Senate Passes Bill to Let FDA Regulate Tobacco

[Vel]

Senate Passes Bill to Let FDA Regulate Tobacco

By Lyndsey LaytonWashington Post Staff Writer
Friday, June 12, 2009
Landmark legislation approved by the Senate yesterday will give the federal government sweeping new powers to oversee tobacco products, allowing regulators to control factors including the amount of addictive nicotine in a cigarette and how that cigarette is packaged and marketed.
For the 20 percent of Americans who smoke, the law will mean confronting more graphic warnings of the risks of their habit every time they pick up a pack. The law also bans most cigarette flavorings.
For the $89 billion tobacco industry, it will mean new requirements to disclose the ingredients in cigarettes and other tobacco products, and severe limitations on how they are advertised and promoted. The government could also issue new rules on nicotine content, flavorings and other product features.





washingtonpost.com



The Obama administration strikes again. They've now taken over the tobacco industry. How many industries does this make now?

 

[STAND4LIBERTY]

"For the 20 percent of Americans who smoke, the law will mean confronting more graphic warnings of the risks of their habit every time they pick up a pack. The law also bans most cigarette flavorings. "

WHOOPEE this is or course a perfect justification for borrowing more money from China for enforcement costs and putting a further "drag" on our economic efficiency....

 

[KittenKoder]

Another lame attack on a true minority in the US. So ... when do we get the same rights as junkies and drunks, like free health-care on the publics dime and free rehab visits until we "kick the habit" without losing our apartment leases?

 

[Vel]

" Advertising and promotion will also be restricted. Tobacco manufacturers will be unable to use the terms "light," "mild" and "low" unless they can scientifically prove that the product so labeled is less harmful than standard tobacco.

washingtonpost.com


I heard that this legislation even dictates that stores can only use black and white for their tobacco displays. Just how invasive are we willing to allow our government to become? If they really are acting in the public good, then they need to forgo the tax revenue and just ban tobacco entirely.

 

[Zoom-boing]

Senate Passes Bill to Let FDA Regulate Tobacco

By Lyndsey LaytonWashington Post Staff Writer
Friday, June 12, 2009
Landmark legislation approved by the Senate yesterday will give the federal government sweeping new powers to oversee tobacco products, allowing regulators to control factors including the amount of addictive nicotine in a cigarette and how that cigarette is packaged and marketed.
For the 20 percent of Americans who smoke, the law will mean confronting more graphic warnings of the risks of their habit every time they pick up a pack. The law also bans most cigarette flavorings.
For the $89 billion tobacco industry, it will mean new requirements to disclose the ingredients in cigarettes and other tobacco products, and severe limitations on how they are advertised and promoted. The government could also issue new rules on nicotine content, flavorings and other product features.





washingtonpost.com



The Obama administration strikes again. They've now taken over the tobacco industry. How many industries does this make now?

Guess they'll be changing that song to 'Hail to the Czar' soon.

 

[Nik]

I know. Its terrible that the food and drug administration would have power over something that has a ton of drugs in it...
...
...

 

[Vel]

I know. Its terrible that the food and drug administration would have power over something that has a ton of drugs in it...
...
...

Then let them ban it. How morally reprehensible to seize control of the industry under the guise of "public danger" and then continue to profit from the sales.

 

[STAND4LIBERTY]

Then let them ban it. How morally reprehensible to seize control of the industry under the guise of "public danger" and then continue to profit from the sales.

You have to understand how Nik's brain operates ... it basically looks like this

The Empowerment of the State > The Liberty of the Individual

It's pretty much the same way a European Serf in middle ages would think of the Catholic Church dominating every aspect of his life, after all thinking for yourself is hard work and it's much easier to let those in charge do it for you.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

The government has no authority to do this, and it's a counterproductive measure. Bigger warning labels are not going to stop anyone from smoking as it's common knowledge what the effects of smoking are. The government needs to realize that it can't legislate morality, and it's immoral to try and do so.

 

[Xenophon]

Glad i don't smoke.

 

[strollingbones]

you should see the shit they put on canadian ciggie packs

 

[STAND4LIBERTY]

you should see the shit they put on canadian ciggie packs

LOL, of course that justifies it, because anything the 33 million people in Canada decide to put up with the 314 million people in the United States should swallow... can you say non-sequitur?

