Read the newest articles about FDA Regulation Lawmakers Bump Tobacco From FDA Cover. House and Senate negotiators defeated an effort Tuesday to have the Food and Drug Administration regulate tobacco products. 10/5/04 "An aide to Kennedy said the Senate would finish up the tax bill, probably on Sunday afternoon. He said the Senate would then approve a separate bill on the FDA, and urge the House to take it up when it returns to wrap up the year's business in a "lame duck" session after the election." Please write and thank them for voting Nay on the Kennedy Amendment Bunning, Jim R KY Gregg, Judd R NH Kyl, Jon R AZ Lott, Trent R MS McConnell, Mitch R KY Nickles, Don R OK Santorum, Rick R PA Thomas, Craig R WY Barton, Joe R TX Boehner, John R OH Burr, Richard R NC Crane, Philip R IL DeLay, Tom R TX Goodlatte, Bob R VA McCrery, Jim R LA Thomas, William R CA   U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 108th Congress - 2nd Session as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate.  FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 509. The President today signed into law: H.R. 4520, the "American Jobs Creation Act of 2004." Thanks to the efforts of concerned smokers like you, the Congress has reached an agreement on the Tobacco Quota Buyout bill. The bill adopted by both the House and Senate does not include Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulation of tobacco products. The compromise bill, which is fair to farmers, businesses and smokers, was signed into law by President Bush on Friday, October 22. This is a great victory for smokers everywhere. The FDA will NOT have sweeping power over the sale, distribution, advertising and promotion of tobacco products. The FDA will NOT have the authority to tinker with tobacco products in any way, allowing you to continue to enjoy your favorite cigarettes. Despite this defeat of FDA regulation, the issue is far from over. Even before the President signed the bill into law, anti-smokers were again lobbying Congress to adopt legislation that gives the FDA control over tobacco products. That's why it's important smokers like you continue to monitor this issue closely and keep an eye out for any MySmokersRights updates in the future. Again, congratulations and thank you for your attention to this important issue.   No FDA: House OKs tobacco-quota buyout. About 38 percent of the $10.1 billion payout expected to benefit quota holders and growers in North Carolina. Philip Morris And FDA Lose, Consumers Win! By Norman E. Kjono. What is particularly onerous about the Senate bill is that it would have provided a nicotine monopoly for Philip Morris and pharmaceutical nicotine. Addictive Allotments. By Doug Bandow. But congressmen haven't given up passing out financial goodies for political gain. Now they just hope to stick cigarette companies and smokers with the bill. If there's anything at which legislators excel, it is giving away other people's money.   Senate gives the FDA authority to regulate tobacco products. Though hailed as a breakthrough by public health groups, the measure faces an uncertain future because it was approved as part of a massive corporate tax bill that must still be reconciled with the House of Representative’s version. Those talks are expected to be long and complex.   Send a free letter to Congress asking them to vote no on the Kennedy/Dewine FDA regulation bill.   Senate Roll Call for FDA Tobacco.See how the Senate voted, send a note to your politicians!   Critical Analysis of S2461: FDA Tobacco Legislation. Congress may snuff out tobacco subsidy.   Two Smokeless Tobacco Companies Join to Oppose FDA Measure; Letter to Congress says DeWine-Kennedy Bill Impedes Public Right to Know. A buyout, but no FDA regulation? Senior tax writer in House offers tobacco compromise that scraps Senate 'marriage.' Congress Fiddles While Tobacco Bill Burns. By Chuck Muth. Members of Congress will soon return to their districts, hit the campaign trail, kiss some babies and tell more whoppers than Joe Isuzu and Al Gore. And it'll be interesting to see what kind of tangled web they weave over this mess of a tobacco buy-out bill.   Free Speech Gets Smoked By Proposed Tobacco Law.Fortunately, the anti-tobacco campaigners don't trump the First Amendment.   Voters in North Carolina, Other Tobacco States Support FDA Tobacco Regulation But Tobacco Buyout is Far Less Popular, Poll Finds.   Empty Tobacco Fields. Buyout plan tempts farmers struggling to keep going.   Senate Passes Historic Tobacco Bill.Though hailed as a breakthrough by public health groups, the measure faces an uncertain future because it was approved as part of a massive corporate tax bill that must still be reconciled with the House of Representative’s version. Those talks are expected to be long and complex. (Readers comments at bottom of page.)   Senate OKs $12B Tobacco Buyout, Regulation. The measure empowering the Food and Drug Administration to oversee the sale, marketing and manufacturing of cigarettes was linked on the Senate floor Thursday to a $12 billion buyout of tobacco farmers. An unlikely coalition of anti-smoking advocates and tobacco-state senators pushed to secure the 78-15 vote to add the twin measures to a massive corporate tax bill that the Senate then passed on a voice vote and sent to a House-Senate conference committee.   