Senate panel OKs bill to relate cigarettes, ban cloves
Posted on August 3rd, 2007 by bile Categories and Tags: Uncategorized, Congress, drugs, education, Food and Drug Administration, freedom, Health, Labor and Pensions Committee, liberty, Michael B. Enzi, nanny state, Pensions Committee, politics, privacy, regulation, Senate, smoking ban, tobacco advertising, United States, World Trade Organization, Wyoming, your rightsA Senate committee Wednesday embraced legislation that would for the first time allow federal regulation of cigarettes.
The bill, approved 13 to 8 by the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, would give the Food and Drug Administration authority to restrict tobacco advertising, regulate warning labels and remove hazardous ingredients.
The bill would allow the FDA to reduce the amount of nicotine in cigarettes, but only Congress could permanently ban them.
The committee adopted an amendment by Sen. Michael B. Enzi (R-Wyo.) that would ban clove cigarettes in the U.S., reversing a controversial decision by Kennedy to allow the FDA to decide.
Kennedy, the panel’s chairman, said he was responding to several senators who contacted him with concerns that a ban on clove cigarettes could not be compliant with World Trade Organization rules. But Kennedy agreed to the ban after several senators objected.
They don’t object to limiting the freedom of the public but whether it’s not compliant with the WTO. It’s funny, they take an oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” They must have a different copy than I do.
5 Responses to “Senate panel OKs bill to relate cigarettes, ban cloves”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
August 3rd, 2007 at 10:55 am
Here is the text of the bill.
As far as the constitution is concerned, it seems they’re getting their justification from:
This is BS:
Smokers cost us less money than people who keep on living, collecting pensions and benefits well into old age.
So cause I’m into auto erotic asphyxiation and the only safe way to do it is not to do it, the government should help me quit?
This is because you can make a mint selling cigarettes illegally since we tax the hell out of them. Anything that has a huge mark up will be sold on the black market.
I agree with this one.
After reading through most of the bill (it’s freakin’ huge) the Secretary has a ton of power. It seems he can ban just about any advertisements and demand stuff that would cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to produce. Your only recourse seems to be to petition him and then go to judicial review. Also it seems to explicitly ban flavored cigarettes (unless I’m misreading it). What’s the deal with that? One thing that is kind of comforting was this:
I don’t know if this is standard fare for Bills as this is the first one I’ve really read.
August 3rd, 2007 at 11:19 am
The Commerce Clause has been used to justify a whole lot more than I believe it was intended. Including civil rights law. It would seem that if the founders had implied the federal government could rule as they pleased over the states in the way the federal government now does… they would have made it more explicit.
It is very much the standard. Take a look at the ‘Bills’ section of the page. Or go to Thomas at the LOC and pick a topic or sponsor. Try reading the tax code some time.
I don’t find that last part comforting at all. It’s a red flag. It (and the like) are put into all kinds of bills because the author knows something there is questionable. By putting that there it makes it seem like a one off instead of something they could or would do to anything. History shows that is not the case.
August 3rd, 2007 at 1:26 pm
Do you like to follow local (state level) bills too?
August 3rd, 2007 at 1:37 pm
Federal keeps me very busy but I report on state and local level when they bubble up to the sites I read. It’s more difficult to follow states because they all have their own online systems and I’ve not come across anything like WashingtonWatch.com or GovTrack.us for the states.
August 3rd, 2007 at 8:26 pm
There is a steak house in Trenton called Pete Lorenzos where apparently a lot of our local representatives have drinks and dinner. I’ve eaten there once (I can really only afford to eat there about once a year) and I thought it would be so cool if you could go to places like that and actually meet your representatives. The thing I like about local, and I mean REALLY local government, is the fact that the people are accessible. Around here they’ll typically go door to door for their campaign. Granted they do this just before local elections, but you can at least talk to them. I’ve always wanted to observe state legislative proceedings too. Unfortunately not much seems to be on the calendar.