As Congress aims to limit Big Tobacco, merits of a bill are debated mp2

It’s called the “Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act,” and if it becomes law, it would regulate tobacco merchandising and sales by convenience-store operators and other retailers.

The bill was introduced Feb. 15 by a bipartisan group of lawmakers. It would give the Food and Drug Administration the same authority over cigarettes and other tobacco products that it already has over many other consumer products.

"Congress cannot in good conscience allow the federal agency most responsible for protecting the public health to remain powerless to deal with the enormous risks of tobacco," Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., said in introducing the bill with Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, and Reps. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., and Tom Davis, R-Va.

If it becomes law, the legislation would force cigarette makers to disclose contents and let the FDA regulate toxin and nicotine limits. Tobacco products that companies want to advertise as "safer" would have to get FDA approval and the FDA could restrict marketing, particularly advertising aimed at children, reported The Lexington Herald-Leader.

The bill would also:

  • Stop illegal sales of tobacco products to children;
  • Ban candy- and fruit-flavored cigarettes;
  • Prohibit the use of terms such as "light," "mild" and "low-tar," and allow only scientifically proven health claims;
  • Require bigger and more informative warning labels
But whether the bill would live up to its name is being questioned in some quarters. It has the enthusiastic backing of Philip Morris, according to at least one observer, New York Post columnist Jacob Sullum, who wrote that regulation by the FDA would bolster Philip Morris’ position as the leading cigarette manufacturer.

And why would it be beneficial to Philip Morris?

Because, among other things, tobacco ads in publications read by minors would be limited to black text on a white background, as would tobacco signs in stores, according to Sullum. “By impeding brand competition, advertising restrictions help keep market shares the way they are, which is fine – if you're Philip Morris,” Sullum wrote in a Feb. 24 column.

As the biggest cigarette maker, Sullum wrote, “Philip Morris is also best positioned to comply with the government's reporting requirements, manufacturing standards and approval process for new products. Those demands will weigh more heavily on smaller companies, especially upstart competitors.”

UST Inc., Greenwich, Conn., on Feb. 16 released a statement in response to the bill’s introduction that said, in part:

“Initial reports indicate that the bill, as introduced, remains essentially unchanged from similar legislation proposed in 2004.

‘While we do not support this bill as introduced, we look forward to participating in an open and cooperative dialogue as the legislative process progresses that would ultimately result in legislation that we can support,’ said Murray S. Kessler, president and chief executive officer.

As previously disclosed, the Company is not opposed to FDA regulation that addresses public health concerns and takes into account the distinct differences between smokeless tobacco and cigarettes while permitting the Company to continue to communicate responsibly with tobacco-interested adults and responsibly manufacture, market and sell high-quality, 100% American-made smokeless tobacco products to adult consumers.

The Company is the only smokeless tobacco manufacturer to sign the Smokeless Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement. Under the STMSA, the Company voluntarily adopted an array of advertising and promotional restrictions and agreed to pay $100 million towards programs to reduce youth access to tobacco products and combat youth substance abuse.”

On Feb. 27, the American Medical Association said it supported the proposed legislation.