 

[Nik]

I know. Its terrible that the food and drug administration would have power over something that has a ton of drugs in it...
...
...

Then let them ban it. How morally reprehensible to seize control of the industry under the guise of "public danger" and then continue to profit from the sales.

Yes...its under the guise of public danger. I mean its not as if cigs are dangerous at all.

How many people have they killed again?

By the way, what exactly is your rationality for saying they should ban it, but not regulate it? How does that make any sense?

 

[Nik]

Then let them ban it. How morally reprehensible to seize control of the industry under the guise of "public danger" and then continue to profit from the sales.

You have to understand how Nik's brain operates ... it basically looks like this

The Empowerment of the State > The Liberty of the Individual

It's pretty much the same way a European Serf in middle ages would think of the Catholic Church dominating every aspect of his life, after all thinking for yourself is hard work and it's much easier to let those in charge do it for you.

tsk tsk, resorting to ad hominems ?

 

[KittenKoder]

I know. Its terrible that the food and drug administration would have power over something that has a ton of drugs in it...
...
...

Then let them ban it. How morally reprehensible to seize control of the industry under the guise of "public danger" and then continue to profit from the sales.

Yes...its under the guise of public danger. I mean its not as if cigs are dangerous at all.

How many people have they killed again?

By the way, what exactly is your rationality for saying they should ban it, but not regulate it? How does that make any sense?

Um ... let's see, the latest number from the anti-smoking liars is .... 17% of the countries population every year ... um ... yeah, and you believe their hype?

 

[STAND4LIBERTY]

Then let them ban it. How morally reprehensible to seize control of the industry under the guise of "public danger" and then continue to profit from the sales.

You have to understand how Nik's brain operates ... it basically looks like this

The Empowerment of the State > The Liberty of the Individual

It's pretty much the same way a European Serf in middle ages would think of the Catholic Church dominating every aspect of his life, after all thinking for yourself is hard work and it's much easier to let those in charge do it for you.

tsk tsk, resorting to ad hominems ?

The truth stings, huh Nik?

 

[Nik]

Then let them ban it. How morally reprehensible to seize control of the industry under the guise of "public danger" and then continue to profit from the sales.

Yes...its under the guise of public danger. I mean its not as if cigs are dangerous at all.

How many people have they killed again?

By the way, what exactly is your rationality for saying they should ban it, but not regulate it? How does that make any sense?

Um ... let's see, the latest number from the anti-smoking liars is .... 17% of the countries population every year ... um ... yeah, and you believe their hype?

So how many people would you, in your infinite wisdom, estimate it kills each year?

 

[Nik]

You have to understand how Nik's brain operates ... it basically looks like this

The Empowerment of the State > The Liberty of the Individual

It's pretty much the same way a European Serf in middle ages would think of the Catholic Church dominating every aspect of his life, after all thinking for yourself is hard work and it's much easier to let those in charge do it for you.

tsk tsk, resorting to ad hominems ?

The truth stings, huh Nik?

Maybe if you pay really close attention you'll be able to comprehend the difference between what you claimed was an ad hom, and what I claimed was one.

 

[STAND4LIBERTY]

This your brain on inane -->

Maybe if you pay really close attention you'll be able to comprehend the difference between what you claimed was an ad hom, and what I claimed was one.

Any questions?

 

[KittenKoder]

Yes...its under the guise of public danger. I mean its not as if cigs are dangerous at all.

How many people have they killed again?

By the way, what exactly is your rationality for saying they should ban it, but not regulate it? How does that make any sense?

Um ... let's see, the latest number from the anti-smoking liars is .... 17% of the countries population every year ... um ... yeah, and you believe their hype?

So how many people would you, in your infinite wisdom, estimate it kills each year?

17% isn't even an estimate, it's a lie, flat out, plain and simple. How can this be? I know, you are easily fooled, but it's simple, math ... explain how it is our world population increases by one every minute now, accounting for all the deaths, factoring all the millions killed by other causes (accidents, wars, alcohol and drugs, car accidents take out a huge chunk) then how can 17% die each year from just cigarettes ... it's impossible.