Save Time: Eliminate Twice a Year Time Changes

Let’s save time by not changing our clocks twice a year. It takes time to change clocks forward one hour in the spring and backward one hour in the autumn. It’s also confusing and can result in persons being early or late for appointments due to not making the change correctly.

Numerous persons in recent years have been seeking to end the practice of changing the time twice a year. A March 2019 National Geographic piece[1] discusses some of these efforts.

In my home state of Kentucky, on Monday, July 2, 2019, two Kentucky state representatives prefiled a bill to establish Daylight Saving Time year round in Kentucky if the federal government allows it, according several news sources, including  the Louisville Courier-Journal[2] and WLKY[3].

Over four years later in November 2023, debate over eliminating the twice a year time changes continues in Kentucky and elsewhere across the country. Studies seem to indicate that staying on standard time all year round would be best for our health as humans, as mentioned in a March 11, 2023, NPR article citing support for this from "many doctors and scientists." {4] Other media sources also report this.

Daylight Saving Time Exemptions, Benefits, and Current Law

A Transportation.gov piece[5] notes that The Uniform Time Act allows states to exempt themselves from Daylight Saving Time and stay on Standard Time all year round. The article also lists supposed benefits of Daylight Saving Time.

Some believe that under Daylight Saving Time certain times of the year people will be awake and active more during daylight hours, and not out and about as much during hours of darkness, which improves safety and reduces energy consumption due to using artificial lights. There is some debate on how effective that it is, but it apparently helps some. However, I feel that any benefits are more than offset by the disadvantages of adjusting clocks and sleep schedules twice a year, as well as the health risks mentioned earlier.

While states can exempt themselves from Daylight Saving Time, they cannot exempt themselves from Standard Time without a change in federal law. In other words, a state can stay all year round on the “slow” time of early November to midMarch via changing state laws. But, if a state wants to stay on the “fast” time of midMarch to early November all year round, it would require Congressional approval, or a Supreme Court ruling that the law was invalid.

I support going to Standard Time all year long. Changing to this can happen at a state level, and seems to be better for our health, as mentioned earlier. But, rather than states have an assortment of laws that would be confusing to persons, I support a law being passed by Congress to make Standard Time permanent nationwide.  

Time change is regulated by The Uniform Time Act of 1966,[6] which was modified in the 1980s and then again by the Energy Policy Act of 2005 [7] which took effect in 2007 and sets the current dates for the time change.

Under current United States law most places in the country change their time ahead one hour at 2:00 a.m. (changing the time to 3:00 a.m.) on the second Sunday in March. Then, on the first Sunday in November at 2:00 a.m., the time is moved back one hour (changing the time to 1:00 a.m.).

Time Changing on My Devices and Closing Thoughts

My cell phones and computer automatically change time appropriately. But, I still need to change the time on my battery-powered alarm clocks, my am-fm clock radio, and my am-fm CD player. It takes time to change the time on all these devices. I want to save that time. More important, I want to avoid the confusion of the time changes and the effects of altering my bedtime twice a year. Below is a picture of two of my battery-powered alarm clocks; I moved them to a convenient location to photograph.

A website Petitition2Congress.com[8] provides a form to contact the President, your United States Senators, and your Congressperson seeking action to end the practice of changing time twice a year. But, I think it’s better to e-mail, phone, or mail via the U.S. Postal Service a personal message to those individuals directly rather than sending a form letter.

Either permanent Daylight Saving Time or permanent Standard Time would be great with me. However, since Standard Time is the more standard version and supported more by health experts, I advocate permanent Standard Time. Maybe we can fall back one hour this fall to Standard Time, then stay on it. And of course, regardless of the time we're on, there are fewer hours of daylight in winter in the United States.

Many countries do not change time twice a year. However, adding to the confusion, those that do change time do not all adjust time on the same two dates of the year.

Momentum seems to be increasing toward ending this time-change practice in the United States and in other countries around the world.

If a huge number of persons urge Congress to act, I think change can come as soon as this year here in the United States. Let’s take action. I e-mailed my United States Senators and Congressperson about this issue. Will you contact yours, too, on this issue?

