By NEIL H. SIMON, Media General News Service
Email to a Friend
Stumble It!
WASHINGTON-Bogged down by more than 20 amendments and a procedural debate, a House panel put off action Thursday on a bill that would federally regulate tobacco.
"After far too many years, tobacco regulation will finally see the light of day," Rep. Frank Pallone, D-N.J., said optimistically as he began the committee's work session. A few hours later he recessed the panel until Tuesday.
Republican lawmakers said the Food and Drug Administration is the wrong agency to handle tobacco oversight and offered a stream of amendments on topics ranging from tobacco farmers to online sales.
The bill would give the FDA the power to regulate the marketing of tobacco, a change that has divided big tobacco companies. Opponents of the bill say further reducing tobacco marketing options would give industry-leader Philip Morris an unfair advantage.
"It's basic economics," said Tommy Payne, executive vice president of public affairs at rival Reynolds American. "You don't have to go to Harvard to say, 'OK, who does that benefit in the current market?' It decreases competition."
Executives at Philip Morris, the only cigarette manufacturer backing the bill, said the company would not unduly benefit from stricter marketing requirements.
"I don't see how anybody can make that claim," said Steve Parrish, a senior vice president at Altria Group, Inc., parent company of Philip Morris USA.
"It would apply to every company in the industry, big or small," he said.
The House panel's biggest hang-up was how to fund federal regulation. The bill text leaves a blank line for the Congressional Budget Office to increase fees on tobacco users to pay for the cost of FDA regulation.
The fees would start at about a penny per cigarette pack this year and rise to at least 5 cents per pack by 2018, generating between $85 million and $712 million a year, according to committee staff.
Republicans argued the fee is a tax and therefore the entire bill should be handled by the House committee that handles taxes.
"You really want to give CBO a blank check?" Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, asked Pallone after the meeting.
Barton said he had thought the tax issue and related committee jurisdiction question would be dealt with in five minutes and not become "a food-fight" that would ultimately stop action.
But with 18 Republican amendments pending, Pallone unexpectedly declared the meeting over just after 3 p.m.
"I think the Republicans are trying to delay the mark-up and not complete it today," Pallone said. "But we're just going to come Tuesday and we're going to do it Tuesday."
A matching bill, sponsored by Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., awaits a vote in the Senate. That bill passed through a Senate health committee last August. Aides said there's no date for the bill to reach the Senate floor, though Democratic leaders in both chambers have called the issue a high priority.
If Thursday's meeting is an indication, the bill's path in the House may be more challenging. While Republicans did not say they wanted to derail the bill, they repeatedly raised concerns about its various parts.
"Is this going to burden (the FDA) to the point they can't carry out their other functions?" said Rep. Nathan Deal of Georgia, the subcommittee's top Republican. "Those are legitimate issues, and I think that's where the rest of the amendments will come."
Democrats, including bill sponsor Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., clearly were frustrated by what they viewed as an obstruction to tobacco regulation.
"It has taken us far too long to get here," Waxman said.
"After far too many years, tobacco regulation will finally see the light of day," Rep. Frank Pallone, D-N.J., said optimistically as he began the committee's work session. A few hours later he recessed the panel until Tuesday.
Republican lawmakers said the Food and Drug Administration is the wrong agency to handle tobacco oversight and offered a stream of amendments on topics ranging from tobacco farmers to online sales.
The bill would give the FDA the power to regulate the marketing of tobacco, a change that has divided big tobacco companies. Opponents of the bill say further reducing tobacco marketing options would give industry-leader Philip Morris an unfair advantage.
"It's basic economics," said Tommy Payne, executive vice president of public affairs at rival Reynolds American. "You don't have to go to Harvard to say, 'OK, who does that benefit in the current market?' It decreases competition."
Executives at Philip Morris, the only cigarette manufacturer backing the bill, said the company would not unduly benefit from stricter marketing requirements.
"I don't see how anybody can make that claim," said Steve Parrish, a senior vice president at Altria Group, Inc., parent company of Philip Morris USA.
"It would apply to every company in the industry, big or small," he said.
The House panel's biggest hang-up was how to fund federal regulation. The bill text leaves a blank line for the Congressional Budget Office to increase fees on tobacco users to pay for the cost of FDA regulation.
The fees would start at about a penny per cigarette pack this year and rise to at least 5 cents per pack by 2018, generating between $85 million and $712 million a year, according to committee staff.
Republicans argued the fee is a tax and therefore the entire bill should be handled by the House committee that handles taxes.
"You really want to give CBO a blank check?" Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, asked Pallone after the meeting.
Barton said he had thought the tax issue and related committee jurisdiction question would be dealt with in five minutes and not become "a food-fight" that would ultimately stop action.
But with 18 Republican amendments pending, Pallone unexpectedly declared the meeting over just after 3 p.m.
"I think the Republicans are trying to delay the mark-up and not complete it today," Pallone said. "But we're just going to come Tuesday and we're going to do it Tuesday."
A matching bill, sponsored by Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., awaits a vote in the Senate. That bill passed through a Senate health committee last August. Aides said there's no date for the bill to reach the Senate floor, though Democratic leaders in both chambers have called the issue a high priority.
If Thursday's meeting is an indication, the bill's path in the House may be more challenging. While Republicans did not say they wanted to derail the bill, they repeatedly raised concerns about its various parts.
"Is this going to burden (the FDA) to the point they can't carry out their other functions?" said Rep. Nathan Deal of Georgia, the subcommittee's top Republican. "Those are legitimate issues, and I think that's where the rest of the amendments will come."
Democrats, including bill sponsor Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., clearly were frustrated by what they viewed as an obstruction to tobacco regulation.
"It has taken us far too long to get here," Waxman said.