It’s Law: No Cigarettes for Kids

That cigarettes should be kept away from children is one of the few principles on which everyone in the debate over tobacco agrees. Public health experts warn that people who start smoking in adolescence often have a harder time quitting and thereby increase their health risks. Even the tobacco companies, if one is to take them at their word, do not try to hook impressionable teenagers--although internal company memorandums demonstrate they at least have had a keen, abiding interest in the habits of youngsters.

During the early 1990s, California saw significant declines in teenage smoking, along with a drop in adult usage. But in recent years, the change in the percentage of adult smokers has leveled off and smoking among teenagers has risen. Why the rise and what can be done to reverse it?

Some health researchers point to cuts in California’s taxpayer-financed anti-tobacco educational campaign. The 25-cent-a-pack cigarette tax that voters approved in 1988 has given rise to the most comprehensive anti-smoking campaign in any state. But that program has been hampered in recent years by steep state budget cuts. Although some money was restored after a court challenge, the program’s $42-million budget for 1995-96 was less than half that for 1992-93. Funds appropriated since then have increased.

The billboard ban adopted unanimously Wednesday by the Los Angeles City Council is another approach, aimed at reducing teenagers’ exposure to ads that portray smoking as fun or desirable. The ordinance bans tobacco and alcohol ads within 1,000 feet of places frequented by children.

However, in a city as vast and dense as Los Angeles, the ordinance effectively eliminates tobacco and alcohol billboards. Opponents of the newly adopted measure, including the tobacco and liquor industries and the American Civil Liberties Union, argue that the ban is an impermissible restriction on 1st Amendment speech rights.

In this issue there’s a conflict between limitations on free speech and, many would argue, good sense. And equally obvious are the limits of the effectiveness of adult exhortations in changing the behavior of kids. What does make sense is curbing the availability of cigarettes. The law already requires that. Boys and girls under 18 years old are not permitted to buy cigarettes. That law must be strictly enforced, all sides should agree. It is the law, and strict enforcement would be a benefit to all. Put that on the billboards.