TOBACCO SHOWDOWN IN U.S. SENATE

A YEAR ago, the kind of tough-on-tobacco legislation that has made its way
to the floor of the U.S. Senate would have been laughed out of the
Capitol's marbled halls.

But a lot has happened in a year. Cigarette-makers took the unprecedented
step of sitting down with some of the nation's state attorneys general in
an attempt to reach agreement on pending court cases. The gesture and
resulting tentative pact was startling both because the tobacco companies
had never lost a case in court and because they made major concessions,
especially on important curbs against advertising aimed at teenagers.

The agreement told the world that the industry was at last running scared.
Combined with revelations of the industry's long-time deception about the
addictive properties of tobacco and an underhanded campaign to hook smokers
while they are young, the abrupt change in strategy --as well as
out-of-court settlements with a number of states that total more than $30
billion -- emboldened Congress.

Even tobacco defenders like House Speaker Newt Gingrich promised no mercy
as Congress reworked the tentative settlement to its liking.

The bill that is scheduled for debate tomorrow shows how the tables have
turned. Tobacco's hard-won concession from the attorneys general -- a ban
on class-action lawsuits against the industry -- is nowhere to be seen in
the legislation (S1415) by Arizona Republican Senator John McCain. The
cigarette manufacturers bowed out of negotiations last month, saying
McCain's bill and others would bankrupt the industry.

However, despite the whines, the tobacco industry still stands to gain from
McCain's bill. It would settle the state claims and it would put a $6.5
billion-a-year cap on liability payments. Considering that the industry
recently settled with the state of Minnesota for $6.1 billion, industry's
cries that there is nothing in the tobacco measures for them rings hollow.

The moment has arrived for Congress to act, even if it cannot win industry
cooperation. The public has become sharply less tolerant of smoking. One
poll shows that more than half of the public thinks there should be a
complete ban on cigarette advertising. And the number of people who say
they are sympathetic toward smokers continues to decline.

Like the tentative settlement with the attorneys general, McCain's bill
focuses on reducing teen smoking for good reason. Studies show that 90
percent of all smokers begin the tobacco habit by age 18. Each day, 3,000
teens start smoking. Tobacco use among teenagers jumped by nearly one-third
during the past six years. Kids need protection from a product that is
harmful to them, and the best way to protect them is to prevent them from
ever starting to smoke.

The McCain bill has much in it that is good, especially its emphasis on
pushing the tobacco industry -- through monetary penalties and advertising
restrictions -- to reduce teen smoking. The advertising restrictions are
problematical, however, because of First Amendment questions that might
require industry agreement. A better route might simply be to set the goals
and allow the industry to find the right path to meet them.

The trick is to set penalties stiff enough so that the industry does not
find that it makes financial sense to ignore the goals and pay the fines.

McCain's bill also creates unnecessary controversy by attempting to direct
the spending of the additional cigarette tax revenue. The bill has set off
a money grab that is overshadowing the substantive issue of how to reduce
smoking in the country. After setting aside a sum for education and
prevention, let the revenue raised go toward the erasing federal debt -- as
Congressmen Jim Hansen, R-Utah, and Henry Waxman, D-Los Angeles, propose in
their House tobacco bill.

The Senate Commerce Committee's 19- to-1 vote for the McCain bill
illustrates the anti-tobacco sentiment and a turnaround from traditional
kowtowing to the big-money cigarette-makers.

McCain's bill would greatly increase the cost of the original deal, from
$368 billion to $516 billion over 25 years and would raise the price of a
pack of cigarettes by $1.10 over five years, bringing the average price at
the cash register to more than $3 a pack. It also would assure Food and
Drug Administration jurisdiction over tobacco in regulating nicotine and
additives. Gingrich has called McCain's legislation ``a very liberal, big
government, big bureaucracy bill'' that he said had virtually no chance of
passage in the House. While some provisions of McCain's bill could be
simplified or even eliminated, however, the momentum is building to pass a
tobacco bill, as Gingrich is well aware.

A recent survey by Republican pollster Fred Steeper showed that GOP
candidates will feel the negative fallout if they block a major bill to
control teen smoking.

Lawmakers need to be on record as acknowledging that they have a role in
discouraging smoking and addressing a serious public health issue that
costs the country $100 billion a year. Their input and vote on the McCain
bill will be closely watched.

VITAL INGREDIENTS IN A TOBACCO BILL

- --Strong measures to cut teen smoking

Tobacco companies should face severe consequences for failing to meet
specific percentage goals for reducing teen smoking within a specified
period.

- --Adequate per-pack tax increase

The cost of cigarettes has an effect on smoking by young people. A new
cigarette tax must be high enough to discourage teens from buying.

- --Federal Drug Administration jurisdiction

Internal tobacco industry documents showing a history of deception prove
that the tobacco industry will not regulate itself.

- --Prevention and education

Federal money is needed to maintain a high-profile anti-smoking campaign
aimed at teenagers.

)1998 San Francisco Chronicle

Checked-by: jwjohnson@netmagic.net (Joel W. Johnson)