Thank you for less smoking
THE REDUCTION in tobacco use has been one of the great public health victories of the past half century. Now the Democratic takeover of Congress could lead to new gains in shrinking both the popularity and toxicity of cigarettes. Senator Edward M. Kennedy, incoming chairman of the Senate health committee, is giving priority to a bill that would authorize the Food and Drug Administration to regulate the advertising and contents of cigarettes. While the agency would not have the right to ban tobacco use altogether or completely eliminate its nicotine, the FDA could force the industry to get rid of known cancer-causing agents in its products and to cut back their marketing to young people.
Even though the percentage of adult smokers declined from about 25 percent to 21 percent between 1997 and 2005, more than 40 million Americans still smoke and 4,000 young people try their first cigarette every day. About half of them will become hooked, running a greater risk of cancer, heart disease, and emphysema. Smoking is blamed for 400,000 deaths a year, making it by far the most common preventable cause of death.
Under President Clinton, the FDA in 1996 claimed authority to regulate tobacco, but was slapped down in a 5-4 decision by the Supreme Court in 2000. The court said Congress would have to give the agency specific permission before it could subject the industry to its regulations. Since then, Republican congressional leaders have blocked legislation that would do this.
According to officials of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, prospects for authorizing legislation improved dramatically with the November election. In the House, Speaker Nancy Pelosi strongly backs the bill, even though she has not put it on her list of goals for the first 100 hours of the new Congress.
In addition to restricting tobacco advertising to children, the bill would let the FDA require strict enforcement of laws limiting sales to minors. It could require public disclosure of all the toxic ingredients in tobacco smoke and force the companies to place larger and more informative health warnings on their products. The agency could oblige the companies to begin removing poisons from tobacco. "If forced to do so," said Matthew Myers, president of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, "the industry could make fundamental changes in those products."
There is, of course, the possibility that Congress would pass the legislation only to see it vetoed by President Bush. But a president whose only other veto was of a bill to expand federal funding of stem cell research could not easily use his veto pen against another bill that is so clearly aimed at protecting the health of Americans, especially American children. Congress should put him to the test.