ENDNOTES:     

---

[1] Maya Wei-Haas; “Tired of daylight saving time? These places are trying to end it”; National Geographic; March 8, 2019; website accessed July 6, 2019; https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2019/03/tired-of-daylight-saving-time-these-states-trying-to-end-clock-changes/

[2] Lucas Aulbach; “Tired of changing the clock? Kentucky lawmakers propose sticking with daylight saving time”; Courier-Journal; July 2, 2019; website accessed July 6, 2019; https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/politics/2019/07/02/kentucky-daylight-saving-time-bill-prefiled/1625917001/

[3] WLKY Digital Team; “Kentucky lawmakers file bill to make daylight saving time permanent”; WLKY; July 1, 2019; website accessed July 6, 2019; https://www.wlky.com/article/kentucky-lawmakers-file-bill-to-make-daylight-saving-time-permanent/28253027

[4] Aubrey, Allison; "Changing our clocks is a health hazard. Just ask a sleep doctor"; NPR; March 11, 2023, 7:01 a.m. ET; webpage accessed March 13, 2023; https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2023/03/11/1162345477/changing-our-clocks-is-a-health-hazard-just-ask-a-sleep-doctor#:~:text=Many%20doctors%20and%20scientists%20agree,time%2C%20which%20preserves%20morning%20light.

[5] “Daylight Saving Time”; Transportation.gov; updated March 10, 2014; website accessed July 6, 2019; https://www.transportation.gov/regulations/daylight-saving-time

[6] “Public Law 89-387: An Act to promote the observance of a uniform system of time throughout the United States”; April 13, 1966; website accessed July 6, 2019 and again February 5, 2023 ; https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-80/pdf/STATUTE-80-Pg107.pdf

[7] "Daylight Saving Time Rules"; National Institute of Standards and Techonology; March 2, 2010; last revised March 7, 2022; webpage accessed February 5, 2023; https://www.nist.gov/pml/time-and-frequency-division/popular-links/daylight-saving-time-dst (Numerous other articles also discuss the Energy Policy Act of 2005.)

[8] “END DAYLIGHT SAVINGS TIME”; Petition2Congress; website accessed July 6, 2019; https://www.petition2congress.com/ctas/end-daylight-savings-time

NOTE:

This piece being submitted to Google Blogger on July 9, 2019 is virtually identical to one the author submitted to another website (Craft News Report, operated by his friend Paul Craft) a few days earlier.

This Google Blogger article was last revised on November 4, 2023.

Is the United States Its Most Divided Since the Civil War?

The United States may be its most divided since the Civil War.

Abortion

Millions of persons, including me, consider abortion murder and adamantly oppose abortion under most circumstances. When a Supreme Court vacancy occurred late in President Barack Obama’s administration, Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnell led a successful move to delay the replacement until after the election when President Donald Trump could nominate a conservative justice more likely to be pro-life.

Now with the prospect of a conservative Supreme Court for the foreseeable future, some Democratic Presidential candidates advocate expanding the Supreme Court[1] to more than nine justices, as a way to put liberals in control.

Gay Marriage

Marriage between homosexuals is another polarizing issue. With its legalization, many conservative Christians are outraged. And, many liberals seek even more rights for homosexuals.

Health Care

An increasing number of persons advocate a single-payer health care system that offers coverage for everyone. On the other hand, many criticize government-run health care.

Escalating Conflict

The conflict between conservatives and liberals on abortion, gay marriage, health care, and other issues seems to be escalating. Instead of seeking to find the best solution or common ground, the arguments seem to be getting worse. Each side seems determined to have its own way.

When Barack Obama was President some persons in certain states such as Texas considered seeking for their states to withdraw from the country to form a new country. Now that Donald Trump is President, some persons in other states such as California are advocating a secession from the nation.

Where Will It End?

What will be the final result of this divisiveness? In Mathew 12:25 the Bible states “. . . Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand:” (King James Version), which is a passage Abraham Lincoln apparently used as his source when he stated in a June 16, 1858 speech[2] at the Illinois Republican State Convention where he had been nominated to run for the United States Senate “. . . .A house divided against itself, cannot stand. I believe this government cannot endure, permanently half slave and half free. . . . ”

Lincoln was elected President of the United States in 1860, the Civil War followed, and Lincoln is often considered our nation’s greatest President for his role in preserving the country and eliminating slavery. But, I like to think our nation would have eventually eliminated slavery peacefully and avoided much of the divisiveness that endures to this day if an even better leader had been elected.

