• Hi Guest - Come check out all of the new CP Merch Shop! Now you can support CigarPass buy purchasing hats, apparel, and more...
    Click here to visit! here...

House votes to regulate tobacco as a drug

Bonfire Smoke

Bonfire Smoke
Joined
Mar 11, 2008
Messages
282
This from a publication called Healthcare Purchasing News. Very interesting. I wonder how this affects cigars?

Johnny

Decades after the surgeon general first warned that cigarettes were a health hazard, the House of Representatives overwhelmingly approved legislation on Wednesday that would for the first time give the Food and Drug Administration the power to regulate tobacco products. Citing the long history of warnings about the dangers of smoking, Representative John D. Dingell, chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee, said that it was hard to believe that the federal government had not yet regulated the tobacco industry.

The White House has signaled its opposition to the bill. And while the legislation has strong support in the Senate, which could take up the measure this fall, it is not clear whether the bill has a veto-proof majority there. The legislation was partly the result of negotiations with Philip Morris USA, the nation's largest cigarette company, which split with other companies by endorsing it. Most large public health groups supported the measure - and its passage was applauded by groups including the American Lung Association and the American Heart Association - but some antismoking advocates said the bargain struck with Philip Morris gave too many concessions to the industry.

The bill specifically states that the FDA's new powers would stop short of the ability to order the elimination of nicotine from tobacco products or place an outright ban on all tobacco products. But the agency could reduce nicotine to nonaddictive levels if it determined that doing so would benefit public health. The F.D.A. could also require changes in tobacco products, like the reduction or elimination of other harmful ingredients. The bill bans flavored cigarettes that appeal to young people but exempts menthol from that ban. The exemption raised objections from black antismoking advocates because mentholated cigarettes are frequently chosen by black smokers.

To satisfy the Congressional Black Caucus on that issue, last-minute changes were made in the bill to direct a scientific advisory committee to issue recommendations on menthol in cigarettes within one year. In a statement, Lorillard Tobacco Company, whose Newport cigarettes are the leading menthol brand, said it opposed the bill but "welcomes the provision in this bill that calls for a scientific review of menthol in cigarettes." Lorillard said that scientific studies to date do not support a conclusion that menthol cigarettes are more hazardous or addictive than non-menthol cigarettes.

The legislation would finance the FDA's tobacco supervision primarily through new fees paid by tobacco companies that are earmarked for that purpose. If the legislation is enacted, consumers would see a wholesale revamping of the warning labels on tobacco products. The small messages currently on cigarette packs warning of the negative health effects would be replaced by graphic images of the physical ravages often caused by cigarettes, such as lung tumors and mouth growths. The bill will also require cigarette makers to provide detailed disclosure about the type and quantities of ingredients in their products - like ammonia and acetaldehyde - which are believed to work with nicotine to increase the addictiveness of cigarettes and smokeless tobacco. The requirements mean that companies would be required to disclose internal research on the biological effects of those additives.

Cigarette companies could no longer advertise their products as "light" or "ultralight" to convey the notion of less harmful ingredients. Some companies have anticipated those changes by packaging their products so that cigarettes packs are color-coded to denote different blends. Under the bill, any outdoor advertising of cigarettes, and advertising in publications seen by children, would have to be in black and white, to reduce their visual allure. (NY Times) Read the complete story at Visit My Website
 
Decades after the surgeon general first warned that cigarettes were a health hazard, the House of Representatives overwhelmingly approved legislation on Wednesday that would for the first time give the Food and Drug Administration the power to regulate tobacco products. Citing the long history of warnings about the dangers of smoking, Representative John D. Dingell, chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee, said that it was hard to believe that the federal government had not yet regulated the tobacco industry.

This language seems to target the cigarette industry, but as we know, there is no such thing. There is the tobacco industry, instead. Hence 95% of our problems.
 
I read most of the bill last night and there is a lot of language regarding "tobacco products" as well as very specific language targeting "cigarettes". It's quite confusing as the definitions outlined in the bill mention cigarettes, roll your own, smokeless tobacco, and little cigars. There's no specific mention in that section of cigars or pipe tobacco.

I can't imagine it's anything good for any tobacco products, but I the language seems unclear to me.

I've read that the Cigar Association agreed to the language in the legislation, but I've not seen that confirmed.


I wonder how long it will be before nicotine or tobacco itself will be classified as a Class II narcotic or controlled substance.
 
I read most of the bill last night and there is a lot of language regarding "tobacco products" as well as very specific language targeting "cigarettes". It's quite confusing as the definitions outlined in the bill mention cigarettes, roll your own, smokeless tobacco, and little cigars. There's no specific mention in that section of cigars or pipe tobacco.

