International commerce flowing across the border between the United States and Mexico is a shared responsibility between our two nations and an important area of focus for our collective long-term prosperity. As such, news of President Joe Biden’s plans to finalize a ban on menthol cigarettes is a source of great concern.

Powerful Mexican cartels, sophisticated multibillion-dollar criminal enterprises, are already trafficking illicit tobacco to fund their violent operations. The current regulated market for menthol cigarettes is $30 billion. A nationwide prohibition on menthols will create a tremendous profit incentive for these cartels to become more aggressive in their activity.

As the General Director of the National Citizen Observatory of Security, Justice and Legality A.C. (ONC), and a National Security Council of Mexico member, I know what the cartels are capable of. These high-tech, organized crime networks continue to innovate and diversify beyond drugs and weapons. They evolve into new products and industries where they can capitalize on growing demand while also minimizing risk.

Over the past few years, the illicit tobacco market has allowed these criminal networks to generate massive revenue – rivaling narcotics – with a fraction of the risk. The sale of illegal cigarettes is already a multibillion-dollar market in the U.S. Criminal networks profit from the price and tax disparities between states. Increasing the transborder traffic of contraband cigarettes from Mexico into the U.S. should give policymakers pause.

The cartels know better than most that tobacco restrictions like bans or taxes won’t reduce consumer demand for an addictive product. So, when states like California ban menthol cigarettes and legitimate retailers are prohibited from selling products to meet consumer demand, the opportunistic cartels quickly become the suppliers of choice.

Mexico’s most powerful and violent drug cartel is Cártel de Jalisco Nueva Generación (CJNG). According to our estimates, CJNG’s assets are in excess of $20 billion, with a presence in at least 27 of the 32 Mexican states. The CJNG, which has been sanctioned by the United States for its role in drug trafficking, is a glaring example of a modern cartel diversifying and smuggling tobacco along the same routes that it traffics narcotics like fentanyl, weapons, and sadly, even humans.

Recent investigations have linked the CJNG to Tobacco International Holdings SA, a Switzerland-registered corporation. This linkage has enabled the cartel to monopolize the Mexican cigarette market and evade sanctions as it ships tobacco into the U.S.

The House Committee on Homeland Security chairman emphasized the threat of cartel tobacco trafficking in a recent letter to the secretary of Homeland Security.

My fear, and that of many colleagues in government and international security, is that a nationwide menthol cigarette in the U.S. will play right into the hands of the CJNG and other violent Mexican cartels. A ban would give the cartels virtual control of another lucrative commodity across America’s southern border. This will create an unprecedented windfall for the CJNG and their rival cartels. The resulting profits fund violent crime throughout Mexico, perpetuating a lawless culture.

With the next presidential election in the United States on the horizon, now is the time for an important discussion about smart policy. The president of the United States must understand that overzealous domestic policies have foreign implications, and bans on popular consumer products like menthol cigarettes can create adverse outcomes in both Mexico and the U.S.

I urge the Biden administration, members of the United States Congress, and candidates for president to work with Mexican authorities to understand what policies, such as a menthol cigarette ban, would impact both our countries. Instead of empowering Mexican cartels, we should be doing everything in our power to work collaboratively to stop the CJNG and other cartels from growing in power and influence.

Francisco Rivas is the General Director of the National Citizen Observatory of Security, Justice and Legality A.C. (ONC) and member of the National Security Council of Mexico/InsideSources

With wars raging in the Middle East and Ukraine — not to mention the recent conflict in the Republican caucus of the U.S. House of Representatives — it has rarely been more important that American voters have the knowledge they need to make wise choices in upcoming federal elections. Unfortunately, after decades of civics being marginalized in public schools, the data show that such knowledge is sorely lacking.

Massachusetts is one of the best-educated states in the country, the only one in which more than half the workforce holds a bachelor’s degree or better. Yet when Pioneer Institute commissioned and Emerson College Polling conducted a survey that asked state residents some of the questions immigrants must answer correctly to gain U.S. citizenship, the responses earned those voters a cumulative grade of 63, or a “D.”

State residents got a failing grade on two basic questions about the U.S. Senate. Only 52% knew the Senate has 100 members, while just 55% knew that a senator’s term is six years.