Here in 2019 we are not on the verge of a civil war or a secession of states. The division is not as bad as it was in the mid1800s. But, the talk of many in certain states about secession may lead to actual secession by one or more states if things continue to get worse in coming years.

Perhaps we can find leaders who will achieve a compromise that placates both sides to some extent. Better yet, as I see it, would be to succeed in educating the public about which side is correct on each issue, attaining unity. For example, on the abortion issue, I’d love for everyone to accept the sanctity of life. We could end most abortions, greatly reduce premarital and extramarital sex, improve prenatal care, and greatly increase adoptions of unwanted children by persons qualified to be good parents.

But, to succeed in resolving issues like abortion, gay marriage, and health care, we need to be willing to listen to one another respectfully and to seek the best solution for each issue.

In Kentucky where I live, the state motto is “united we stand, divided we fall.” I think those are wise words. I think these words mean we need to stand for all persons, including the unborn, and that persons desiring no children need to exercise their God-given self-control to practice sexual abstinence or to use contraceptives (maybe multiple methods) properly. But, for our society to be united, somehow this message need to be communicated more effectively than it has been so far.

Ideally, if we all listen intelligently with an open mind, we will eventually reach agreement on the right path to take on each issue, as we learn from one another. Let’s seek to do it.   

ENDNOTES:     

---

[1] “Are you open to expanding the size of the Supreme Court”; New York Times; website accessed June 30, 2019. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/us/politics/supreme-court-democratic-candidates.html

(Numerous other websites also discuss this.)

[2] “Full text of ‘A house divided against itself cannot stand’ ”; Lincoln Room of the University of Illinois Library, via Archive.org; website accessed June 30, 2019. https://archive.org/stream/ahousedividedaga00linc/ahousedividedaga00linc_djvu.txt

(Numerous other websites also quote from this speech.)

NOTE:

This piece being submitted to Google Blogger on July 2, 2019 is based upon one the author submitted to a friend's website, Craft News Report, on June 30, 2019.

Wearing High Heel Shoes: Definite Health Risks, Why Wear Them?

Some workplaces require women to wear high heel shoes. Many women dislike the requirement.

“More than 19,000 people in Japan” have signed “a petition to ban the requirement” according to a recent CNN article.[*] Numerous other news sources also have reported on this petition, which apparently continues to get signatures online.

Employers at various organizations in other countries than Japan also require high heels for female workers. I strongly feel that such requirements need to be eliminated.

Why I Oppose High Heel Shoes

I remember watching women struggle to walk in high-heeled shoes. I remember women talking about how their feet hurt at the end of the day after wearing high heels for several hours. Why should women punish themselves this way?

What is the purpose of a shoe? It seems to me that the main purposes of shoes are protecting one’s feet and making it easier to walk and stand. Low-heeled shoes seem much better suited for this.

I think high-heeled shoes seem to be uncomfortable to wear, unsafe to walk in, and inappropriate to wear while driving a car. Furthermore, over the long term they can cause several problems for your feet—assuming you don’t fall and suffer a severe accident in the short term wearing them.

I am not a medical professional and cannot give any medical advice. But if you like, you can research online and find numerous articles either written by medical professionals or that quote medical professionals, which report on the safety hazards of high-heeled shoes.

Choosing to Wear High Heels

Women enjoy the right to wear suitable shoes of their choice. But I wonder why so many choose to frequently wear high heel shoes (also called high-heeled shoes). A lot of women wear high-heeled shoes to church services (and other activities). Why does a Christian woman (or anyone) wear high heels?

Can anyone cite any medical benefit to the average person from wearing high heels? Is there any reason for the average lady to wear high heels other than fashion? Is the desire to look fashionable the big appeal? If some fashion show (whether in Paris or in your hometown) portrays specific styles as being “in” this season, will women in your neighborhood rush in droves to buy the newly fashionable shoes? Please seek to resist the temptation.

