USA TODAY Latest news
Front page, News, Sports, Money, Life, Weather, Marketplace
Inside News
Nationline
Washington
World
Politics
Opinion
Columnists
Snapshot
Science
States
Weird news

Search
Newspaper
 
Archives
Our site

Resources
Index
Feedback
What's hot
About us
Jobs at USA
  
TODAY

08/18/98- Updated 01:11 AM ET
The Nation's Homepage

FDA rules won't help

By Jacob Sullum

Since the Supreme Court has transformed the Commerce Clause into a license for federal intervention in all manner of economic activity, it may be fruitless to note that the Constitution does not authorize Congress to regulate intrastate sales of tobacco.

Nevertheless, it is true.

And what Congress is not empowered to do it surely may not delegate to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

Such old-fashioned concerns aside, the sort of regulations the FDA has proposed would not make much of a dent in underage smoking. Every state already forbids cigarette sales to minors. Enforcement is lax in many places, but simply duplicating the rule at the federal level is not likely to change that.

Restrictions on advertising and promotion are hard to square with the First Amendment, and there is little reason to believe they would have a noticeable impact on the level of cigarette consumption.

The 1994 surgeon general's report, which focused on underage smoking, acknowledged the "lack of definitive literature" in this area. None of the widely publicized studies that have appeared in recent years, including the much-hyped Joe Camel research, actually measured the impact of advertising on a teen-ager's propensity to smoke.

Giving the FDA jurisdiction over tobacco could lead to other mischief. The agency has seriously considered forcing tobacco companies to gradually eliminate nicotine from cigarettes. This would make the habit more dangerous, since people would tend to smoke more to compensate for lower nicotine delivery, and it would invite a black market in full-strength cigarettes.

Proponents of FDA regulations may be sincere when they insist the rules are not a prelude to prohibition, but history suggests caution. Early in this century, cigarettes were banned in 19 states. The motivation then, as now, was to save the children.

Jacob Sullum, a senior editor at Reason magazine, is the author of For Your Own Good: The Anti-Smoking Crusade and the Tyranny of Public Health.


To comment

If you would like to comment on editorials, columns or other topics in USA TODAY, or on any subjects important to you: Send e-mail for letters to the editor only to editor@usatoday.com. Please include address and daytime phone numbers so letters may be verified. Letters and articles submitted to USA TODAY may be published or distributed in print, electronic or other forms.



Front page, News, Sports, Money, Life, Weather, Marketplace

©COPYRIGHT 1998 USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co. Inc.