Email to a Friend
Stumble It!
By SEAN MUSSENDEN and RICHARD CRAVER
Media General News Service
WASHINGTON—North Carolina’s senators unveiled an alternative proposal for federal regulation of tobacco products Wednesday that would save cigarette companies billions of dollars over the next decade.
The Federal Tobacco Act, co-sponsored by Sen. Richard Burr, R, and Sen. Kay Hagan, D, would create a new federal agency within the Health and Human Services Department to solely regulate tobacco instead of assigning the task to the Food and Drug Administration.
Burr and Hagan said the massive recall of tainted peanut products and other problems at the FDA demonstrate the agency is too “overburdened” to oversee an important component of North Carolina’s economy.
“This new agency will provide meaningful regulation without diverting the FDA from its core mission which is ensuring that foods and medicines are safe and effective,” Burr said in a statement.
In an interview, Hagan said she would prefer no new regulation of the tobacco industry, but that creating a new agency was a better alternative than giving that power to the FDA.
“I’d like to not do anything, but there is a very strong feeling that there needs to be regulation,” she said. “The FDA is overburdened and lacks the capacity to take on a large, complicated new industry.”
Last week, a key House panel approved legislation sponsored by Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., to give the FDA oversight of tobacco, a move that set the stage for House passage later this year.
Both bills propose paying for the new regulation by imposing “user fees” on tobacco companies, with the largest share paid for by the nation’s two largest cigarette companies, Philip Morris and R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., respectively.
The Burr-Hagan measure would collect no more than $100 million a year from the industry in 2010. The amount would increase with inflation in subsequent years, giving the government around $1 billion over the next decade.
The Waxman measure, to contrast, would collect $235 million in 2010, $450 million in 2011, and rise to $712 million by 2019, a total of $5.4 billion from the industry over the next decade.
“It's important that we have the time to review the details of the bill, but it certainly seems to be a step ahead when compared to legislation previously considered,” Reynolds spokeswoman Maura Payne said.
Opponents of the Waxman measure say the user fees are excessive and are intended to put the tobacco industry out of business. But public health groups said the $100 million per year user fees specified by Burr and Hagan are too little.
In addition, anti-tobacco advocates complain that the bill from the North Carolina senators demands weaker restrictions on cigarette marketing than the Waxman measure, gives tobacco companies too large a presence on a government advisory council, and doesn’t give the government enough power to restrict certain chemicals in tobacco products.
“It includes numerous restrictions and loopholes that tie the hands of regulators,” said Matthew Myers, president of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. “It gives the tobacco industry too much influence over the regulatory process. And it fails to provide the resources needed to do the job,”
Proposals for government regulation of tobacco have stalled in Congress for the last decade.
The Waxman measure passed the House last year, but an identical proposal sponsored by Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., failed to pass the Senate last year, because Burr threatened to tie up the measure and President Bush opposed the move.
Supporters of FDA regulation say they are optimistic the measure will pass this year because President Barack Obama supports the idea and it attracted enough support in the Senate last year to eventually overcome Burr’s threatened delays.
Obama co-sponsored the Kennedy legislation last year. And he reiterated his support of FDA regulation in a round table interview with Southern reporters Wednesday.
“I do think that the FDA has an important role to play on an issue that obviously has an enormous impact on the health of the American people,” Obama said in his first public comments on the topic since entering the White House.
Though he co-sponsored nearly identical legislation last year, Obama did not say Wednesday whether or not he supported the Waxman measure.
“We’re probably going to have an announcement on this fairly soon, so I don’t want to step on my own story. That’s all you’re going to get out of me,” he said.
Tobacco analysts said the Burr-Hagan bill has only a slim chance of passing both the House and Senate, though some of its provisions could be incorporated into the final bill.
“A lot of people will just discredit it off the bat because it’s being introduced by two tobacco state members,” said Scott Ballin, a tobacco policy specialist who works with tobacco farmers, industry groups and public health advocates.
“In the Senate, there’s an opportunity for dialogue in some of the areas of difference between the bills that you really won’t have in the House,” he said.
For example, the Burr-Hagan bill would force states to spend funds from the Master Settlement Agreement, developed between states and cigarette companies, on tobacco control programs at levels recommended by the Centers for Disease Control, something few states currently do.
Neil Simon contributed to this story. Sean Mussenden can be reached at smussenden@mediageneral.com or 202-662-7668.
