bg-announce

Smokefree Pennsylvania sent the following letter to members of
Congress regarding tobacco provisions that were amended to 
the FSC/ETI legislation.   Bill Godshall
- - - - - 

September 20, 2004

Dear    :

On behalf of Smokefree Pennsylvania, I write urging you to OPPOSE the 
DeWine-Kennedy Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act 
(S.2461) for Food and Drug Administration (FDA) tobacco regulations 
that the Senate amended to the FSC/ETI legislation, and to also 
OPPOSE both House and Senate approved tobacco quota buyouts.

Since I founded Smokefree Pennsylvania in 1990, our nonprofit organization
has advocated policies for smokefree air, reducing tobacco marketing to 
youth, increasing tobacco taxes, preserving civil justice remedies for 
injured tobacco victims, and increasing smoking cessation.  We've also
exposed many deceptive tobacco industry protection policies, programs, 
strategies, coalitions, front groups, lobbyists and politicians.

While some health groups have endorsed S.2461, upon detailed analysis, 
Smokefree Pennsylvania opposes this FDA legislation because it would:

- protect cigarettes from market competition by lower risk tobacco,
- increase Philip Morris cigarette sales and huge 50% market share,
- perpetuate manufacturer safer cigarette frauds via FDA oversight,
- misrepresent health risks of noncombustible (smokeless) tobacco,
- ban harm reduction marketing of lower risk products to smokers, 
- severely limit FDA authority to issue effective product regulations,
- do very little if anything to reduce cigarette use, diseases or deaths,
- allow manufacturers to promote cigarettes as FDA approved,
- fool people into believing FDA is resolving the cigarette pandemic, 
- reduce manufacturer liability as cigarettes kill 500,000 annually.

Sound regulations discourage or eliminate the most hazardous products, 
and encourage the development of and transition to lower risk products.
But S.2461 protects the most hazardous tobacco product (cigarette) 
from competition by prohibiting truthful marketing of lower risk 
noncombustible (smokeless) tobacco products to addicted smokers. 

Cigarettes kill 50% of addicted smokers, and up to 63,000 American 
nonsmokers annually (from secondhand smoke and fires).  In contrast,
smokeless tobacco kills about 1% of addicted users, but ZERO 
nonusers.  Swedish smokeless (snus) and other new low nitrosamine 
noncombustible tobacco products pose even fewer risks.  Smokers who 
switch to smokeless products sharply reduce disease and death risks. 

But S.2461 perpetuates the myth/fraud that noncombustible tobacco 
is as hazardous as cigarettes by requiring larger labels on smokeless 
packs and ads stating: "This product is not a safe alternative to 
cigarettes," and by not informing smokers (e.g. labels on cigarette 
packs and ads) that smokeless tobacco poses fewer mortality risks. 

Sound product regulations protect consumers from health frauds.  But 
S.2461 perpetuates the deadliest consumer fraud (safer cigarettes) 
by allowing 'light' cigarettes to remain on the market in their easily 
recognized pack designs and colors (minus the word 'light').  Marlboro 
Lights largest market share would increase (at expense of competitor 
brands) while current customers continue smoking the brand, which
Philip Morris would call Marlboro Gold.  Yet, S.2461 does nothing to 
warn smokers that 'lights' are just as hazardous as other cigarettes.

Any S.2461 authorized FDA performance standards for cigarettes 
almost certainly would be incorrectly perceived by the public as making
cigarettes safer, which would discourage many smokers from quitting 
and could encourage youth and exsmokers to smoke.  Just as filters,
low tar, lights and ultralights never reduced cigarette's health hazards,
neither would removing a few chemicals or carcinogens from cigarettes 
or from the smoke, but the public (especially smokers) would be fooled.

Section 911(g)(2) would allow a cigarette manufacturer to apply for 
and receive FDA approval for "an explicit or implicit representation 
that such tobacco product or its smoke contains or is free of a 
substance or contains a reduced level of a substance, or presents 
a reduced exposure to a substance in tobacco smoke."

Philip Morris has stated it will market a so-called 'reduced exposure' 
cigarette this year, and it appears that Section (g)(2) was drafted by the
company in order to obtain FDA approval for its new marketing campaign.
The FDA shouldn't perpetuate, initiate or allow safer cigarette frauds.

Although Philip Morris desires the benefits it receives from S.2461, 
the company is contemplating legal challenges to other provisions.  
Mary Shaffrey of the Winston-Salem Journal (upon interviewing Mark 
Berlind of Philip Morris about the legislation) recently reported: 
"However, because of a 2001 Supreme Court ruling that dealt with 
tobacco advertising, Berlind said he is confident that the FDA 
provisions in the Senate bill would eventually be changed."

Sound regulations also allow regulatory agencies unfettered authority 
to issue regulations that reduce access to hazardous products.  But 
S.2461 prohibits the FDA from issuing many of the potentially most 
effective cigarette access reduction regulations, including: 

- increasing the minimum age to purchase cigarettes beyond 18 years,
- eliminating cigarette sales from any type of retail outlet (about 500,000
  retail outlets sell cigarettes in America),
- requiring prescriptions to buy cigarettes (as FDA does with other drugs),
- removing nicotine from cigarettes, 
- eventually removing cigarettes from the market.

More comprehensive public health analyses of this FDA legislation is 
available at: www.notobaccobailout.org.  

Smokefree Pennsylvania supports fair and effective federal regulations
for tobacco products, and we acknowledge that S.2461 contains some 
improvements over the status quo.  But overall, this FDA legislation 
gives the cigarette and Philip Morris significant unwarranted protection 
and benefits, at the expense of public health.

Finally, we urge you to oppose both the $9.6 billion House approved 
and $12 billion Senate approved tobacco quota buyouts because the 
overwhelming majority of beneficiaries don't even grow tobacco.

Thank you for your consideration, and feel fee to contact me for 
additional information about these important policy matters.
 
Sincerely,


William T. Godshall, MPH
Executive Director
.