Senate Approves Tobacco Buyout and Fed Regs. Unlike the $9.6 billion House version, the Senate's buyout is funded by a tax on manufacturers of tobacco products.   Should the FDA regulate cigarettes? RJR opposed the tobacco regulations proposed by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 1996 and the McCain bill in 1998 because they unduly restricted or eliminated our ability to compete for adult smokers' business. Cigarettes are clearly not foods, drugs or medical-delivery devices, the product categories over which FDA currently has regulatory authority. The food and drug laws governing the FDA make it very clear that unless food, drugs and medical devices are safe, they cannot be sold – a standard that cigarettes cannot meet. If cigarettes are to be further regulated by the federal government, they should be regulated as cigarettes – not forced into a regulatory category they do not fit. “Altria Group and our domestic tobacco company, Philip Morris USA, enthusiastically endorse passage of a final FSC/ETI bill that contains the DeWine/Kennedy FDA proposal in its entirety, and we will strongly oppose any and all amendments to this language during the upcoming House/Senate Conference Committee” said Steven C. Parrish, Senior Vice President, Corporate Affairs, Altria Group. “We look forward to working with all stakeholders in support of this legislation.” Minority Cigarette Marketing Scrutinized. The latest cigarette-marketing efforts have caught the attention of health officials and anti-tobacco activists, who are accusing tobacco companies of using hip-hop images and attractive flavors to seduce minority youth into smoking. Limiting tobacco ads. Farmers aren't the only ones who will be paying close attention when the debate over a tobacco buyout starts up again in Congress. National media, marketing and advertising groups are nervously watching to see what happens to a proposal that gives the Food and Drug Administration the authority to regulate tobacco advertising. Remove subsidies. The letter writer failed to mention how this would help children, other than to say the targeting of minors would be more restricted. As far as I know, the FDA has nothing to do with advertising. Matter of fact, by the FDA's own bylaws, tobacco would have to be outlawed under the agency's oversight. Philip Morris Ad Incites Tobacco Market Struggle. Small Manufacturer Questions Motive Behind Advertisement Supporting FDA Regulation Of The Tobacco Industry. Let FDA do its primary job. Rather than tobacco, the FDA needs to focus on fixing problems raging with prescription drugs. FDA Cigarette Regs Unfair to Convenience Stores. Congress obviously has no intention of outlawing tobacco. It's too afraid of the political fallout and too fond of the federal and state taxes paid by smokers. But pending legislation in Congress would treat anyone who sells tobacco like a criminal, including the many independent retailers who probably run your local convenience store. New tobacco buyout proposed Please click on Your State Info and contact your politicians today! This would be connected to legislation giving the Food and Drug Administration power to regulate the sale and marketing of cigarettes and tobacco products. A FEW REASONS WHY SMOKERS SHOULD OPPOSE THE FDA TOBACCO BILL 1.  Basically Will Allow Power to Ban Existing Conventional Tobacco Products.      ·   FDA may adopt tobacco product standards at any level, as long as they are “appropriate for protection of the public health.”      ·   Standards can regulate any aspect of “the construction, components, ingredients, additives, constituents, including smoke constituents, and properties of the tobacco product . . . .”      ·   FDA can prohibit the use of any ingredients, or mandate reductions in smoke constituents that would make the products unacceptable to all or nearly all adult smokers. 2.  Creates New Bureaucracy.      ·   In 2000 FDA bill, FY00 budget request for FDA tobacco regulation was $34 million.             ·   This bill includes a tax increase of $300 million in 2006, adjusted for inflation thereafter.      ·   The entire Bush Admin. FY04 request for medical devices was $185 million. 3.  Limits the Ability to Communicate with Adult Consumers.      ·   The 1998 Master Settlement Agreement with state Attorneys General already eliminated the most youth-sensitive forms of marketing and advertising: it bans all outdoor and transit advertising (including billboards), limits the size of retail advertising, bans advertising in youth-oriented publications, limits corporate sponsorship, bans brand-name merchandise, and bans youth access to free samples.      ·   Additional restrictions potentially authorized by the bill, such as tombstone advertising and a ban on self-service displays, will, if constitutional, significantly impact adult consumers.      ·   The broad, unlimited authority in this bill to restrict advertising by any means and to any extent “appropriate for the protection of the “public health” will fundamentally limit communication to adult consumers. 4.  Authority No Longer Tied to Reducing Youth Usage, but, Rather, to Adults.      ·  FDA bills originally required that restrictions on sale, distribution, advertising or promotion of    tobacco products be “appropriate for prevention of, or decrease in, the use of tobacco products by children”.      ·   Under this bill, the authority to impose new restrictions requires only that the restrictions be “appropriate for protection of the public health.”      ·   Perhaps one reason for the switch is that HHS statistics show that youth smoking has fallen to a 27-year low. Senate Tobacco Quota Buyout/FDA Legislation Would Hurt Growers, Industry WINSTON-SALEM, N.C. – July 15, 2004 – R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. today reiterated its vigorous opposition to the Kennedy/McConnell tobacco quota buyout/FDA amendment debated by the U.S. Senate. Tommy Payne, executive vice president of external relations, said, “The Kennedy/McConnell amendment is ill-conceived, imperils the viability of a tobacco quota buyout and creates an overwhelming competitive advantage for Philip Morris that is unprecedented in the modern history of Congressional action. “This amendment fails to make U.S. tobacco farmers more competitive and would be financially disastrous for tobacco manufacturers, their employees, their business partners and adult smokers, many of whom are lower- and middle-income wage earners,” Payne added. “If Congress is serious about giving tobacco growers financial relief, it will adopt the House version of the tobacco quota buyout bill,” Payne said. Posted on Thu, Jul. 15, 2004 Senate Prepares to Vote on Tobacco Buyout MARY DALRYMPLE Associated Press WASHINGTON - The Senate is ready to vote on a compromise buyout of tobacco farmers that would be financed by cigarette makers. The buyout would pay farmers $13 billion over six years to let go of government-guaranteed high prices to grow tobacco. It would be connected to legislation giving the Food and Drug Administration power to regulate the sale and marketing of cigarettes and tobacco products. The agreement reached Wednesday to combine the buyout with new FDA powers broke weeks of deadlock between Republican and Democratic leaders over how to proceed with negotiations on a corporate tax bill. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., said senators would vote Thursday on whether to approve the tobacco buyout and regulations. "I just want to say, particularly on behalf of those of us who represent states in which tobacco farmers are slowly having their assets stripped from them, that this agreement gives the buyout a chance," said Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. "It doesn't guarantee an outcome." The House had attached a $10 billion federal tobacco buyout to its version of the corporate tax bill to secure votes from lawmakers in tobacco-growing regions. The House then voted this week to prohibit the taxpayer-financed buyout it had earlier approved. Key senators said they could not allow a tobacco buyout to go forward without also giving the FDA authority to regulate the marketing and production of tobacco products. Senators struck the agreement to consider attaching the tobacco issues to the tax bill the same day that the House's top tax writer said Senate delays could doom urgently needed tax legislation for the year. Ways and Means Committee Chairman Bill Thomas, R-Calif., said the opportunity to work on the bill this summer, before lawmakers get distracted by the fall election, had almost disappeared. The tax bill seeks to eliminate a tax break for U.S. exporters that international trade courts have declared an illegal export subsidy. Some goods exported to Europe face escalating tariffs until the offending tax break is dropped. The tariffs now stand at 9 percent and increase 1 percentage point each month. They would grow to 13 percent by the November election and 15 percent by January if the tax bill isn't passed. Thomas had blamed the delay on Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., who wanted assurances that some of the Democrats' priorities would be met before agreeing to send the tax bill into final negotiations. "They have to be able to dictate the outcome, or they're not going to participate, and that is the absolute antithesis of what a conference is supposed to be about," Thomas said. As part of Wednesday's agreement, Democrats secured promises from Republicans that they will not push through a final bill unacceptable to Democrats. The House and Senate passed bills this year that eliminate the tax break for exporters and replace it with new tax cuts for American manufacturers. Manufacturers eager for the new tax breaks have urged Congress to pass the bill quickly, as have some industries hit with punitive tariffs. The bills have also absorbed dozens of other items that include provisions on tax shelters, energy production incentives and the tobacco buyout. Rep. Charles Rangel of New York, the House's top Democratic tax writer, said Republicans didn't get serious about fixing their tax problem until sanctions were imposed. "For more than two years, they sat on their hands without bringing a bill to the House floor until last month," he said. The House bill is H.R. 4520. The Senate bill is S. 1637. ON THE NET Congress: http://thomas.loc.gov/ June 6, 2004 Plan ends price supports, rejects FDA regulation. House