I urge women to revolt peacefully against the persons/traditions/forces that lead them to purchase and wear high-heeled shoes. Instead, buy and wear comfortable walking shoes.

Closing Thoughts

I am thankful men typically do not wear high heels. I personally have never worn them other than trying them on briefly. I hope the day will come soon when no employer finds high heels necessary for female employees. If your job requires them, you have my sympathy. I hope your employer reads this chapter and changes the requirement.

There are various theories on how high heels originated and why they became popular. You can find numerous articles online about the subject if it interests you. For my purposes here, I find it sufficient to state that I do not know of a logical reason (other than orders from an employer or someone else) for modern women to insert their feet into them at all. I certainly see no reason for ladies to wear them for hours daily while walking, working typical jobs, driving a car, or relaxing.

Indeed, I know of no good reason for buying or wearing high heel shoes unless an employer requires it (which seems discriminatory and is hopefully relatively rare here in the United States). However, I am a man. Perhaps as a member of the male gender there is something I fail to understand on this topic.

Some women who wear high-heeled shoes at least sometimes and gave me feedback on their reason(s) for wearing them seemed to basically offer three reasons for wearing high heels: (1) to satisfy a job requirement, (2) to appear taller, and/or (3) to look more attractive. I sympathize with the job issue and hope employers will change that requirement, as I stated earlier. But I respectfully feel that the other two reasons do not justify undertaking the health risks of high heels.

If you know of a good reason for wearing high-heeled shoes, please write to tell me about it and why you think it is a good reason. Thanks!

ENDNOTE:

---

[*] Wakatsuki, Yoko and Westcott, Ben; “Japanese minister: High heels for women at work are ‘occupationally necessary and appropriate’ ”; CNN; updated June 6, 2019; website accessed June 8, 2019; https://www.cnn.com/style/article/japan-minister-high-heels-intl/index.html

(Numerous other online websites also have articles about this issue.)

NOTE:

This piece is being submitted to Google Blogger on June 9, 2019. It is virtually identical to a piece the author submitted to his friend Paul Craft’s website, Craft News Report, on June 8, 2019. The Craft News Report piece was adapted and updated from a chapter in the author’s book True Christianity: It May Not Be What You Think (chapter 39 in the second and third editions, chapter 32 in the first edition). The author has also written on this issue for other websites in the past.

Abortion Is a Symptom, Not the Problem

I abhor abortion. I would love for the United States Supreme Court to rule Roe vs. Wade unconstitutional.

I would love it even more if the United States Congress would pass a law outlawing almost all abortions, the President would sign it into law, and the Supreme Court would uphold it.

Abortion Is a Symptom, Not the Problem

But, abortion is a symptom, not the problem. The problem is that persons who don’t want children engage in casual sex without using contraceptives effectively and consistently. 

If persons practiced sexual abstinence before marriage, monogamy after marriage, and married couples desiring no children used contraceptives effectively—perhaps using both birth control pills and condoms—undesired pregnancies would decline dramatically. Few would want abortions.

Even persons who are pro-choice would prefer to avoid the pain, expense, and health risks of an abortion. But, they frequently lack the self-control to avoid casual sex, often lack the discipline to use contraceptives properly. Furthermore, they are often unwilling to carry the unwanted child to term, then give it up for adoption.

With the passage of strict abortion laws in various states recently, most notably Alabama,[1] the United States Supreme Court will almost certainly eventually be making some decisions (and/or deciding to allow lower court decisions to stand) that will impact abortion.

While we pro-life persons wait for the possibility of overturning Roe vs. Wade, we need to take actions to help with the necessary things that will need to occur if it is overturned. We need to do a better job of educating persons about the importance of abstinence before marriage, monogamy afterward, and proper use of contraceptives. You can read more about abstinence and contraceptives in another article I wrote[2].

Hypothetical and Actual Situations

Even if abortion is made illegal, when undesired pregnancies occur, there will be negative consequences. If a 15-year-old high school couple or a 20-year-old college couple face an unplanned pregnancy, it may negatively affect their future plans. And, what about the rare (I hope) case of a 10-year-old victim of rape? These are hypothetical situations, but there are true cases like them.

