City Government

Commentary: Black Institutions Must Stop Taking Big Tobacco Money

It’s hard to believe that with the amount of damage that the tobacco industry has inflicted on the Black community, that there are still Black organizations accepting their funding. By doing so, these Black organizations enable the tobacco industry to portray themselves as allies to our community. They help silence our voices and efforts aimed at encouraging policymakers to take specific steps to protect our people, thus becoming complicit in our death and disease.

Published

2 years ago

March 2, 2023

Oakland Post

Dr Phillip Gardiner is the co-chair of the African American Tobacco Control Leadership Council. Photo courtesy of Dr. Gardiner.

By Dr. Phillip Gardiner

It’s hard to believe that with the amount of damage that the tobacco industry has inflicted on the Black community, that there are still Black organizations accepting their funding.

By doing so, these Black organizations enable the tobacco industry to portray themselves as allies to our community. They help silence our voices and efforts aimed at encouraging policymakers to take specific steps to protect our people, thus becoming complicit in our death and disease.

The problem with accepting these funds is the tobacco industry has a history of targeting and exploiting vulnerable communities, especially Black communities, through predatory advertising and marketing tactics.

Our people must be aware that accepting money from the tobacco industry contributes to the ongoing exploitation of our people through their predatory practices of marketing menthol cigarettes and flavored cigars.

The African American Control Tobacco Council is calling on Black organizations to be united in our fight against Big Tobacco and help save Black lives. Tobacco companies are actively opposing public health measures aimed at protecting Black Americans from the harm caused by their products.

The Backstory

A 1953 study by Roper, B.W. found that only 5% of African Americans smoked menthol cigarettes. A 1968 poll of People’s Cigarette Smoking Habits and Attitudes by Philip Morris showed that menthol use among Blacks had almost tripled to 14%. A report by Brown and Williamson in 1978 found that it had tripled again to 42%. By the 2000s, over 80% of Black smokers used menthol cigarettes.

Today, 85% of Black adults and 94% of Black youth who smoke are using menthol products. These striking statistics arise from the success of the industry’s predatory marketing of these products in our community, where there are more advertisements, and most disturbingly, menthol cigarettes are cheaper compared to other communities.

In 2022, the use of cigarettes, cigars and cigarillos was highest among Black youth. These practices, coupled with buying the silence of some Black spokespersons for the past 50 years, have led to Black Americans dying disproportionately from heart attacks, lung cancer, strokes and other tobacco-related diseases.

The National Museum of African American History and Culture

Across this country, tobacco companies are vigorously opposing public health policies that would protect Black Americans from these products, specifically the proposed FDA ban on menthol products.

These same companies continue to strategically provide monies to Black institutions to create the illusion of being socially responsible and invested in our well-being.

Black institutions must reject funding from or any form of partnership with tobacco and vaping companies and hold them accountable for the harmful effects they’ve had and continue to have on public and mental health, the environment and social justice.

The National Museum of African American History and Culture is one of those institutions. They currently list Altria as a member of their Corporate Leadership Council. It should be noted that Altria owns a 35% stake in JUUL Labs, the e-cigarette company that malevolently popularized e-cigarette usage among America’s youth. We are calling upon the museum to divest their funding portfolio of all tobacco industry contributions moving forward.

The museum undertakes highly commendable work to document African American life, history and culture. However, we must bear in mind that American history is forever interwoven with the enslavement of African people on tobacco plantations.

Unfortunately, traces of that exploitation continue to exist to this day, principally taking the form of marketing menthol cigarettes and flavored little cigars to the Black community.

The museum is only one example, and we are challenging all Black organizations currently accepting funding from the tobacco industry to divest. If current efforts to protect present and future generations are not realized, African Americans will continue to pay the disproportionate price of death and disease for generations to come.

A New Road Forward

In 2021, the AATCLC was joined by the Action on Smoking and Health, the American Medical Association, and the National Medical Association when we sued the FDA to compel them to take menthol off the U.S. market.