I can't imagine it's anything good for any tobacco products, but I the language seems unclear to me.

I've read that the Cigar Association agreed to the language in the legislation, but I've not seen that confirmed.


I wonder how long it will be before nicotine or tobacco itself will be classified as a Class II narcotic or controlled substance.

First marijuana, now tobacco. Of course, marijuana never killed anyone, just influenced them to rape their neighbor's 13 year old.

Sidenote: The Cigarette Industry is not what it was 40 years ago. They're making their money overseas now, so who knows what they're up to. They could be appeasing folks in the U.S. just to be left alone in China.
 
And if that's the case Mick, how long until they say, "See ya later" and pack up and move to China or some other welcoming country? I can't see the Mexican government calling in the heads of the leading tobacco companies to sit them on the hot seat. That would seem appealing to me if I ran a large tobacco concern.
 
I hope I'm not overstepping my noob boundaries, but I can see this turning political any second :0
 
Of course, marijuana never killed anyone, just influenced them to rape their neighbor's 13 year old.

That strikes me as a rather unfounded and out of place statement.


edit:

It seems to me, based on this article alone, that the legislation is mostly going after cigarette companies, but could easily spill over into the cigar industry.
 
Of course, marijuana never killed anyone, just influenced them to rape their neighbor's 13 year old.

That strikes me as a rather unfounded and out of place statement.


edit:

It seems to me, based on this article alone, that the legislation is mostly going after cigarette companies, but could easily spill over into the cigar industry.

When our govt initially went after marijuana, short films were produced to show the public the effects marijuana had on the user's mind. If you think my statement is exaggerated, I would recommend checking out the films.
 
Of course, marijuana never killed anyone, just influenced them to rape their neighbor's 13 year old.

That strikes me as a rather unfounded and out of place statement.


edit:

It seems to me, based on this article alone, that the legislation is mostly going after cigarette companies, but could easily spill over into the cigar industry.

When our govt initially went after marijuana, short films were produced to show the public the effects marijuana had on the user's mind. If you think my statement is exaggerated, I would recommend checking out the films.

Hmm, I'll check it out, sorry I guess I didn't catch the intended sarcasm there.
 
Of course, marijuana never killed anyone, just influenced them to rape their neighbor's 13 year old.

That strikes me as a rather unfounded and out of place statement.


edit:

It seems to me, based on this article alone, that the legislation is mostly going after cigarette companies, but could easily spill over into the cigar industry.

When our govt initially went after marijuana, short films were produced to show the public the effects marijuana had on the user's mind. If you think my statement is exaggerated, I would recommend checking out the films.

Hmm, I'll check it out, sorry I guess I didn't catch the intended sarcasm there.

I shoulda thrown in a 'dripping sarcasm' something or other. Don't sweat it.
 
Aside from the obvious "follow the money" comment, this looks like another lame attempt by the anti-smoking lobby to control our lives and scapegoat personal responsibility. I do agree however that cigarettes are a nicotene delivery device, as opposed to pipe tobacco & cigars being products produced with tobacco. Cigarettes are a manipulated product. If Congress had any balls they would include personal responsibility and discontinue ANY health services (including Medicare) to every cigarette smoker, but where would they make money in that. Not political, just facts.
The disgusting/funny item in this story is that the Menthol Exemption is so blatently dripping in racism, that comming from the PC crowd it is beyond irony!!! Does this mean that when the PC Police goes after fried food they will exempt fried chicken because it is stereotypically favored by blacks :whistling: , or better yet, they get an exemption if it is served with watermelon! ??? More crap from a do NOTHING Congress that is hell bent on saving the planet and couldn't give a damn about hits to my wallet! :angry:
 
Rebel,

I think you pegged it just right. Only thing is, it is too late to save the planet. It is hotter than hell down here in Louisiana.

Johnny
 
Does it not strike anybody as odd that Philip Morris USA agreed to this legislation while the other companies did not want to be a part of it? Their tactics are most likely part of a cleverly crafted plan to most ably secure remaining interests in the USA with the full realization that the real money in the cigarette business is to be made abroad. Correct me if I am wrong but I believe that China actually has a growing cigarette market.

-Mark
 
I agree that there's something suspicious here with big companies supporting FDA control, but it's pretty obvious. If the FDA has to approve new products, only huge companies will be able to launch new products, so this will be a HUGE advantage to the big tobacco companies. Small producers, like Native American tribes, won't be able to afford to launch new products. Same deal with small pipe tobacco blenders.
 
Top