In such situations, a supportive family, helpful religious leaders, community support, better adoption procedures, government programs, etc., can help. But, in the case of that 10-year-old who is raped, she may carry the memory of that rape all her life. Carrying a baby to term is risky at that age[3], though some children have successfully done so. Indeed, there is apparently one case of a child five-years-old successfully giving birth in Peru[4]. But, the joy of feeling a baby moving around inside one ought to come after marriage, not as a rape victim during one’s childhood, a victim whose baby may serve as a reminder of a horrible rape experience.

Personally, even in cases of child rape victims, I’d prefer the innocent baby be born instead of being murdered while in the womb. But, I certainly wouldn’t penalize a child for desiring an abortion in such a case, and I’d have a hard time penalizing her parents if they desired her to have one (and would hope a parent wasn’t involved in the rape). Many abortion laws, including the one Alabama recently passed, only set penalties for those performing abortions, not the female seeking the abortion. But, I would even have a hard time severely punishing a medical doctor who performed an abortion on a pregnant 10-year-old.

Personally, though, I think most abortions occur not as a result of rape, but as a result of consensual, casual sex—sex engaged in without using multiple methods of effective contraceptives consistently and properly.

Closing Thoughts

I’ll state in closing, yes, we need to overturn Roe vs. Wade. Even better, we need to pass a law making most abortions illegal nationally, instead of returning the issue to the states, as overturning Roe vs. Wade would do.

But, we also need to greatly reduce (if not eliminate) rape, incest, and casual sex. Providing better education, better supervision of young people, and better prosecution of adults who prey on children are some things we can do.

Greedy, selfish sexual lust that leads to engaging in casual sex without the disciplined self-control to use multiple contraceptive methods consistently and effectively is the problem. Abortion is only a symptom of this underlying problem.

ENDNOTES:

---

[1] “Alabama abortion bill passes: Read the bill”; Al.com, Alabama Media Group; May 15, 2019; last updated May 16, 2019, webpage accessed May 18, 2019; https://www.al.com/news/2019/05/alabama-abortion-ban-passes-read-the-bill.html

[2] Gibson, James Edwin; “Want No Children, Practice Abstinence or Use Contraceptives”; Google Blogger; December 13, 2015; webpage last updated May 18, 2019; webpage accessed May 18, 2019; https://oneopinionsomeviews.blogspot.com/2015/12/want-no-children-practice-abstinence-or.html

[3] Pappas, Stephanie; “Doctors Appalled by 10-Year-Old Giving Birth”; LiveScience; April 9, 2012; webpage accessed May 18, 2019; https://www.livescience.com/19584-10-year-birth.html

[4] “Six decades later, world’s youngest mother awaits aid”; TelegraphIndia.com (posting of Reuters article of August 26, 2002); August 27, 2002; webpage accessed May 18, 2019; https://www.telegraphindia.com/world/six-decades-later-world-s-youngest-mother-awaits-aid/cid/1560903 (You can also access numerous other articles online about this case.)

NOTE:

This piece being submitted to Google Blogger on May 19, 2019 is virtually identical to one the author submitted to Craft News Report (a website operated by the author’s friend Paul Craft) on May 18, 2019. That article was adapted and updated from various other articles the author has written on the subject over the years, as well as from a chapter in his book True Christianity: It May Not Be What You Think.

Trump Raising Tariffs Vs. Freer Trade: Which Is Best? An Opinion

Completely free trade with no tariffs is best in an ideal world. But, we don’t live in an ideal world. And, for better or worse, President Donald Trump is a decision maker who seeks to make decisions that change things. He often plays “hardball”—sometimes successfully, sometimes not.   

Friday, May 10, 2019, President Trump took action to raise tariffs on imports to the United States from China according to numerous news reports, such as the ones linked in this sentence from CNN,1 Reuters,2 and CBSNews.3 China responded by raising tariffs on some imports to China from the United States.

Raising Tariffs Vs. Free TradeAre tariffs a good thing? Other things being equal, I strongly prefer free trade without any tariffs. Tariffs typically raise prices for consumers and decrease the quantity and variety of good available. Tariffs also reduce the amount of trade between countries, because the higher prices typically result in persons buying fewer imports.