Republicans proposed a measure yesterday that would end federal price supports for tobacco and pay farmers $9.6 billion over five years to stop growing their crop. Congress - Reading the Tobacco Leaves 04-03-2004 National Journal Corine Hegland Back in 1758, Thomas Jefferson denounced tobacco, declaring that Virginia's biggest cash crop was so labor-intensive that it gave rise to "a culture productive of infinite wretchedness." Rising competition, he predicted, would soon oblige farmers in his beloved colony to abandon tobacco altogether, "and a happy obligation it will be." Jefferson was about two and a half centuries off in his prediction of tobacco's demise, and he thought the death blow would come from Georgia and lands west of the Mississippi, not from Brazil and India. But he was right about the eventual impact of competition: The nation's 90,000 tobacco farms are going broke, and they blame government controls on production that they say make it almost impossible for them to survive in the world marketplace. Under a system in place since 1938, the government dictates how much tobacco farmers can sell based on the number of "quotas," or acreage allotments, they own or lease. During the last five years, the demand for U.S. tobacco has declined, because fewer people are smoking and domestic cigarette manufacturers are relying more on lower-priced tobacco imported from abroad. So the government has reduced the amount of tobacco that quotaholders can sell. That means that tobacco farmers have to buy more quotas to sell the same amount of tobacco leaf, a cost they say makes it harder for them to compete. Legislation pending in Congress would phase out this quota system over several years and institute a more market-oriented approach. In the interim, tobacco farmers and other quotaholders would receive a series of fixed government payments, or a "buyout," totaling between $9.6 billion and $17 billion. As a result of such a buyout, about half the farmers would quit the trade altogether, according to some studies, while the rest would be able to better compete with foreign growers. Farmers in tobacco country -- which runs through Virginia, the Carolinas, Kentucky, Georgia, Tennessee, West Virginia, Florida, Alabama, Indiana, and Ohio -- have been clamoring for a federal buyout for years. And they say now, it's do or die. "A lot of the farmers have been telling the bankers, year after year, that we'll have a buyout this year," said Will Snell, a University of Kentucky economist. "They're very extended on credit right now. If we don't have a buyout, there are a lot of aging farmers who say that this is going to be their last crop, and it's going to force the hands of the policy makers to make some abrupt changes." To win support in Congress from lawmakers outside the tobacco states, some proponents support coupling a federal tobacco buyout bill with separate legislation giving the Food and Drug Administration the ability to regulate tobacco manufacturing and marketing. The idea dates back to recommendations made in 2001 by a commission of tobacco growers and health advocates appointed by President Clinton to study the farmers' crisis. The approach gained currency when tobacco giant Philip Morris, which sells about half the country's cigarettes, broke ranks with the other manufacturers to support it. Philip Morris even agreed to pay for part of the buyout, through a user fee levied on all of the manufacturers, as long as the buyout was tied to FDA regulation. The company believes that government regulation would provide greater stability in tobacco policy. A package deal -- instituting a federal buyout, an assessment on the manufacturers to pay for it, and FDA regulation of tobacco -- has traction in the Senate, where members from tobacco and nontobacco states alike say that the farmers' hopes depend on their alliance with health advocates. "Accepting an FDA bill is a bitter pill for this senator to swallow, [but] that simply is the reality which we confront today," Senate Majority Whip Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said in floor remarks last year. "Simply put, 165,000 of my constituents and 44,000 rural family farms in Kentucky are facing financial ruin due to the continuation of a program that we in Congress have the power to change." In the House, however, conservatives opposed to new regulations and new taxes are sympathetic to three smaller tobacco companies -- R.J. Reynolds, Brown & Williamson, and Lorillard -- that oppose FDA regulation of tobacco and the proposed fee on manufacturers to finance a buyout. "It appears to me that [the growers and the health advocates] took their ultimate wish lists, put them together, and said that we ought to go out and get this done," said Tommy Payne, executive vice president of external relations for R.J. Reynolds. "So it solves their problems, but only their problems." Payne noted that the industry is already shelling out more than $200 billion from the 1998 tobacco settlement with the states. The proposed "user fee," he said, would amount to "the single largest tax increase since 1992." R.J. Reynolds and the other smaller tobacco companies believe that FDA regulation would soon lead to marketing restrictions that could prevent them from challenging