Tobacco Deceits

The tobacco companies are trying to create a new image of
themselves as repentant and in retreat when in fact they remain on the
attack. Only the packaging has changed.

When they settled the lawsuit that Florida had filed against
them the other day, the companies said the deal was "a concrete
demonstration that the industry is prepared to cooperate with
government and the public health authorities to emphasize that it
doesn't want kids to smoke." They called the settlement "another step
in a process to end the climate of confrontation and litigation that has
marked the national debate on tobaccorelated issues."
So they are pussycats, except that:

As part of the national deal they now want President Bill
Clinton to bless, they have agreed to pay $368.5 billion over 25 years.
Pretty imposing. But the companies also got the Republican leadership
of Congressno less than House Speaker Newt Gingrich and Senate
Majority Leader Trent Lottto tuck into the budget they sent the
president in July a couple of sentences forgiving them $50 billion of
this before they were even required to pay it. The $50 billion was to
compensate them for the tobacco tax increase that Congress had just
voted in part to help finance a new program of children's health
insurance. No one professes to know exactly how the forgiveness rnade
its way into the legislationwho suggested it, for example. But part of
the explanation, we are willing to guess, lies in the enorihous campaign
contributions that the tobacco companies have made to the
Republicans in recent years. (They also have given a lot, but less, to
the Democrats.) That is what these folks mean when they say they are
buying "access." The $368 billion figure won't endure, they will find
ways to knock it down. The durable part of the deal, if they have their
way, will be the limits on future lawsuits that the $368 billion is meant
to buy. Surely no one would be so crass as to suggest that Congress go
back on its word on that.

A second aspect of the deal has to do with the power of the
Food and Drug Administration to regulate nicotine. The companies
professed to agree that it has such power, which was nice of thern,
since a court had already ruled so. Then they proposed that the power
should be exercised only if the FDA could jump through a series of
impossible and irrelevant hoops whose effect would be as intended, to
negate the power. Meanwhile, the companies continue to appeal the
court ruling which confirmed that the authority exists.

They agreed as well to back off ads calculated to appeal to
kids, and a great show was made of the withdrawal of the Joe Camel
series. But it was withdrawn only to be replaced by another aimed at
pretty much the same market. The current behavior of the companies
demonstrates the same thing that their past behavior so amply shows:
They will game any system that is put in place to keep them from
selling cigarettes. It is a mirage to think.that they are preparing to go
out of business. They simply want to buy at as low a price as possible a
steady platform from which to continue.

Here is a rule, which the president and Congress alike should
keep in mind as they try in the weeks ahead to figure out what to do
about the proposed master agreement: Almost by definition, any deal
that the tobacco companies find congenial is against the public interest.

It is a real temptation to siRn off on a big peace pact such as
hasl been proposeda worldclass photo op, and there are in fact some
substantive features of the proposal that would be gains. Our own
instinct is that the politicians should go carefully and slowly.

Among other things, they need to see what a few more of the
pending state suits the one in Minnesota particularly turn up by way of
evidence that the companies knowingly put the many millions of people
they hooked on their product at risk. Which politicians want to vote for
a limit on future lawsuits and other liability in advance of that?
THE WASHINCTON POST.