NC deserves clarity. Where does Kamala Harris stand on menthol ban?

If Vice President Harris wants to win North Carolina, she needs to explain her position on the Biden administration’s plan to ban menthol cigarettes.

In 2022, the Biden administration announced a proposed regulation that would have criminalized menthol cigarettes. This proclamation was a big hit with the liberal donor class, with Michael Bloomberg calling it a “significant victory.” Then reality set in, and the public backlash was swift, prompting nearly 175,000 public written comments to the FDA in just 90 days. The idea was so unpopular that the Biden administration put the plan on hold as soon as election season began this spring, admitting they had received “an immense amount of feedback, including from various elements of the civil rights movement.”

So, is the plan dead — or just delayed? The public doesn’t know.

Harris is running for president mainly as a continuation of the Biden administration and its policies. Media reporting claims that Harris strongly supported the menthol ban at the time. Will she stand by that position? Commentators on both sides of the aisle have noted that her campaign has been light on policy details. However, if she wants to win North Carolina, she must clarify where she stands.

North Carolina is America’s No. 1 tobacco-producing state — and it’s not even close. More federal restrictions on tobacco would, therefore, hurt North Carolina more than any other state. According to one estimate, a menthol ban could cost North Carolina tobacco farms more than $100 million.

Whether or not you work in North Carolina’s tobacco industry, this matters to all of us. An NC State study estimates that each dollar of tobacco income generates $2.22 in value-added income to the state and that every $1 million in tobacco production supports 14 jobs. This means a menthol ban would jeopardize $246 million in value-added income and take good jobs away from 1,500 North Carolinians. It would also have ripple effects throughout our economy, well beyond the tobacco industry, devastating businesses and hard-working families across the state. 

Harris should remember that the theme of her convention speech was “freedom.” An outright national ban of a product enjoyed by 18 million Americans — a prohibition that Congress never explicitly voted for — would be a hypocritical and paternalistic restriction of freedom. 

It would also be radically unfair. According to the CDC, 85% of African-American smokers smoke menthols. Under a ban, they would face possible criminal prosecution, while the preferences of other racial groups would remain perfectly legal. The mother of Eric Garner put it this way: “They are not targeting the other neighborhoods; they are targeting the black neighborhoods.”

It’s no wonder that many law enforcement groups opposed the menthol ban, such as the National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives (NOBLE). Banning a product used by 18 million Americans would lead to a dramatic increase in criminal activity, black market criminal funding, and interactions with the police. 

Criminalizing menthols wouldn’t even accomplish its supposed goal of significantly reducing smoking. America has tried prohibition before. The result was not the promised utopia of perfect sobriety but a massive, underground, untaxed black market for alcohol that enriched violent criminals. This is a snapshot of what would happen under a menthol cigarette ban. 

There already exists a large black market for cigarettes — and the underground tobacco sellers are more than ready to start selling menthols, too. The CDC estimates that anywhere from 7% to 21% of cigarettes in America are illicitly traded. A menthol ban would send this into overdrive, since menthol is roughly one-third of America’s cigarette market. Many people would continue to smoke menthols, paying a much higher price for it on the black market, and without tax revenue coming to our state. As with prohibition 100 years ago, the criminals would get rich while small businesses and the state would lose income.

Take, for example, California’s menthol ban. After California banned flavored tobacco, a study found that roughly one out of every five disposed cigarette cartons was for menthol cigarettes — approximately the same proportion as before the ban. California’s menthol ban hurt legitimate retailers and deprived the state of $240 million in tax revenue, with little natural decline in smoking.

There is a better way to reduce smoking. A more thoughtful approach than a ban that hurts rural and hard-working families would be a true test of leadership. America’s experience in recent decades — when smoking fell by an unprecedented three-quarters — shows that education and cessation programs are much more effective in helping people quit than an outright ban.

The people of North Carolina deserve to know where Vice President Harris stands on this issue. She should make clear that she’ll leave North Carolina’s tobacco farmers alone — or she could see her electoral chances diminish greatly.