Philip Morris's dominance at convenience stores everywhere. "Could we still, at the end of the day, compete for the business of adult smokers?" Payne asked. "It would not be irrational to think that you could make a very plausible argument that restricting either marketing or advertising would be in the interest of public health." But Philip Morris contends that such concerns about stifled competition are overblown. "The law on commercial free speech is very well developed, so there is a limited scope in terms of what FDA could do," said John Scruggs, vice president for government affairs at the Altria Group, Philip Morris's parent company. "We believe that FDA's major focus will be on reducing the harm of products currently on the market by limiting harmful components and issuing new labeling requirements." Last year, the farmers, health advocates, and Philip Morris tried to get their package proposal through the Senate. But that attempt collapsed amid acrimonious negotiations in the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee over the FDA provisions. A spokeswoman for committee Chairman Judd Gregg, R-N.H., said that he's in no hurry to try again. "Last fall, the senator presented a good-faith offer, which the health groups then said wasn't enough, and there were some less than constructive comments made," the Gregg aide said. "We're not sure it's the right atmosphere to go along those same lines and get a positive result." She added that the committee is waiting to see what "the leadership is interested in signaling." Given the situation in the Senate, the farmers are looking to the House to take the lead. Thirty-five tobacco-state House members have introduced stand-alone legislation authorizing a federal tobacco buyout totaling $9.6 billion, paid for by using part of the current 39-cents-per-pack federal excise taxes on cigarettes. One of the sponsors, Rep. Richard Burr, R-N.C., said he would be willing to support federal regulation of tobacco if that's the only way to bail out his state's farmers. But he added, "The leadership in the House has repeatedly said that there would be no buyout on the House floor" if FDA provisions were included. Since neither chamber has yet indicated a willingness to blink over the FDA regulation issue, several staffers and lobbyists said that the House proponents are also looking at attaching a tobacco buyout to an unrelated bill and daring the Senate to discard it. Tobacco-state members tried to do that in last fall's omnibus spending bill but failed. FDA regulation "can't pass the House, and a buyout can't pass the Senate without it," one lobbyist said. "So if the House amends some piece of must-pass legislation with the buyout, will the Senate Democrats who want FDA [regulation] blow it up? It's a crapshoot." But Matthew Myers, president of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, said that tobacco-state House members are deluding themselves if they think they can persuade their chamber to pass a buyout -- which would divert almost $10 billion in cigarette taxes from the federal Treasury at a time of huge deficits -- without the help of health advocates. "If you take away the FDA [regulation], no one has much interest in this outside of a tobacco state," Myers said. Back in the tobacco states, the pressure is building for action, and lawmakers are feeling the heat as the November election approaches. In North Carolina, where Burr is running for the Senate against Democrat Erskine Bowles, bumper stickers warning "No Buyout, No Burr" have appeared. The Tarheel State produces about $720 million of tobacco a year, and farmers are eager for a buyout. "The only way it's not going to be an issue in the election is if it's solved," said Larry Wooten, president of the North Carolina Farm Bureau. "If it doesn't happen, obviously Burr can give a lot of reasons, but if I was Erskine Bowles, I'd say the Republicans couldn't get it done." House members from tobacco areas also expect the issue to surface in their re-election campaigns. "The political ramifications are pretty clear-cut," said an aide to a tobacco-state Republican lawmaker. "There are a lot of House seats that could be won or lost on this issue, a few Senate seats on which this could be a playing card, and it's a huge issue for farmers in the South in the presidential election." One recent effort to use the issue to sway voters failed, however. In last month's special election in Kentucky, House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., promised a floor vote on the tobacco buyout legislation if voters sent Republican Alice Forgy Kerr to Congress. She lost anyway. "Bottom line is that it wasn't enough to turn an election, and you have a serious question as to how much it matters to any given seat," an industry lobbyist said. Some manufacturers are quietly talking about the possibility of defusing the pressure for FDA regulation by voluntarily bailing out the farmers, albeit for less money than they would get from Congress. Steve Watson, vice president of external affairs at Lorillard, proposed such an approach last summer. "We believe that a buyout of the program could be accomplished without new excise taxes and without FDA legislation, by bringing all the interested parties