Furthermore, many products must be imported. For example, bananas are probably my favorite fruit. And, here in the United States, we don’t grow bananas, so they must be imported. I would be upset if a high tariff created a banana shortage or higher prices for them. Of course, bananas from other countries are not part of the trade dispute with China, but the United States does import a huge quantity of a wide variety of items from China. Look at the labels on many items you purchase to get an idea.

As stated earlier, tariffs often have negative effects. When the United States, China, and other nations set tariffs, they limit trade, which typically results in fewer items being available for purchase and their prices being higher.

Trump’s Logic in Raising Tariffs on Imports from China?

Perhaps only President Trump knows his complete logic in raising tariffs on imports from China. But, my guess is that Trump feels that China needs us more than we need them.

Therefore, by raising tariffs, which make Chinese exports to the United States more expensive and will likely lead to a decrease in Chinese sales, Trump can pressure the Chinese government to make a fairer trade agreement with the United States and reduce the unfair trade practices China has allegedly (almost certainly?) been engaging in with the United States and many other countries.

A post from the President on Whitehouse.gov4 nearly a year ago discusses some of these allegedly unfair practices. Furthermore, other nations, such as Japan and members of the European Union, are also upset about Chinese trade practices, as noted by numerous articles, including a 2018 Financial Times piece.5

A main goal of the increased tariffs is probably to get China to reach a trade agreement with the United States that makes the international trade between the country fairer, more beneficial to the United States than it is now. 

Free Trade Agreements

Ideally, I would love to see completely free trade between all countries, as long as products are produced and transported safely and fairly. However, the governments of some nations do not do regular inspections in factories and other production facilities to help ensure quality and safety, do not take steps to prevent copyright and patent infringement, etc.

Nations and groups of nations negotiate, approve, and enforce trade agreements to help progress toward fair, free trade. The United States and China are seeking to find enough common ground to achieve a trade agreement between the countries. I hope they do. But it isn’t easy.

You are probably familiar with the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which took effect between the United States, Canada, and Mexico in 1994. While I believe this helped improve trade between the countries and was a good thing at the time, it had numerous weaknesses which I won’t take time to detail here.

Furthermore, the NAFTA document was 2,000 pages long according to an article on thebalance.6 Like many other “free trade” agreements, it contains numerous provisions that show favorable treatment to various groups in the three countries. I would think that a true free trade agreement would be only a few pages long. Would you want to be a businessperson seeking to establish, maintain, or expand an international business and supposedly be responsible for reading and adhering to this lengthy agreement?

Even reading the sections pertinent to a particular business would be time consuming. I wonder if anyone has actually read the entire agreement. One of President Trump’s campaign pledges was to replace NAFTA, and a proposed revision to it is currently going through the ratification process. 

A Chinese fair/free trade agreement likely won’t be a simple document either, if one is produced from ongoing negotiations. But, it can be a big step in the right direction. 

Closing Thoughts

As I see it, one of the biggest successes of modern society is the widespread trade between countries around the world that enables the economies of various nations to produce and sell more goods than they otherwise could—while allowing citizens around the world to enjoy a wider variety and greater quantity of products than ever before. And, trade agreements are helping gradually improve work conditions and quality of products worldwide, while continuing the expansion of trade, as I see it.

However, in the short term, higher tariffs on goods coming to the United States from China (and vice versa) may decrease this trade between the two nations. The Chinese may suffer more than the United States, which will (I’m guessing Trump hopes) give the Chinese government incentive to reach an agreement with the United States (or better yet with some other countries around the world, too) that leads to fairer, freer trade between the countries. If such a trade agreement is reached, and it leads to even more trade between the countries, it will be a win-win situation. And part of that win-win situation could be Chinese consumers benefitting from more United States products appearing in Chinese stores at cheaper prices.

President Trump seems to have a history of making quick decisions to help institute changes he wants. Some decisions work out; some do not. Time will tell if his gamble in raising tariffs on Chinese imports will work.

My optimistic guess is that Trump’s “hardball” pressure will help lead to a trade agreement between the two nations that benefits both countries. In an ideal world that agreement would come without a tariff increase, but my sometimes idealistic outlook is perhaps less constructive than Trump’s more pragmatic approach in our real world.