Imagine our nations medical doctors joining with us to sue our own government to take these deadly addictive products off the market. This August, the FDA is slated to make a final ruling to take all menthol and flavored products off the market. We have a lot of work to do to ensure this happens and a large part of that is having the support of Black institutions.

Blacks people have been at the head of this fight, and we have made great strides in protecting the next generation from the industry’s emerging tobacco and nicotine products.

In November 2022, California went to the polls and soundly rejected the tobacco industry’s attempt to undermine Senate Bill 793, making their state the second after Massachusetts to pass legislation to take menthol and all flavored tobacco products off the market. We are working hard to encourage all states to follow suit.

Now is the time to take a stand and be a part of the solution: Stop taking tobacco industry money.

Dr Phillip Gardiner is the co-chair of the African American Tobacco Control Leadership Council. The AATCLC works at the intersection of public health policy and social injustice. www.SavingBlackLves.org

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Up Next

In Memoriam

Don't Miss

Taxes on Wealthy Could Fund Reparations, Lawyers Tell Task Force

Oakland Post

Click to comment

Activism

Oakland Post: Week of June 18 – 24, 2025

The printed Weekly Edition of the Oakland Post: Week of June 18 – 24, 2025

Published

1 day ago

June 20, 2025

Oakland Post

To enlarge your view of this issue, use the slider, magnifying glass icon or full page icon in the lower right corner of the browser window.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Activism

OPINION: California’s Legislature Has the Wrong Prescription for the Affordability Crisis — Gov. Newsom’s Plan Hits the Mark

Last month, Gov. Newsom included measures in his budget that would encourage greater transparency, accountability, and affordability across the prescription drug supply chain. His plan would deliver real relief to struggling Californians. It would also help expose the hidden markups and practices by big drug companies that push the prices of prescription drugs higher and higher. The legislature should follow the Governor’s lead and embrace sensible, fair regulations that will not raise the cost of medications.

Published

3 days ago

June 18, 2025

Oakland Post

Rev. Dr. Lawrence E. VanHook. Courtesy of Rev. Dr. Lawrence E. VanHook.

By Rev. Dr. Lawrence E. VanHook

As a pastor and East Bay resident, I see firsthand how my community struggles with the rising cost of everyday living. A fellow pastor in Oakland recently told me he cuts his pills in half to make them last longer because of the crushing costs of drugs.

Meanwhile, community members are contending with skyrocketing grocery prices and a lack of affordable healthcare options, while businesses are being forced to close their doors.

Our community is hurting. Things have to change.

The most pressing issue that demands our leaders’ attention is rising healthcare costs, and particularly the rising cost of medications. Annual prescription drug costs in California have spiked by nearly 50% since 2018, from $9.1 billion to $13.6 billion.

Some lawmakers, however, have advanced legislation that would drive up healthcare costs and set communities like mine back further.

I’m particularly concerned with Senate Bill (SB) 41, sponsored by Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), a carbon copy of a 2024 bill that I strongly opposed and Gov. Newsom rightly vetoed. This bill would impose significant healthcare costs on patients, small businesses, and working families, while allowing big drug companies to increase their profits.

SB 41 would impose a new $10.05 pharmacy fee for every prescription filled in California. This new fee, which would apply to millions of Californians, is roughly five times higher than the current average of $2.

For example, a Bay Area family with five monthly prescriptions would be forced to shoulder about $500 more in annual health costs. If a small business covers 25 employees, each with four prescription fills per month (the national average), that would add nearly $10,000 per year in health care costs.

This bill would also restrict how health plan sponsors — like employers, unions, state plans, Medicare, and Medicaid — partner with pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) to negotiate against big drug companies and deliver the lowest possible costs for employees and members. By mandating a flat fee for pharmacy benefit services, this misguided legislation would undercut your health plan’s ability to drive down costs while handing more profits to pharmaceutical manufacturers.

This bill would also endanger patients by eliminating safety requirements for pharmacies that dispense complex and costly specialty medications. Additionally, it would restrict home delivery for prescriptions, a convenient and affordable service that many families rely on.

Instead of repeating the same tired plan laid out in the big pharma-backed playbook, lawmakers should embrace Newsom’s transparency-first approach and prioritize our communities.

Let’s urge our state legislators to reject policies like SB 41 that would make a difficult situation even worse for communities like ours.

About the Author

Rev. Dr. VanHook is the founder and pastor of The Community Church in Oakland and the founder of The Charis House, a re-entry facility for men recovering from alcohol and drug abuse.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Antonio‌ ‌Ray‌ ‌Harvey‌

Air Quality Board Rejects Two Rules Written to Ban Gas Water Heaters and Furnaces

The proposal would have affected 17 million residents in Southern California, requiring businesses, homeowners, and renters to convert to electric units. “We’ve gone through six months, and we’ve made a decision today,” said SCAQMD board member Carlos Rodriguez. “It’s time to move forward with what’s next on our policy agenda.”

Published

4 days ago

June 17, 2025

Oakland Post

Shutterstock.

By Antonio‌ ‌Ray‌ ‌Harvey‌
California‌ ‌Black‌ ‌Media‌

Two proposed rules to eliminate the usage of gas water heaters and furnaces by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) in Southern California were rejected by the Governing Board on June 6.

Energy policy analysts say the board’s decision has broader implications for the state.

With a 7-5 vote, the board decided not to amend Rules 1111 and 1121 at the meeting held in Diamond Bar in L.A. County.

The proposal would have affected 17 million residents in Southern California, requiring businesses, homeowners, and renters to convert to electric units.

“We’ve gone through six months, and we’ve made a decision today,” said SCAQMD board member Carlos Rodriguez. “It’s time to move forward with what’s next on our policy agenda.”

The AQMD governing board is a 13-member body responsible for setting air quality policies and regulations within the South Coast Air Basin, which covers areas in four counties: Riverside County, Orange County, San Bernardino County and parts of Los Angeles County.

The board is made up of representatives from various elected offices within the region, along with members who are appointed by the Governor, Speaker of the Assembly, and Senate Rules Committee.

Holly J. Mitchell, who serves as a County Supervisor for the Second District of Los Angeles County, is a SCAQMD board member. She supported the amendments, but respected the board’s final decision, stating it was a “compromise.”

“In my policymaking experience, if you can come up with amended language that everyone finds some fault with, you’ve probably threaded the needle as best as you can,” Mitchell said before the vote. “What I am not okay with is serving on AQMD is making no decision. Why be here? We have a responsibility to do all that we can to get us on a path to cleaner air.”

The rules proposed by AQMD, Rule 1111 and Rule 1121, aim to reduce nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions from natural gas-fired furnaces and water heaters.

Rule 1111 and Rule 1121 were designed to control air pollution, particularly emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx).

Two days before the Governing Board’s vote, gubernatorial candidate Antonio Villaraigosa asked SCAQMD to reject the two rules.

Villaraigosa expressed his concerns during a Zoom call with the Cost of Living Council, a Southern California organization that also opposes the rules. Villaraigosa said the regulations are difficult to understand.

“Let me be clear, I’ve been a big supporter of AQMD over the decades. I have been a believer and a fighter on the issue of climate change my entire life,” Villaraigosa said. “But there is no question that what is going on now just doesn’t make sense. We are engaging in regulations that are put on the backs of working families, small businesses, and the middle class, and we don’t have the grid for all this.”

Rules 1111 and 1121 would also establish manufacturer requirements for the sale of space and water heating units that meet low-NOx and zero-NOx emission standards that change over time, according to SCAQMD.

The requirements also include a mitigation fee for NOx-emitting units, with an option to pay a higher mitigation fee if manufacturers sell more low-NOx water heating and space units.

Proponents of the proposed rules say the fees are designed to incentivize actions that reduce emissions.