to the table to negotiate a buyout that adequately compensates quotaholders and farmers," Watson said. Scott Ballin, a health consultant working closely with the growers' coalition, said that negotiations on such a deal might take place "if the entire system and process collapses." But Ballin added: "I don't think they can get Philip Morris to that table. And once you take the buyout out of Congress, you remove one of the players, and you're back to the old stalemate between public health groups and industry." Congress, of course, has its own stalemates to break on other issues as the election nears. In such an atmosphere, it's sometimes the case that anything goes. "I think people have looked at this and thrown everything they know about normal process out the window," Burr said. RJR to cut leaf buys By David Rice. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. is cutting the amount of tobacco it buys from North Carolina farmers by almost half this year, state officials say. Growers aren't happy about it. Hopes fade for buyout legislation By Ned B. Hunter. "The leadership in the House has let us know in no uncertain terms that an FDA bill will not originate in the House," he said. "If we do not get action from the Senate side, we're in real trouble. We are running out of time, and the clock just keeps ticking." Tobacco buyout bill likely dead By Ned B. Hunter. Congress is unlikely to pass tobacco buyout legislation before it adjourns for the holidays, congressional representatives said. Talks on Capitol Hill to Regulate Tobacco Industry Break Down October 2, 2002 By Kelley Beaucar Vlahos. Talks in Congress to regulate the tobacco industry broke down Wednesday along partisan lines, making it highly unlikely that new restrictions would be imposed on the cigarette industry anytime soon. Lawmakers had been close to passing legislation that not only would have ended unpopular tobacco subsidies, but also would have allowed government control over tobacco products for the first time. But Democrats said late Wednesday that regulations that would have handed the Food and Drug Administration (search) oversight of cigarettes were not strong enough. "Unfortunately, the proposed legislation which Republicans put forth today falls far short of the strong FDA authority which is needed to effectively do the job," said Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., the leading Democrat on the health committee. "A weak bill is worse than no bill at all because it would give the public a false impression that their health was being protected." The House and Senate had been close to voting on bills that would have ended Depression-era tobacco farm subsidies that lawmakers have described as archaic and harmful to the farming communities in several states that grow tobacco. Farming quotas -- which dictate how much tobacco a farmer can grow and the subsidies given in return -- have been slashed by 50 percent over the last several years due to the decline in demand for cigarettes and foreign competition on the international market. Paid for by a five-year annual assessment on manufacturers that import tobacco, the buyout would pay for both farmers leaving the tobacco business and those choosing to continue growing the crop on their own. "The tobacco support system is "outmoded and not practical anymore," Rep. Mike McIntyre, R-D-N.C., told Foxnews.com, explaining that the government began controlling the production of tobacco farming in the 1930s to ensure stable payments to farmers for their crops. "You can imagine what would happen if your income were cut in half," said Rep. Mike McIntyre, D-N.C., whose district has been devastated by the declining tobacco industry. "And they still don’t know if it can be cut further." McIntyre joined Rep. Ernie Fletcher, R-Ky., Rep. Virgil Goode, R-Va., and Rep. Bob Etheridge, D-N.C., in introducing a bill last month to end the subsidies with a $15.7 billion buyout. While the House had not planned to include FDA legislation in the bill, Sens. Judd Gregg (search), R-N.H., the chairman of the Senate health panel considering the legislation, and Mike DeWine, R-Ohio, had agreed to marry the FDA authority to a bill proposed by Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., that would have allowed a $13 billion buyout. Calling the FDA proposal a "bitter pill for this senator to swallow," McConnell said in a recent floor speech that support from the senators and the health community behind FDA regulation would be necessary to end the subsidies once and for all. "That is simply a reality which we confront today," he said, noting that linking the two measures together would create "a formidable coalition here in the Senate across an ideological divide to move us in the direction of achieving both these goals." House aides had said that similar FDA legislation would likely have remained in final legislation written when negotiators from both chambers met in conference. That way, the bill would have had a better chance of passing in the House, but would also have satisfied lawmakers who wish to see greater regulation of tobacco products. But when Senate Democrats saw Gregg's final proposal, they said that the provision that allowed only Congress to ban cigarettes was so vaguely