Media General News Service
WASHINGTON—North Carolina’s senators unveiled an alternative proposal for federal regulation of tobacco products Wednesday that would save cigarette companies billions of dollars over the next decade.
The Federal Tobacco Act, co-sponsored by Sen. Richard Burr, R, and Sen. Kay Hagan, D, would create a new federal agency within the Health and Human Services Department to solely regulate tobacco instead of assigning the task to the Food and Drug Administration.
Burr and Hagan said the massive recall of tainted peanut products and other problems at the FDA demonstrate the agency is too “overburdened” to oversee an important component of North Carolina’s economy.
“This new agency will provide meaningful regulation without diverting the FDA from its core mission which is ensuring that foods and medicines are safe and effective,” Burr said in a statement.
In an interview, Hagan said she would prefer no new regulation of the tobacco industry, but that creating a new agency was a better alternative than giving that power to the FDA.
“I’d like to not do anything, but there is a very strong feeling that there needs to be regulation,” she said. “The FDA is overburdened and lacks the capacity to take on a large, complicated new industry.”
Last week, a key House panel approved legislation sponsored by Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., to give the FDA oversight of tobacco, a move that set the stage for House passage later this year.
Both bills propose paying for the new regulation by imposing “user fees” on tobacco companies, with the largest share paid for by the nation’s two largest cigarette companies, Philip Morris and R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., respectively.
The Burr-Hagan measure would collect no more than $100 million a year from the industry in 2010. The amount would increase with inflation in subsequent years, giving the government around $1 billion over the next decade.
The Waxman measure, to contrast, would collect $235 million in 2010, $450 million in 2011, and rise to $712 million by 2019, a total of $5.4 billion from the industry over the next decade.
“It's important that we have the time to review the details of the bill, but it certainly seems to be a step ahead when compared to legislation previously considered,” Reynolds spokeswoman Maura Payne said.
Opponents of the Waxman measure say the user fees are excessive and are intended to put the tobacco industry out of business. But public health groups said the $100 million per year user fees specified by Burr and Hagan are too little.
In addition, anti-tobacco advocates complain that the bill from the North Carolina senators demands weaker restrictions on cigarette marketing than the Waxman measure, gives tobacco companies too large a presence on a government advisory council, and doesn’t give the government enough power to restrict certain chemicals in tobacco products.
“It includes numerous restrictions and loopholes that tie the hands of regulators,” said Matthew Myers, president of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. “It gives the tobacco industry too much influence over the regulatory process. And it fails to provide the resources needed to do the job,”
Proposals for government regulation of tobacco have stalled in Congress for the last decade.
The Waxman measure passed the House last year, but an identical proposal sponsored by Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., failed to pass the Senate last year, because Burr threatened to tie up the measure and President Bush opposed the move.
Supporters of FDA regulation say they are optimistic the measure will pass this year because President Barack Obama supports the idea and it attracted enough support in the Senate last year to eventually overcome Burr’s threatened delays.
Obama co-sponsored the Kennedy legislation last year. And he reiterated his support of FDA regulation in a round table interview with Southern reporters Wednesday.
“I do think that the FDA has an important role to play on an issue that obviously has an enormous impact on the health of the American people,” Obama said in his first public comments on the topic since entering the White House.
Though he co-sponsored nearly identical legislation last year, Obama did not say Wednesday whether or not he supported the Waxman measure.
“We’re probably going to have an announcement on this fairly soon, so I don’t want to step on my own story. That’s all you’re going to get out of me,” he said.
Tobacco analysts said the Burr-Hagan bill has only a slim chance of passing both the House and Senate, though some of its provisions could be incorporated into the final bill.
“A lot of people will just discredit it off the bat because it’s being introduced by two tobacco state members,” said Scott Ballin, a tobacco policy specialist who works with tobacco farmers, industry groups and public health advocates.
“In the Senate, there’s an opportunity for dialogue in some of the areas of difference between the bills that you really won’t have in the House,” he said.
For example, the Burr-Hagan bill would force states to spend funds from the Master Settlement Agreement, developed between states and cigarette companies, on tobacco control programs at levels recommended by the Centers for Disease Control, something few states currently do.
Neil Simon contributed to this story. Sean Mussenden can be reached at smussenden@mediageneral.com or 202-662-7668.