ENDNOTES:           

---

1 Pham, Sherisse; The US just raised tariffs on Chinese goods. China says it will hit back”; CNN; May 10, 2019; webpage accessed May 11, 2019; https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/10/business/china-us-tariffs-trade/index.html

2 Lawder, David and Pamuk, Humeyra; “Trump ratchets up tariff threat after talks show no progress”; Reuters; May 10, 2019; webpage accessed May 11, 2019; https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trade-china-tariffs/trumps-tariff-hike-on-200-billion-of-chinese-goods-takes-effect-idUSKCN1SG08X

3 “Trump’s tariffs on China: How do they work and what do they aim to achieve”; May 11, 2019; webpage accessed May 11, 2019; https://www.cbsnews.com/news/tariffs-on-china-what-are-they-and-how-do-they-work-and-what-do-they-aim-to-achieve/

4 Trump, President Donald; “President Donald J. Trump Is Confronting China’s Unfair Trade Policies”; White House website; May 29, 2018; webpage accessed May 12, 2019; https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/president-donald-j-trump-confronting-chinas-unfair-trade-policies/

5 Mitchell, Tom; “Trade wars: China fear an emerging united front”; Financial Times; September 11, 2018; webpage accessed May 12, 2019; https://www.ft.com/content/ee361e2e-b283-11e8-8d14-6f049d06439c  

6 Amadeo, Kimberly; “What Is the North American Free Trade Agreement? Six Things NAFTA Does”; Webpage updated October 31, 2018; webpage accessed May 11, 2019; https://www.thebalance.com/nafta-definition-north-american-free-trade-agreement-3306147

DISCLOSURE:

The author’s second job is as a part-time store clerk at a retailer. This retailer will probably be impacted by the increase in tariffs on imports from China due to many of its products coming from China.

NOTE:

This piece being submitted to Google Blogger on May 13, 2019 is updated from one submitted to Craft News Report (a website operated by the author's friend Paul Craft) on May 12, 2019.

Raise the Minimum Age to Buy Tobacco to 21, But Enforcement Won't Be Easy

Recent Action

A bipartisan effort is underway in the U.S. Congress to raise the minimum age for buying tobacco and vaping products to 21 according to an April 30 CNBC piece,1

a May 3, 2019 Sinclair Broadcast Group article accessed on ABC’s website,2 and other sources. The issue gained much national attention after an April press release3 from U.S. Senator Mitch McConnell from my home state of Kentucky announcing he planned to introduce a bill in the U.S. Senate this month (May) to raise that age to 21.

Twelve states and numerous communities already have a minimum age of 21 for purchasing tobacco products according to a list on TobaccoFreeKids.org4.

Retailers are also taking action. “Effective September 1, 2019” Walgreens will require tobacco purchasers at its stores to be at least 21 according to a Walgreens press release5. CVS stopped selling tobacco in September 2014, and one year later CVS released results of a study conducted by the CVS Health Research Institute indicating positive results from the decision. An article on CVS’s website6 discusses this.

My Views

I strongly support raising the age to 21 for purchase of tobacco and vaping products. I also support offering help to current users to quit the habit. A law raising the limit could be set to take effect six months after passage, giving time for current users to seek help quitting the habit. During this six months, the government could offer cessation help (via websites with tips, brochures, etc.).  Much of this is already available, but it is underused. Religious organizations, other nonprofit organizations, and communities could offer support groups, too; again, some already do, but the resources are often unused.

Better education of young people and quality enforcement of the law are keys to its success. Most current users began using before age 18 as stated on a Centers for Disease Control webpage7, as well as many other places. The underage users likely obtained their products from older relatives or friends, in addition to making purchases from retailers who sold them illegally.
       Many persons under age 18 have older friends age 18, 29, or 20 who could and would give or sell them tobacco and vaping products. If we prevent persons under age 21 from using such products, by the time individuals reach age 21 they may have the good judgement not to ever try them.  
     But, enforcement is key, and it needs to be accompanied by help overcoming addiction. Parents, teachers, community leaders, religious leaders, nonprofit organizations, etc., can all play a role in helping persons avoid using, or stop using, tobacco and vaping products.
      I think it can be much easier to get persons to quit using them if they've only tried them a few times or for a few months or years than if they have been a user for decades. Let's seek to help young people who are current users to quit before they become hooked more strongly.
     Personally, over the long term, I’d love for tobacco products and vaping products to be illegal. As I see it, if tobacco was a new product it would not be legal. But, millions of people are addicted, so making it illegal probably isn’t feasible in the short term.