The questions most often answered correctly were one in which respondents were given a list of places and asked which is a U.S. territory, and one about the month in which federal elections are held. Eighty-five percent identified Puerto Rico as a territory and 76% knew federal elections are held in November. This means the best grades Massachusetts residents could muster are a “B” and a “C.”

There wasn’t a lot of difference in how well respondents did based on party affiliation, but registered voters scored higher than those who aren’t registered. Unaffiliated voters scored best, getting 69% correct. They were followed by Democrats and Republicans, each at 62%. Those who aren’t registered to vote earned a failing grade, getting the correct answer just 46% of the time.

It’s not surprising that those with more education did better, but perhaps the most troubling parts of the poll are the breakdowns based on respondents’ age and how many civics classes they have taken. Those over 65 did best in the poll, getting 75% of the questions right. They were followed by those ages 55-64 (68%) and ages 45-54 (65%). The three youngest age ranges did the poorest — ages 18-24 (58%), ages 35-44 (55%), and ages 25-34 (52%).

Performance was correlated with the number of civics classes taken. Respondents who took multiple civics classes in middle or high school got an average 69% of the questions right, while those who took one class averaged 65%, and those who didn’t take any averaged 58%.

The poor performance of younger people on the exam and the correlation between performance and the number of civics courses taken highlight the near-disappearance of civics from Massachusetts public school curricula in recent decades. As public education has increasingly come to be thought of as little more than workforce development, teaching civics has become less and less of a priority.

America’s Founding Fathers weren’t perfect, but they possessed wisdom that was far ahead of their times. They saw the primary role of public education at the state and local levels as preparing young people to be active participants in our democracy. At a time when our nation faces staggering challenges and much of the public lacks even the most rudimentary civic knowledge needed to choose between different approaches to confronting those challenges, we may be about to learn — the hard way — just how right the founders were.

Charles Chieppo is a senior fellow and Jamie Gass is the director the Center for School Reform at Pioneer Institute, a Boston-based think tank.

If you think offering migrants luxury hotel rooms, free meals, laundry service, transportation, health care and immigration lawyers is excessive, just wait until they can vote. Democrats are pushing to allow noncitizens to vote in local elections in New York City, Boston and other municipalities.

The number of migrants pouring across the southern border hit a record high, according to data released last week. Illegal immigrant crossings soared 21% over the previous month. On a yearly basis, the figure hit 2.48 million.

Democrats may feign shock and distress. Don’t be fooled. Dems see these newcomers as their guarantee of a permanent voting majority in local elections. Not years from now, after the newcomers become citizens. Right now.

New York Mayor Eric Adams’ rhetoric is typical. He warns that the overwhelming number of migrants arriving — currently 16,000 to 17,000 a month — “will destroy New York City,” but he’s also leading the legal effort to turn migrants into voters.

Adams and other New York Democrats pushed President Joe Biden to expedite work authorizations for them. They said it’s about making migrants self-sufficient. Maybe, but Dems have another powerful motive.

If you read the fine print of New York City’s “Our City, Our Vote” law, enacted in December 2021, it says that anyone with a work authorization who has been in the city for a mere 30 days can vote, even if they entered the country illegally.

The law is tied up in court.

A group of Republicans led by Staten Island Borough President Vito Fossella sued, arguing the state constitution grants the right to vote to “every citizen.” A Staten Island judge bought that argument and struck down the law, but Adams’ law department is appealing that ruling in a higher court, arguing that the state constitution does not specifically prohibit noncitizens from voting.

Adams has a shot at winning. Vermont’s top court ruled in favor of allowing noncitizens to vote in municipal elections, even though the Vermont constitution restricts voting in state elections to U.S. citizens.

California and Maryland also already permit municipalities to enfranchise noncitizens.

The Boston City Council is debating allowing newcomers to vote, including migrants who recently came across the border illegally and have temporary protected status.

In Washington, D.C., Democrats rammed through a local law in November 2022 allowing noncitizens, even foreign embassy employees, to vote, as long as they’ve resided in the city for 30 days.

In Connecticut, Democrats want to amend the state’s constitution to allow noncitizens to vote in state and local elections.

Voting is a privilege reserved for citizens. Once immigrants follow the law, become naturalized and swear loyalty to this nation and its Constitution, they should be entitled to vote. Not before.

Betsy McCaughey is a former lieutenant governor of New York and chairman of the Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths.