are nifty excuses for police to have a "probable cause" to pull over and check a lot more people...AND they are useful in getting penalty money into municipal coffers. If "saving lives" (from accidents AND auto pollution) was the idea, we'd see SERIOUS attention to public transit and limiting sprawl.

This "fire-safe" cig thing is somewhat similar. Consider the following:

* Cigarette makers, by this law, EVADE charges and penalties and liabilities for MAKING the products virtual fuses for decades. Cig stuffing is fluffed up, porous paper is used, and citrates and phosphates are ADDED to the paper for the express purpose of making cigarettes burn down quickly...so a smoker would get on to the next and next cig all the sooner. (Find the great old film, "Stalag 17", to see how POWs used a cig as a fuse to blow up a Nazi train.)

* The laws do NOT require cigarette makers to remove any of these burn accelerants or change the manufacturing process.

* No studies have been introduced or required about the health effects of SMOKING these (or ANY) non-tobacco substances.

* No studies or laws have addressed the matter of comparing the Burn Accelerated cigarettes to plain, unadulterated tobacco cigarettes...which already exist and DO tend to self-extinguish when untended.

* The deadly combination of these burn-enhanced cigs with all the volatile, toxic, synthetic furniture fabrics and rugs is ignored. More folks die or are harmed by the toxic fumes from this stuff than from the fires from any dropped cigarette.

* The cig industry, including the burn accelerant suppliers, hasn't paid a dime in compensation to victims or survivors...including firefighters...for maximizing the fire risks...or making them virtually inevitable.

* Public officials didn't consider fires and public health for all the decades since burn accelerants and the other techniques were first used. They don't even require LISTING of burn accelerants! Why? They liked the increase in regressive "sin" taxes...and the nice campaign funding checks AND access to future corporate jobs.

* Top health insurance firms own huge multi-million dollar holdings in top cigarette manufacturers. Such insurers have their little "investment" in public officials' Campaign Funding too. These insurers, some who doubtlessly insure the complicit firms as well as invest in them, do NOT care to pay any liability payments. Hence the exclusive focus on "careless smoking"...without a WORD about Reckless Endangerment caused by unlisted, untested non-tobacco cigarette ingredients. This is, as usual, blaming the victims.
(This applies to blaming "smoking" (instead of Manufacturing Techniques) for health problems...with no words at all about the huge stew of untested, often toxic and cancer causing and addiction-enhancing Non-Tobacco things that adulterate cigarettes.
Pesticide firms, for instance, are not brought to court to answer questions about even the worst industrial chemicals that hit uninformed, unprotected, insufficiently-warned smokers.)

* The mitigating route of exposing the Burn Accelerants issue, of demanding that the relatively few cig firms REMOVE these substances, of publicizing the fact that plain, organic tobacco products that do not burn this way already exist has not been taken.

* These "fire-safe" laws take the MOST burdensome, complicated route...requiring all vendors to comply, and creating the inevitable law enforcement problems...not to mention the zillions of cigarettes that will be purchased out of state or out of the country. The LEAST burdensome route...Ordering the small handful of cigarette manufacturers to DESIST from using Burn Accelerants...is not done.

* Why is this route not taken? It would INDICT the cig firms...and bring HUGE (Very Deserved) liabilities onto them AND their insurers and investors. And it would gravely indict the "Public" officials who, for so long allowed this, failed to warn about it, and who profited from it. We can't have the happy system of Conflicts-of-Interest between bizness and gov't threatened, can we?

* Why haven't victims and survivors sued on this issue? Perhaps lawyers back off after taking one look at the ENORMITY of the powers they'd be fighting...big chemicals, Big cig, the citrates industry, phosphate mining, Big Insurance and big investment...not to mention all the complicit public officials...not to mention difficulty of finding a judge or juror who is not somehow economically linked to the complicit industries.
And with the corporate media having done such a swell job convincing the population that fires are caused exclusively by "careless smokers" (the victims)...there may not be adequate public support.

Some relevant links:
http://www.ameriburn.org/advocacy/fireSafeCig.htm

http://www.pnhp.org/news/2000/march/insurers_are_major_i.php
If that site is a problem...see same material at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/IllinoisGreensTalk/message/1221?source=1