Senate finally says ‘no’ to Big Tobacco

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000
Senate finally says ‘no’ to Big Tobacco
13
Fri, 06-12-2009 - 11:31am

The industry's influence staved off major regulations for nearly a half century. Thursday's vote changes that.

http://features.csmonitor.com/politics/2009/06/11/senate-finally-says-no-to-big-tobacco/

The Senate today passed legislation Thursday that gives the Food and Drug Administration broad powers to regulate tobacco products, in many respects ending the era of Big Tobacco’s clout on Capitol Hill.

Republicans, many from tobacco states, put up some resistance – forcing the Senate into a second week of debate on the bill and three procedural votes to ensure its final passage.

But the bill passed 79 to 17, with one Democrat joining 16 Republicans in opposition. The Senate now needs to reconcile its bill with the House’s version, which passed 298 to 112 on April 2. President Obama says he will sign the compromise bill into law.

It is a remarkable turnaround from even a decade ago.

Lawmakers say that one of the first things many new members learned when they came to Washington was to avoid crossing tobacco companies.

Tobacco lobbyists have contributed more than $62.1 million to congressional campaigns since 1990, 74 percent to Republicans, according to the Center for Responsive Politics in Washington.

“Congress moves slowly, the tobacco industry is powerful, and individual senators have tremendous power to slow and delay and prevent things from happening,” says Paul Billings, vice president of national policy and advocacy for the National Lung Association in Washington.

But Sen. Edward Kennedy (D) of Massachusetts, the lead sponsor of the bill, said in a statement that the “decades of irresponsible delay are finally over.”

“The United States Senate has finally said ‘no’ to Big Tobacco,” he added.

The shift began in 1987, 23 years after the Surgeon General released a study linking smoking to severe health problems. In that year, Congress banned smoking on airline flights within the US that lasted two hours or less.

“So many members of the House flew in airplanes and couldn’t stand the fiction of ‘smoking areas,’” said Sen. Richard Durbin (D) of Illinois, a longtime leader in antismoking legislation.

The July 13 House vote was 198 to 193.

“That was the first domino to fall,” Representative Durbin added. “People started to say secondary smoke is dangerous on airplanes – it could be dangerous in other places.”

Evidence was building. In 1982, Surgeon General C. Everett Koop had called smoking “the chief single, avoidable cause of death in our society and the most important public health issue of our time.”

Cigarette smoking now accounts for 1 in 5 deaths every year in the US – more than HIV AIDS, alcohol use, illegal drug use, traffic accidents, suicides, and murders combined, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Yet even in recent times, the industry had appeared unrepentant. Seven tobacco executives, testifying before a House panel in 1994, famously declared under oath that nicotine was not addictive.

In 2004, industry giant Altria Group, Inc., formerly Philip Morris, split with the other tobacco companies and endorsed FDA regulation of the tobacco industry. But industry leaders rallied to oppose a 2006 Department of Justice lawsuit charging tobacco companies with racketeering for making false claims about the dangers of smoking, including denying that it is marketed to children.

This May 22, the US court of appeals affirmed a lower court ruling finding the companies guilty.

Commenting on the decades it took Congress to act, Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D) of New Jersey, who drafted the Senate version of the 1987 airline smoking ban, said: “The Senate has the speed of a centipede. Sometimes it takes a long time for all parts of the body to get moving, but we’re here.”

Photobucket      The WeatherPixie 

 


Photobucket&nbs

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000
Fri, 06-12-2009 - 11:37am

New tobacco rules: What will they do?

Under legislation passed by the Senate Thursday, the FDA is likely to require warnings on the packs that take up much more space.

http://features.csmonitor.com/politics/2009/06/11/new-tobacco-rules-what-will-they-do/

One way the American public will notice any new regulation of tobacco by the Food and Drug Administration is that within a year, cigarettes called “light,” “mild,” or “low” are likely to be off the shelf.

This is assuming that President Obama, who has talked about his own efforts to quit smoking, signs the historic legislation on tobacco regulation that passed the Senate on Thursday.

Even if the legislation becomes law, it will still take some time for other important elements of the bill to affect current and future cigarette smokers.

