Democrats Want to Take Your Cigarettes

The title is intentionally provocative because this is how voters will perceive the FDA rule

There is an ironclad case for why smoking has objectively bad policy outcomes. It is the clearest case to cite when explaining and defending the concept of a sin tax. I’m not arguing that smoking isn’t bad and I doubt few smokers would argue that point either.

The question in my mind is why the Biden administration, having already lost the war but not formally signed the peace treaty, is engaging in Kamikaze attacks against Democrats’ brand. This proposal will be immediately quashed by the Trump administration, it only has value as a signaling exercise. But to whom is this signal meant to appeal to? It certainly will anger the filling groups of people: smokers, anyone working in tobacco (including farmers), and anyone with an ounce of libertarian identity who believes that free will should usually win out over executive fiat. This comes on the heels of the Surgeon General wanting to add carcinogen advisory labels to alcohol.

So what’s the point of these highly symbolic moves made on the way out the door. Does anyone here believe the way to win the popular vote is by telling people to drink less and that cigarettes are illegal? Democrats are already branded as the “party of HR” and most of us feel like that was an unintended consequence. Now Democrats want to be the party of your primary care physician scowling at you when you step outside for a smoke after you’ve had a few drinks.

We can’t tell ourselves these things don’t matter. Now Democrats with a future need to communicate that this idea is dumb or risk being yikes with the “nanny state, no fun at parties” label. Joe Biden has the political acumen of a cucumber.