It Won’t Be Easy

In 1604 King James I of England wrote a treatise criticizing tobacco in which he stated, among many other things, that smoking tobacco is “a custom loathsome to the eye, hateful to the nose, harmful to the brain, dangerous to the lungs, and in the black stinking fume thereof nearest resembling the horrible stygian smoke of the pit that is bottomless,” as quoted from a Library of Virginia website8, and available from many other sources, too.

In the hundreds of years since King James I, many others have sought to discourage tobacco use. Its use is now in decline in the United States and many other nations. Still, it remains an addition for millions. And vaping is adding to the problem.

Vaping is attracting millions of young people. Teenagers and preteens need educated better about the dangers of vaping. Better education, accompanied by passing and enforcing a law raising the minimum age for vaping and tobacco use to 21, can help enormously in preventing young people from ever starting the habit. But, getting current users under age 21 to stop and preventing access to potential future users won’t be easy. Passing the law may be easy compared to the enforcement of it.

ENDNOTES:

---

1 LaVito, Angelica; "US lawmakers push bipartisan bill to raise the federal minimum buying age for tobacco to 21"; CNBC website; April 30, 2019; website accessed May 11, 2019; https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/30/lawmakers-push-bill-to-raise-federal-minimum-tobacco-buying-age-to-21.html

2 Macaluso, Michelle; “Bipartisan push in Congress to raise the national smoking age”; Sinclair Broadcast Group; May 3, 2019; website accessed May 5, 2019; https://abc3340.com/news/nation-world/bipartisan-push-in-congress-to-raise-the-national-smoking-age

3 “McConnell Announces Bill to Raise Minimum Age to Buy Tobacco to 21”; Senator Mitch McConnell’s website; April 18, 2019, website accessed May 5, 2019; https://www.mcconnell.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/pressreleases?ID=C7912202-0742-4404-8775-8836F261DDEF

4 “States and Localities That Have Raised the Minimum Sale Age for Tobacco to 21”; Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids; data accurate as of May 1, 2019; website accessed May 5, 2019; https://www.tobaccofreekids.org/assets/content/what_we_do/state_local_issues/sales_21/states_localities_MLSA_21.pdf

5 “Walgreens to Implement New Tobacco 21 Policy to Further Prevent Youth Access to Tobacco Products”; Walgreens website; April 23, 2019; website accessed May 5, 2019; https://news.walgreens.com/press-releases/general-news/walgreens-to-implement-new-tobacco-21-policy-to-further-prevent-youth-access-to-tobacco-products.htm

6 “We Quit Tobacco, Here’s What Happened Next”; CVS website; September 1, 2015; website accessed May 5, 2019; https://cvshealth.com/thought-leadership/cvs-health-research-institute/we-quit-tobacco-heres-what-happened-next 

7 “Youth and Tobacco Use”; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Page last reviewed February 28, 2019; webpage accessed May 5, 2019; https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/youth_data/tobacco_use/index.htm

8 “King James I, A Counterblaste to Tobacco, 1604, Section VIII, The uncleanliness of tobacco use”; Library of Virginia website; accessed May 5, 2019; http://edu.lva.virginia.gov/dbva/files/original/2e14513db1261cffc5307218fe4347c9.pdf

DISCLOSURE:
The author’s second job is as a part-time store clerk at a retailer whose products include cigarettes and cigars. His retailer sells to persons over age 18.

NOTE:

This piece was last updated on May 11, 2019. The original Google Blogger post on May 5, 2019 was virtually identical to one the author submitted to Craft News Report ( a website operated by his friend Paul Craft) earlier the same day. The author has long felt a need to help current tobacco users quit and to help prevent young people from starting the habit.