Within two years, according to the legislation, the FDA has to issue new rules on what warnings will go on cigarette packs. The industry would have fifteen months to implement the rules. This means those designer-looking cigarette packs such as Capri are likely to be history. And the health warnings – now printed on the thin side of the box – will probably take over the top half of the cigarette pack on both sides. The warnings are likely to be accompanied by a graphic image, such as a damaged lung.

But will making cigarettes less attractive encourage people to quit smoking?

Public-health advocates say it will help. “Every country that has adopted strong physical warnings has made a significant impact on attitudes, public knowledge about the danger of smoking, and the intention to quit,” says Matthew Myers, president of Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, a Washington advocacy group.

Countries that already have strong graphic warnings include Singapore, Australia, and Canada. Large warnings can be found in New Zealand, Belgium, and Switzerland, among others. Other countries, such as Brazil, ban the use of ���light” and “low tar” types of labels on cigarettes.

The new rules go to great lengths to try to prevent the tobacco companies from circumventing the intent. Here’s what happened before, according to Mr. Myers: When the graphic labels were on the bottom of the packs, the tobacco companies designed the display cases in stores to hide them. When the warnings were just on the front of the pack, the companies displayed the back in the cases.

“The reason these regulations have to be strong is we are assuming we are dealing with an industry that will do whatever it can to sell products,” Myers says.

The changes will have little impact on people who already smoke, says Barbara Kahn, an independent packaging expert who is dean of the University of Miami School of Business. “It will have a larger effect on people who have not smoked before,” she says.

The legislation’s ban on marketing that makes smoking appear sexy may also have a positive effect, especially on young people, says Ms. Kahn. “Not allowing ads to make it look like a really good thing is a really good idea,” she says.

Smokers who were standing outside a New York office building said they doubted a change in packaging would make them quit. “I’m addicted,” explains Daniel, who did not want to give his last name. “Maybe if there was some graphic picture like a diseased lung, because when I see those ads on TV about smokers and diseases, I hate them,” he says.

After more discussion, he said the only thing that might make him quit is a higher tax.

Another smoker, who did not want to give even his first name, said he intended to quit in the future. But he doesn’t need a health warning, he says. “It’s already on the pack,” he said, tapping the inside of his blazer pocket.

The expected changes come at a time when the adult smoking rate in the US is at 19.7 percent – the lowest rate since the government started measuring it in the mid-1960s. Teen smoking is now at 20 percent. Part of the legislation is aimed at cutting down on teenage smoking by eliminating candy-flavored and food-flavored cigarettes in three months.

Despite the passage of the legislation in the Senate, the battle is not over, Myers says. “We may have beaten them in Congress, but the tobacco companies are not going away,” he says.

Opinion: Make tobacco illegal
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/letters/print/chi-0612vplettersbriefs0jun12,0,5946855.story

Photobucket

 


Photobucket&nbs

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-20-2009
Fri, 06-12-2009 - 4:07pm

I am not a smoker, never have been, and pretty much hate it.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000
Sat, 06-13-2009 - 8:08am

"I have a huge problem with the government now being responsible for a very deadly product."


Cigarette manufacturers are responsible for complying to the FDA's rules. They have a

 


Photobucket&nbs

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2009
Sat, 06-13-2009 - 8:49am

Apparently, anything which isn't laissez-faire capitalism or a preferentially treated monopoly is "Marxism".

Bush left a steaming great pile of you-know-what through his incompetence and reluctance to "govern". I do not always feel that the Obama administration is cleaning up the muck in ways which minimize the size, stench, or nasty appearance. But they are at least trying.

Republicans/conservatives have not exactly been chomping at the bit to come up with viable alternatives! From what I can see, they've been nay-sayers, pooh-poohers and prophets of doom. Period.

Too bad. Unless they get their act together and stop this yammering about "limited government", they will lack any semblance of credibility. After all, who in their right mind would elect a crew to govern which doesn't believe in governing?!

Jabberwocka

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000
Sat, 06-13-2009 - 9:05am

"Republicans/conservatives have not exactly been chomping at the bit to come up with viable alternatives! From what I can see, they've been nay-sayers, pooh-poohers and prophets of doom. Period."


