Well, it turns out that there is, albeit with a different psychoactive substance: Tobacco 21 laws have proliferated since 2012 and especially since 2015, mostly at the local level but increasingly at the state level as well (with Massachusetts being the most recent one to do so). And what were the results? A big nothing in terms of teen smoking rates, basically. There has been essentially no hard evidence that there was any sort of correlation between a state's or locality's tobacco age limit vs. their teen smoking (or vaping) rate, period, regardless of whether it was 18 or 21 (or, less commonly, 19). Thus, raising the age limit from 18 to 21 has been an unnecessarily ageist endeavor, and one can thus easily extrapolate these results to alcohol and cannabis going forward as well.
True, from 2013 to 2017, there was a massive drop in teen and young adult smoking. But that was more likely due to the explosion of vaping during that time than any other factor, and happened in states in localities that kept their age limits at 18 all along as well as those who raised them. Which, by the way, also debunks the laughable idea that vaping is somehow a "gateway" to combustible cigarettes--if anything, raising the age limit for e-cigarettes/vapes may even steer young people back towards combustible cigarettes according to some studies.
As for Chicago's supposed success story in terms of reduced smoking rates in the first year after hiking their age limit to 21 in 2016, note that Chicago also recently hiked their cigarette tax as well, to make their cigarettes some of the most expensive in the nation. Pennsylvania also hiked their own cigarette tax while leaving their age limit at 18, and if anything Philadelphia has seen more progress in reducing teen smoking than Chicago from 2013-2017 according to the YRBSS. Thus, no causal link has been proven.
And while the Tobacco 21 movement luurrrves to gloat about their very first victory in the Boston suburb of Needham, MA, they conveniently ignore another Boston suburb, Cohasset, where teen tobacco use actually increased in the year following enactment of their own local Tobacco 21 law.
Some may dismiss the relevance of tobacco age limits to alcohol (or cannabis), of course, but keep in mind that just a few years ago, Tobacco 21 advocates actually predicted that raising the age limit for tobacco to 21 would be more effective that raising the drinking age to 21 was in the 1980s. Tobacco is far more addictive, which in economic terms means that while the short-run elasticity is lower than for alcohol (or cannabis), the long-run elasticity is higher than for these other substances. And easy access to a daily or almost daily source is thought to be far more important for tobacco as well. Thus, the failure of Tobacco 21 laws to have any meaningful impact on teen and young adult smoking rates would also apply a fortiori to alcohol and cannabis as well.
As for Chicago's supposed success story in terms of reduced smoking rates in the first year after hiking their age limit to 21 in 2016, note that Chicago also recently hiked their cigarette tax as well, to make their cigarettes some of the most expensive in the nation. Pennsylvania also hiked their own cigarette tax while leaving their age limit at 18, and if anything Philadelphia has seen more progress in reducing teen smoking than Chicago from 2013-2017 according to the YRBSS. Thus, no causal link has been proven.
And while the Tobacco 21 movement luurrrves to gloat about their very first victory in the Boston suburb of Needham, MA, they conveniently ignore another Boston suburb, Cohasset, where teen tobacco use actually increased in the year following enactment of their own local Tobacco 21 law.
Some may dismiss the relevance of tobacco age limits to alcohol (or cannabis), of course, but keep in mind that just a few years ago, Tobacco 21 advocates actually predicted that raising the age limit for tobacco to 21 would be more effective that raising the drinking age to 21 was in the 1980s. Tobacco is far more addictive, which in economic terms means that while the short-run elasticity is lower than for alcohol (or cannabis), the long-run elasticity is higher than for these other substances. And easy access to a daily or almost daily source is thought to be far more important for tobacco as well. Thus, the failure of Tobacco 21 laws to have any meaningful impact on teen and young adult smoking rates would also apply a fortiori to alcohol and cannabis as well.
The Tobacco 21 movement now seems to be running out of steam, as their initial euphoria pinned on irrational exuberance is fading fast. This year, only one state raised their smoking age to 21, compared with three states last year and two states in 2016, and fewer localities have changed their laws this year as well. The momentum is almost completely gone now.
And the fact that Big Tobacco has now recently jumped on the Tobacco 21 bandwagon (yes, really), after at least feigning opposition at first, shows that the movement has jumped the proverbial shark, and is now tainted as well. Strike three, yer out!
And the fact that Big Tobacco has now recently jumped on the Tobacco 21 bandwagon (yes, really), after at least feigning opposition at first, shows that the movement has jumped the proverbial shark, and is now tainted as well. Strike three, yer out!
2018 is almost over, and the current 2010s decade is also almost over as well. Let this be the time now to flush the idea of the 21 age limit (for any age-resticted product) down the toilet for good with all of the other dumb things from this despicable decade.
I hope so.
ReplyDeleteSame here, I really hope so as well. Then we can finally relegate it to the dustbin of history for good.
ReplyDelete