written it could have prevented the FDA from requiring changes to make cigarettes safer. "The vague language was a loophole that could prevent FDA from taking any steps to reduce the harm caused by tobacco," said Matthew Myers, president of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. "We’re not willing to support FDA regulations that are too weak," said Allison Dobson, spokeswoman for Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, before the final legislation was offered. "I think there are a lot of senators who feel strongly that this shouldn’t be a sham." Mark Berlind, a lawyer for Philip Morris parent company Altria, rejected the criticisms. He said health groups wanted the FDA to be able to ban tobacco products, something that was in a previous bill sponsored by Kennedy. "We're disappointed that these talks broke down over a last-minute insistence that FDA be able to ban all cigarettes for adults," Berlind said. Jacob Sullum, editor of Reason magazine, added that the public health lobby is "never satisfied." He said that he thinks the latest attempt to regulate tobacco is just another boondoggle for government. "This is more than [the public health lobby] dreamed of years ago, but they are still not happy," Sullum said, referring to the 1998 tobacco settlement with the states in which the cigarette makers were forced to pay hundreds of billions of dollars for state programs as well as comply with new marketing and promotion standards. Other areas of disagreement include how far states should be able to go in setting their own restrictions on the industry and whether tobacco companies can be sued for failing to adequately warn people about smoking hazards. This latest effort by lawmakers to regulate the tobacco industry was the most serious in years. Whereas a buyout of tobacco-growers was an unpopular suggestion five years ago, it had recently been embraced by farmers and lawmakers alike as the only solution to their ongoing financial woes. Philip Morris USA, the nation's largest cigarette maker and a major campaign contributor, had also recently reversed its previous position and endorsed FDA regulation, even though would be getting hit twice in the pocketbook -- once for the buyout, another with the oversight fees. Smaller companies like R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Holdings, Inc., say they will be financially ruined by both the buyout and the oversight measures. Smaller cigarette makers will likely be squeezed by the new rules, said Sullum, who added, "The cost will be passed on to consumers." But lawmakers say the move was necessary to help the ailing farming community as well as provide regulations aimed to protect the public health. The FDA asserted authority over cigarettes in 1996, but the Supreme Court later ruled that only Congress can give the FDA that power. The Associated Press contributed to this report.     Stop the Tobacco Quota Buyout! Several U.S. senators have recently introduced bill S. 1490, referred to as the "McConnell bill." The bill, a $13 billion buyout of the 65-year old federal tobacco quota program, would burden lower-and middle-income Americans with one of the largest tax increases in the last decade. If passed, the McConnell bill could also cost hundreds and perhaps thousands of jobs in economically depressed areas and exacerbate state budget shortfalls. This is a terrible price to pay to enrich a relatively small number of individuals and companies, most of whom do not actually grow tobacco. Contact your U.S. senator today and urge him/her to vote NO on the McConnell bill! Gregg FDA bill would be disastrous for growers, retailers, manufacturers. Senator Gregg’s legislation granting FDA powers to regulate the tobacco industry is expected to be introduced in the Senate this fall. It is expected to give FDA unlimited authority to impose new regulations that it deems to be “in the best interests of public health.” The complexity and cost of creating and complying with new FDA regulations would be profound, and may drive some smaller manufacturers out of business entirely. Such a broad mandate would have disastrous consequences for tobacco growers, cigarette retailers, and – most dramatically – manufacturers. FDA regulation could effectively prohibit cigarettes acceptable to smokers. Using the authority delegated in the Gregg bill, the FDA could ban the manufacture and sale of cigarettes acceptable to most adult smokers. For example, the FDA could require the elimination of certain naturally occurring components, such as tar and nicotine, resulting in a product that is not acceptable to consumers. FDA regulation would give the most dominant tobacco company an unfair advantage. Even more egregious would be the stifling of any meaningful competition within the industry. Broad restrictions on marketing freedoms restrict competition and generally benefit a manufacturer with a dominant market share. Hence, this type of legislation has been appropriately nicknamed the “Marlboro Monopoly Act.” Like most consumer products, tobacco companies must be able to effectively compete for their own and competitive customers. The MSA’s broad advertising and marketing restrictions have significantly hampered manufacturers’ ability to do so. Granting