Too busy criticising to have any positive input. They were given a chance to participate but instead chose to be petulant faultfinders.


"...who in their right mind would elect a crew to govern which doesn't believe in governing?!"


Really!

Photobucket

 


Photobucket&nbs

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-23-2003
Sat, 06-13-2009 - 12:12pm

I quit smoking over 10 yrs ago & it wasn't easy.


iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2009
Sat, 06-13-2009 - 1:14pm

FDA is already responsible for monitoring "deadly products". Food contamination outbreaks, potent drugs--FDA regulates/oversees 'em. Speaking of addictive substances, how about Oxycontin? The issue of legal liability which concerns you in regards to tobacco would presumably have reared its head in regards to other products if likely to do so. As far as the ACLU, they haven't been known for getting involved in consumer protection/addiction. Free speech, reproductive choice, separation of church/state, and equal opportunity for all have been their predominant focus.

Yes, FDA IS overburdened. Blame BushCo for cutting their budget and taking a hands off approach to their mission; except when it suited to block access to certain forms of contraception or when corporate interests were served.

My brother works for the FDA. According to him, now that a Secretary of Health has been appointed, they can go forward with plans to expand divisions which had been decimated or nonexistent previously. FDA's job in this world of Big Pharma, Big Tobacco, and centralized food processing/distribution is more important and vital than ever. That said, I also believe that FDA must be watched so that it doesn't turn into an adjunct or enabler of the industries it's meant to monitor .

Jabberwocka

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000
Sat, 06-13-2009 - 7:00pm

"....now that a Secretary of Health has been appointed, they can go forward with plans to expand divisions which had been decimated or nonexistent previously."


That's good to hear.

 


Photobucket&nbs

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-20-2009
Mon, 06-15-2009 - 12:46pm

<>


As a pharmacist, I can assure you that Oxycontin and tobacco are not even in the same league.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-09-2001
Mon, 06-15-2009 - 1:07pm
"The government doesn't really want to do away with tobacco at all. In fact, the government LOVES the fact that people smoke because they get a whole lot of tax revenue off of smokers. I don't know the exact figures...but millions? billions?



If the government was truly concerned about the health of Americans....we would put fast food and junk food industries out of business. Americans are fat and lazy. They eat horribly. They don't exercise. They smoke and drink.
If the government was truly concerned about high health care costs, they would not allow big Pharma to advertise prescription drugs. Let the doctor decide what drugs a patient needs, not the patient. Patients see and advertisement for a drug and they say, "I need that....I have that problem....etc"



We are creating a hypochondriac society. Everyone is sick and everyone is a victim."




ITA! Has anyone read this book, Our Daily Meds by Melody Petersen? http://www.ourdailymedsthebook.com/ Worth the education it provides. Too many drugs being prescribed, IMO,and causing WWIII in our bodies. As a pharmacist, what is your opinion of this book?



As for tobacco, as far as I'm concerned it has no redeeming value whatsoever. It harms the user and harms those who are exposed to the smoke. It should be as illegal as cocaine, heroin or whatever, being as it kills, cripples and causes major health problems. I'm not crazy about more & more gov't control, but I am glad the big lobbying power of tobacco companies has been broken. Their lies and tyranny and work to addict people is despicable, with all the knowledge we have now about the harm done using this product.


Blessings,

Gypsy





Photobucket



"What is life? It is the flash of a firefly in the night.

It is the breath of a buffalo in the wintertime.

It is the little shadow which runs across the grass

and loses itself in the sunset.



- Crowfoot, Blackfoot warrior and orator



Photobucket Photobucket



Dog fighting is cruelty, which is a human activity and a human illness.

It's not the dog's fault.

All dogs need to be evaluated as individuals."

--Tim Racer, one of BAD RAP's founders



http://www.badrap.org/rescue/



Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket Photobucket



Mika Dog




"All things share the same breath;

the beast, the tree, the man.

The Air shares its spirit with

all the life it supports."

--Chief Seattle



"If there are no dogs in Heaven,

then when I die I want to go where they went."

~Will Rogers



"The greatness of a nation and its moral progress

can be judged by the way its animals are treated."

~~Mahatma Gandhi











Blessings,

Gypsy

)O(



Pages