By TIM THORNBERRY
Kentucky Correspondent WASHINGTON, D.C. — Last year the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) became the governing agency over tobacco when landmark legislation passed Congress.
Last week the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced a plan to print graphic warnings on cigarette packaging and advertisements that would “drive home the point that smoking is a health danger,” according to a statement from the agency. Not only is the campaign aimed at current smokers but young people who have yet to start.
“Every day, almost 4,000 youth try a cigarette for the first time and 1,000 youth become regular, daily smokers,” said HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius during the announcement. “Today marks an important milestone in protecting our children and the health of the American public.”
The HHS notes that “tobacco use is the leading cause of premature and preventable death in the United States, responsible for 443,000 deaths each year. Thirty percent of all cancer deaths are due to tobacco. Each day 1,200 lives of current and former smokers are lost prematurely due to tobacco-related diseases.”
It isn’t news that smoking can be harmful. In 1965 federal requirements mandating cigarettes to have warnings posted on packaging took effect and at that time, the U.S. was ahead of the rest of the world in doing so. That is not the case today, however, as other countries have enacted similar rules when it comes to cigarette packaging.
The plan is actually a proposed rule stemming from a requirement in last year’s Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act. The public will have the opportunity to comment on 36 different images, nine of which will be selected by the FDA.
The comment period goes through Jan. 9, 2011. The selections will be made by June 22, and implementation of the rule will take effect by September 2012.
“When the rule takes effect, the health consequences of smoking will be obvious every time someone picks up a pack of cigarettes,” said FDA Commissioner Margaret A. Hamburg, M.D. ‘This is a concrete example of how FDA’s new responsibilities for tobacco product regulation can benefit the public’s health.”
This comes as no surprise to tobacco companies, but with pending litigation looming, it remains to be seen if the FDA will make its deadlines. A host of tobacco companies filed suit in August 2009 in the U.S. District Court in Bowling Green, Ky., “seeking to protect their First Amendment right to communicate with adult tobacco consumers about their products,” according to information from R.J. Reynolds (RJR), one of the plaintiffs.
“This suit does not challenge Congress’ decision to give the FDA regulatory authority over tobacco products, nor does it challenge the vast majority of the provisions of the new law,” said Martin L. Holton III, senior vice president and general counsel for RJR at the time of the filing.
“However, the law contains provisions that severely restrict the few remaining channels we have to communicate with adult tobacco consumers and, in our opinion, cannot be justified on any basis consistent with the demands of the First Amendment.”
A judge’s ruling in that suit found for both sides in certain matters, of which appeals were filed on the part of the government and the tobacco companies. The labeling issue was clearly one found to be in favor of the government.
David Howard, a spokesman for RJR, said if the rule goes into effect, it would be in violation of the company’s right to free speech.
“We certainly encourage the public to comment, as we are going to consider what if any comment we as a company want to make on the notice issued,” he said. “I think what really is important to note is that the legality of providing larger and graphic warnings is part of our lawsuit that is currently pending. Requiring the larger and graphic warnings on our packaging is something we believe is in violation of our First Amendment rights of commercial free speech.”
Howard added that essentially, the government is coming in and seizing half of their packs and devaluing company trademarks, some of which have been around for more than 100 years.
“Not questioning the FDA’s authority – if they pass regulation and put it into effect, obviously we are going to abide by it – but we believe this is a matter that needs to be addressed from a constitutionality standpoint,” he said. A hearing on the matter is expected next year.
Howard also said that as far as tobacco farmers are concerned, it is business as usual at this time, but he encouraged them to be vocal in their opinions of the labeling proposal, as he would encourage anyone else to do.
“What I would say to growers is that you too are a part of the general public, and if you feel you want to make a comment on this you absolutely should. I encourage everybody in the public to do so,” he said.
There is little doubt that anti-tobacco groups will voice their opinions. In a statement released last week after the announcement of the labeling proposal, Matthew L. Myers, president of Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, said the action “will improve health, save lives and save health care costs for employers, workers and taxpayers across the country.”
The statement went on to say that “in implementing the new warnings, the United States is catching up to scientific best practices and joining more than 30 countries that already require large, graphic cigarette warnings (and that) the administration and Congress must now provide sufficient funding for these initiatives if they are to succeed.
“It is especially critical that funding be provided for the national media campaign to prevent children from smoking and help smokers quit.”
To see the proposed images and learn more about the proposed rule, go online to www.fda.gov/TobaccoProducts/Labeling/CigaretteProductWarningLabels/default .htm |
