House Passes Anti-Tobacco Bill

By Sam Wechsler - Talk Radio News Service

On Friday the House of Representatives agreed to a Senate amendment on “The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act.” The bill, H.R. 1256, is now set to go before President Obama. The bill gives the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) much more control over the tobacco industry in order to protect the health of the American people, especially children. The House voted 307-97. All but 7 nea votes came from Republicans.

Said Congressman Jim Moran (D-V.A.), “In their boardroom [tobacco companies] discussed how important it was to get kids to smart smoking at 14 or 15 years of age because then they would be loyal to their brand, let alone addicted to the product.”  He added, “[Tobacco companies] manipulated the media, deceived the American people, [and argued] the science wasn’t really there to claim cigarettes were a problem.”

The legislation allows the FDA to force tobacco companies to change their ingredients if necessary, bans the production of flavored tobacco products, and bans the use of descriptions such as “light” or “mild.” The bill also restricts advertisements geared towards youths.

Although President Obama is a smoker, he was pleased to know the House agreed to the Senate amendment. He now plans to sign the bill himself. Shortly after the House vote took place, the President stated, “this bill will be the fourth piece of bipartisan legislation that I’ve signed into law over the last month that protects the American consumer.”

Supreme Court skeptical of "light" cigarette suit

Basic facts:

It's long been known that people smoking "light" cigarettes smoke them differently. They inhale more, smoke more cigarettes and/or cover the air holes in the filter. The FTC requires that cigarette companies use the "Cambridge Filter Method" for testing tar and nicotine levels, and that method shows lower levels. But it doesn't accurately recreate the way people actually smoke, and people really end up getting about the same amounts of tar and nicotine whether they smoke light cigarettes or not.

Color:

Not really relevant to the legal arguments, but the U.S. government took a position in the case and received 10 minutes of time, argued by Assistant Solicitor General Douglas Hallward-Driemeier. Justice Alito grilled him about whether the FTC had tacitly approved the use of these figures. "If these figures are misleading, you should have prohibited them a long time ago." He said that the FTC had created the problem at the base of this case, saying that, "If they are misleading, then you have mislead." Justice Scalia seemed to concur, noting that he had heard a case on a similar issue ("lip draping," the covering of the filter air holes with one's lips) when he was on the circuit court between 1982 and 1986. "It's been general knowledge for a long time, and the FTC has done nothing," he said.

Arguments:

The questions in the case dealt with whether the deceptive advertising claims, brought in state courts, should be allowed under federal law. There is a federal law regulating labeling on cigarettes, and the question is whether federal law controls (meaning any action would have to come from the FTC) or whether cases like this should be allowed. There was a lot of discussion about whether the case relies on "smoking and health" or whether it's a purely deceptive advertising case. Altria and the Justices noted that if there were no health distinction, there would be no case, but the respondents argued that this was just a run-of-the-mill deceptive advertising case and presented no special burden on cigarette companies. They argued that the federal law was passed to keep states from having extra regulations focused on cigarette companies, but that it wasn't supposed to prevent general state laws, which apply to everyone else, from being enforced.

There was also a big question as to the relief being sought. Respondents said at first that they were not asking for an injunction to force additional warnings or stop selling the cigarettes, but Mr. Frederick later admitted he had misspoken. Still, he argued the main thing they were asking for were damages. He could not, however, explain what damages he was asking for. He said there was an economic cost when people bought the light cigarettes instead of normal ones, but under questioning by Justices Scalia and Souter admitted the cigarettes cost the same whether light or not. Further, he tried to argue that there would be damages even if the smokers could show no health effects—if they were Olympic athletes, for example. The Court may decide that this lack of demonstrated harm means that the plaintiffs are owed no money, and therefore there is no case.

Preventing terrorism and violent crime with a lot of natural light

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives dedicated their new national headquarters today. The new building is located in the area north of Massachusetts Avenue, and the facility is hoping to support the revitalization and growth of the emerging downtown area.

The building itself is much to be admired at 422,000 square feet, it was designed by Moshe Safdie and consists of three inter-connected wings in a reverse L shape and has long corridors and atriums to allow for lots of natural lighting. The new building has lots of office space, housing nearly all ATF employees, training rooms, an auditorium seating 3,000, underground parking and auxiliary services. The building “serves as an anchor for the redevelopment of a historic” neighborhood.

The ATF is active in its regulation of firearms and explosives, as well as the apprehension of armed violent criminals, bombers and arsonists. “When we see ATF on the job we know the crime will be solved,” said Congresswoman Eleanor Norton (D-D.C.). Norton stressed the importance of the ATF in a post 9/11 world and said that they have never been more important and hopes the new building will help.

“This state of the art building and space will inspire the men and women of the ATF as they carry out their mission to reduce violent crime and protect the nation,” said Michael Sullivan, action director of the ATF.

NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg spoke to World Bank Employees about how to use New York's positive example in other cities

New York City Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg addressed the World Bank Employees on “Building Better Cities: New York's Experience in Urban Transformation” at World Bank's Urban Sector Day. He said they should be proud of the difference they were making to society. For the first time in human history, he said, most of the world's population is in cities as opposed to urban areas.

There are major responsibilities, he said, because of the economic, social, and environmental consequences of “explosive urban growth.” He said that now we are faced with the challenges of providing people with the health and social services that they need. He said he would explain his formula used with New York City as an example of how to effect changes on a larger scale in the world.

He brought the audience's attention back to 9/11, saying that many people believed that New York's “days of greatness were numbered.” He said that there had been predictions that residents and businesses would leave, the economy would never recover, crime would take over, and that they were on an “irreversible downward spiral of decline.” However, he said, there are four values that are universal and can (and should) be transferred to other parts of the world. First, there is using the forces of immigration and globalization, second, tapping the “power of innovation,” third, instituting accountable governance, and fourth to have the independence to take on 'entrenched interests' when they stand in the way of progress.

Bloomberg said that he believed that some of our national leaders are turning their backs on what he calls his “formula for success.” He says that if they insist on turning away the best and the brightest by protecting jobs instead of promoting them, then the economic problems we are facing in the United States will be here for a long time.

He asked a question to the world: “Do we reap the benefits of globalization and address its difficulties honestly or do we scapegoat globalization and turn away its benefits?” He went on to say that he believed that we should be working to bring the benefits of globalization not only in the United States but in cities around the world.

New York City, Bloomberg said, holds the title of 'America's safest big city.' New York holds the that title because they have been mapping crime trends and then sending police officers to where the crime is specifically based. In New York, he said, many would say that more money is the solution to any problem, but, it is possible to do more with less.

Bloomberg said is it important to make decisions based on the merits of the decision, not based on polls or partisanship. A good example, he said, is how New York City has been very pro-active against smoking. They raised cigarette taxes, made public information campaigns, increased smoking cessation programs, and outlawed smoking in all public places. An area of political independence, and a willingness to fight the 'vested interest,' has really paid off by the results they've seen with reduced smoking and better health for New York City's citizens.

“Globalization, innovation, accountable governance, independent leadership,” he said again, are the four values that should be fostered in cities around the world. “Every generation, in its own way,” he said, “faces the challenge of enlarging the realm of human happiness and opening up new vistas of human possibility.”

At the press conference immediately following the presentation, Mayor Bloomberg answered questions. In response to a question about how to translate crime reduction successes in New York City to other parts of the world, Bloomberg said to take the policies and allocate resources to “problem places” with “problem people.” The politics is usually to put them “where people scream the loudest.” The police represent the community, he said, so the makeup of the police department should match the demographics of the population. You want to make sure that the person feels that the police officer understands you because of who you are, he said.