FDA authority to stifle all remaining commercial speech to adult users of tobacco products, under the premise that would be in “the best interests of public health,” ensures that the brands that are large and growing now will continue on that trend. This bestows tremendous competitive advantage to the largest manufacturer, Philip Morris, which currently controls nearly one-half of the U.S. cigarette market. It is hardly surprising, therefore, that Philip Morris remains the only major tobacco company actively supporting passage of FDA legislation. Among the marketing and packaging restrictions FDA regulation could impose are: At the discretion of the FDA, all advertising and promotion can be banned “to the full extent permitted by the first amendment.” Product descriptors (light, ultra light) would be treated as “reduced risk” claims and would be prohibited. All product changes – no matter how minor – could be denied if the FDA finds that the changes “might” be expected to attract even an insignificant number of new smokers. Product packaging – an important competitive and trademarked tool – would be defaced by expanded labeling requirements. FDA regulation could result in conflicting state standards: If the FDA bill does not preclude states from adopting product and marketing restrictions more stringent than those of the federal government, cigarette manufacturers would have to comply with a patchwork of 50 different state standards. For example, in the interest of “fire safety,” each state could impose different and conflicting product requirements relating to fire safety. Cigarette manufacturers could be forced into an impossible situation of manufacturing products that meet up to 50 different, state-specific requirements. Summary: These bills will impose a huge tax, cost jobs, cripple state budgets, and benefit only a small number of individuals/companies. Passage of these bills will burden lower- and middle-income Americans with one of the largest tax increases in the last decade, cost hundreds and perhaps thousands of jobs in economically depressed areas, exacerbate states’ budget shortfalls, and stifle legitimate competition to the benefit of one market-dominant company. This is a terrible price to pay in order to enrich a relatively small number of individuals and companies, most of whom do not actually grow tobacco. Results of passage of these bills: Impose a new $13 billion tax Most money will not go to “family farms” Tobacco buyout far richer than support for other commodities Causes significant manufacturing job losses States could lose $1.6 billion in revenue FDA regulation effectively ends competition The Bill 1. TQB web site: http://www.tobaccoquotabuyout.com 2. How does the tobacco program work?: http://www.uky.edu/Agriculture/TobaccoEcon/publications/womach_95-129_ENR.pdf The federal tobacco price support program is designed to support and stabilize prices for farmers. It operates through a combination of mandatory marketing quotas and nonrecourse loans. Marketing quotas limit the amount of tobacco each farmer can sell, which indirectly raises market prices. The loan program establishes guaranteed minimum prices. The law requires that the loan program operate at no net cost to the federal government. Apart from year-to-year budget impacts, no-net-cost provisions of the law are intended to assure that all loan principal plus interest will be recovered. 3. Tobacco Program History/Overview links: http://www.ers.usda.gov/briefing/tobacco/program2.htm Most tobacco production in the United States has been under a price support­production control program since the early 1930's. A number of changes have been made in the program, especially during the last fifteen years. Changes in the program from the early 1930's are summarized and more recent changes evaluated in this article. http://www.ncseonline.org/NLE/CRSreports/Agriculture/ag-61.cfm Over 93% of U.S. tobacco production is flue-cured and burley (both being cigarette tobacco types). These crops are particularly important to the agriculture of North Carolina (where flue-cured is grown) and Kentucky (where burley is grown). Together, these two states produce 65% of the total U.S. tobacco crop. The federal tobacco price support program is designed to support and stabilize prices for farmers. It operates through a combination of mandatory marketing quotas and nonrecourse loans. Marketing quotas limit the amount of tobacco each farmer can sell, which indirectly raises market prices. The loan program establishes guaranteed minimum prices. The law requires that the loan program operate at no net cost to the federal government. Apart from year-to-year budget impacts, no-net-cost provisions of the law are intended to assure that all loan principal plus interest will be recovered. http://www.farmfoundation.org/2002FB/3-5.pdf The U.S. Tobacco Program. 4. Buyout Bill comparison links: http://apacweb.ag.utk.edu/ppap/pp03/buyout060203.pdf Tobacco Quota Buyout Update. By Kelly Tiller. The National Tobacco Grower Settlement Trust Conference, Nashville, TN June 2, 2003. http://www.uky.edu/Agriculture/TobaccoEcon/publications/womach_rl31790.pdf Tobacco Quota Buyout Proposals in the 108th Congress. Updated August 21, 2003. 5. Current Tobacco Situation links: