Are you a member?

[NullSmurf]

I read it. I just don't agree with it. I stated my overall opinion, and moved on. I wouldn't even mind editing and forming some "Cliff Notes", but I don't think I could do it without bias.

Just to clarify.

I'm not looking to sway you, but I'd love to hear your thoughts.

[mrtr33]

To keep in line with the long-winded them of the post.....

The CRA sounds like a union to me. I have never been a member of a union where I felt they were ever looking out for my best interests. In several cases, I was required to pay member dues as a condition of employment, when I knew non-union members working for other organizations not only had better benefits, but better pay as well. I chose to work where I did because I believed in the work I was doing (at the time – another story). The point being, the union only acted in a way that would keep the union alive – its members be damned. If they could have appealed their case to people outside of their organization as to the necessity of their purpose, they could have potentially had a better argument for existence.

The CRA has “met with the embassies of Honduras, Nicaragua and the Dominican Republic to address the role of this industry in their national and regional economies”? Did we need the CRA to tell them that? According to the CIA World Factbook, along with coffee and sugar, the DR and Nicaragua base their economy on exporting tobacco. Nicaragua and Honduras are some of the poorest companies in the western hemisphere. They would gladly welcome any opportunities to export any of their wares to Americans, and abroad. I’m not quite sure we need the CRA to explain this to them. What kind of sway does the tobacco industry of these countries have with the United States Congress? Again, these are individuals close to the tobacco industry. To generate mass support, you need to appeal to a broader constituent base. Cigar smokers rallying with fellow cigar smokers only interest other cigar smokers to their interests.

Just so I understand clearly: The Cigar Rights Association launched the National Tobacconist Program, whose main effort is then the Great American Cigar Shop program. Why all the bureaucracy? For a small-store tobacconist to join, there are two membership levels: platinum ($200) and gold ($100). I understand the networking potential, and being part of a voice that represents the small tobacconist, but aside from that, what does a CRA Key Tag do to further the plight of the CRA? It’s the little knick knacks that really get to me. Who else is going to see that Key Tag but other cigar enthusiasts? Better yet, where else would you wear a CRA shirt that would appeal others to the cause? A cigar store? Aren’t you again, as they say, “preaching to the choir”?

Furthermore, t-shirts, “members only” cigars, and events I can’t physically get to, or would be financially impossible for me to attend don’t entice me, either. I can see the potential benefit of some kind of event to generate funding for the cause, but this is the cigar industry, not a political candidate or charity organization we are talking about. Simply put, I can’t understand how the inclusions of these membership gimmicks generate membership. I probably am not interested in the cigars, unless they get Carlos and Carlito (who are on the CRA Board of Directors) Fuente to produce some kind of super-cigar for this cause. Even if I could afford to fly to Connecticut tomorrow, and then stay at a hotel somewhere, then pay to get into Big Smoke, would I want to smoke cigars with complete strangers? What do I have to say to Jorge Padron or Rob Levin, should I even get the chance to talk to them? Probably nothing. That isn’t what cigar smoking is about to me – it’s about relaxing with friends, talking, enjoying a drink or playing some cards. Besides, the t-shirt more than likely won’t fit me, anyway.

I think this fight to secure cigar smoker rights is misdirected. We don’t need to be appealing our case to other cigar smokers – a protest does nothing. Neither does combining efforts nationwide with other cigar smokers – no matter how prominent their stake within the cigar industry may be. The fight lies in convincing the voters – and more specifically, the non-smoker - that the rights of cigar smokers are valid. The anti-tobacco lobbyists have done a tremendous job convincing the general public how terrible smoking is, and the best retaliation we come up with is a rally amongst ourselves? This starts locally – not nationally. Each state’s laws work differently, and each smoker may have their own ideas on the limits of smoking laws. I, for one, am happy that smoking is banned in restaurants. I don’t like smelling the smoke where food is served. "Fair-trade" coffee has had an appeal on the coffee industry - could something like that be pursued in the tobacco industry? Maybe make more of an appeal for local action to take place - everyone on my street smokes, and I can smoke in almost every bar here in town. We had a tobacco event not too long ago, but I was unable to attend. I did send a few non-smokers, and they loved it! The point being, it seems like we've established cigar smoking as a kind of "higher class" of tobacco consumer. Maybe we need to use that to our advantage in appealing to others. That's all I'm saying.

I just find it a hard concept to swallow – on one hand; I’m paying a higher tax for my tobacco now, with SCHIP, stating my allegiance to the tobacco industry. Then, I can pay membership dues to CRA, further cementing my beliefs in my rights as a cigar smoker. But when was the last time you paid tax on an out-of-state online purchase? There is no doubt that its taxes like these that target the local B&M tobacconist, while turning a blind eye to online retailers. As stated by ironpeddler in CP, it’s not worth it to the government to eliminate tobacco altogether – not only is the lobby strong, but people love their tobacco! They are simply getting as much from us as they can.

In closing, they are appealing their case to the wrong demographic. Seeking to extend tobacco rights amongst only smokers will only get you half of the members you need.

[LawDog2006]

Can't someone just illustrate everything that was said in the OP with a PICTURE!!!

I can't read

[NullSmurf]

To keep in line with the long-winded them of the post.....

The CRA sounds like a union to me. I have never been a member of a union where I felt they were ever looking out ...

<snip>

Ok by me.

[Cigars4Me]

To keep in line with the long-winded them of the post.....



In closing, they are appealing their case to the wrong demographic. Seeking to extend tobacco rights amongst only smokers will only get you half of the members you need.

I did not want to quote the entire post again as it is there to read the first time. I have studied the CRA and they have indeed missed the real point of what is needed and I agree with your point of view. While something like the CRA needs to exist they have failed by not thinking outside the box in furthering the rights of cigar smokers by excluding those people they need to convert or at least attempt to get information out to.

[MarineOne]

Does a tree that falls in the forest make a sound when there is no one there to hear it?

While a united voice is whats needed, they need to model themselves more like the NRA and use that "united voice" to go after these insane tax laws and bans. After reading this, the CRA has a good idea but they fail on taking the next step, which is going after those that want the bans and taxes and swear to God that smoking is evil.

Just like converting someone who isn't Pro-2A and taking them to the range, the CRA needs to target those against tobacco by introducing them to good times with good friends smoking good cigars.



-K