Here is another one:
Tobacco Bill in Trouble
Opposition to the $516 billion measure is building in unusual corners, and might succeed.
Diverse Opposition to Tobacco Bill Builds
By Ceci Connolly
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, April 20, 1998; Page A07http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/tobacco/tobacco.htm
When lawmakers return to Washington this week, they will discover that opposition to comprehensive anti-smoking legislation has been steadily building -- in some of the most unusual corners.
Constituencies as diverse as button-down Chamber of Commerce types and fast food junkies are preparing an aggressive campaign to revise or kill a national tobacco policy crafted by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.). In most cases, objections have little to do with the dangers of smoking. But the alliances signal a new, and potentially deadly, phase for this year's biggest legislative initiative.
"The tobacco industry has orchestrated this thing very well," said Bill Novelli, a veteran of the anti-smoking movement. "Retailers pop up one day, alcohol the next. This is a real grass-roots tussle that will not be lost on members of Congress in an election year."
The National Restaurant Association, part of the network forming against the tobacco legislation, represents 170,000 eateries. "The best thing about representing restaurants is they're in every district," said the association's Lee Culpepper, emphasizing his members' close contact with lawmakers.
Though not formally organized, the loose coalition includes some of Big Tobacco's most reliable partners (bar owners, tobacco growers and convenience store operators) as well as those who seemingly have little in common with the cigarette business (insurance companies, drug stores, anti-tax advocates and the American Civil Liberties Union).
Some object on philosophical grounds, others fear for their own livelihood and many simply worry Congress is heading down a slippery slope: today, cigarettes; tomorrow, who knows? After all, one Yale University psychologist waging his own crusade against fatty foods asserted: "To me, there is no difference between Ronald McDonald and Joe Camel."
If McCain and the White House cannot revive momentum for the $516 billion plan to discourage smoking, it could die of a thousand tiny cuts.
"If it was solely the American Civil Liberties Union or the pension funds over tobacco stocks, it wouldn't be such a problem for the legislation," said Ross Baker, a congressional scholar at Rutgers University. "But the more diverse the opposition becomes, and particularly the more unconventional the alliances, it usually spells trouble."
After a brief period of detente, cigarette executives resumed hostilities earlier this month. RJR Nabisco chief executive Steven Goldstone declared that he and other major cigarette company leaders were abandoning talks with Congress because the price tag on the proposed legislation would bankrupt the industry. They vowed to use their vast resources to battle on Capitol Hill and in courtrooms across America. As lobbyist J. Philip Carlton put it: "We're fighting for our life."
Industry spokesman Scott Williams said their battle plan to defeat the legislation is secret, but he acknowledged cigarette makers are busily wooing industries with a financial stake in the legislation. As one executive familiar with industry thinking put it: "We've got to go back and see if our traditional allies are ready to jump on."
Already, tobacco's representatives have contacted the American Wholesale Marketers Association, friendly Wall Street analysts and several farm groups. A national advertising campaign has begun, and there is talk of a series of town hall-style meetings hosted by cigarette executives to try to convince the public that Congress is more interested in raising taxes and paying for new spending programs than in curbing youth smoking.
Combine anti-taxers, tobacco growers and many of America's 50 million smokers and you have "a potent combination," said a worried Novelli, the anti-smoking advocate.
Cigarette companies -- and other industries affected by the tobacco legislation -- contribute huge sums to elected officials. Common Cause reported Friday that alcohol and restaurant interests gave more than $26 million to the Democratic and Republican parties from 1987 to 1997. Philip Morris gave $100,000 to the National Republican Congressional Committee, the largest contribution the committee took in during the first three months of 1998, according to the Federal Election Commission.
Because tobacco is politically radioactive, few of the groups wish to be tied to cigarette makers. "We don't want to be viewed in the same light they're viewed," said Marc Katz, a lobbyist for the National Association of Convenience Stores.
Yet their interests often merge. A group of convenience store operators met with McCain in Phoenix Friday to urge him to modify parts of the bill that permit the Food and Drug Administration to decide what types of stores can sell tobacco products. A victory on that front would be great news for cigarette makers because convenience stores are one of the largest markets for cigarette sales.
And their messages frequently track talking points developed by tobacco's high-priced public relations experts.
"Tobacco is just the first step," said John R. Block, a former agriculture secretary and president of Food Distributors International. "If you can attack tobacco with these horrendous taxes, why not do the same to liquor? How about beer? Then maybe go after beef because it's kinda fatty."
Warehouse owners, worried that new fees and regulations on tobacco may be passed on to them, have begun lobbying individual lawmakers, Block added.
When Congress began weighing proposals to limit tobacco sales and advertising, critics of the beer and alcohol industries saw an opportunity to extend similar restrictions to those products, said Jeff Becker, a lobbyist for the Beer Institute. "It's sort of a mini-prohibition when you can't advertise a product and the price is increased so significantly." The McCain bill also would impose a fee on every pack of cigarettes that would reach $1.10 over the next five years.
Until last week, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce had remained silent on smoking issues. But the McCain bill has become a rallying point for businesses. "The biggest concern we have is if this goes through, it would represent the largest transfer of wealth ever," said the chamber's executive vice president, Bruce Josten, pointing to whopping fees that anti-tobacco lawyers would collect and billions in new taxes.
For many conservatives, the tobacco proposals, which also call for up to 17 new regulatory agencies, are an alarming return to the big government, tax-and-spend era.
"This is a dry run for the same effort against beer, liquor, cars, gasoline, guns, sport utility vehicles," said Grover Norquist, head of Americans for Tax Reform. About a month ago, he sent a missive to Republicans saying it was fine to try to reduce teenage smoking, but don't use that as an excuse to raise taxes.
Finally, there are free speech objections to attempts to limit cigarette advertising.
"We're not on their side," said Laura W. Murphy, director of the ACLU. "We're on the side of the right to free expression."
Although the ACLU has received money from Big Tobacco, Murphy said the organization's views on commercial speech were established long before the donations came in.
Yet the emerging coalition is a fragile one at best. Last year, when cigarette makers negotiated a secret deal with trial lawyers and state attorneys general, it cut out many of its longtime supporters, such as billboard owners, fast food restaurants and, perhaps most important, tobacco farmers. The settlement signed last June 20 abolished billboard advertising, prohibited smoking in many eateries and offered no assistance to growers who anticipated a major drop in demand.
Public health advocates and President Clinton quickly exploited those tensions -- for example, offering farmers $28 billion in aid in the proposed legislation.
Yet in an election year with precious few working days left on Capitol Hill, Baker said Big Tobacco's pick-it-apart strategy could well succeed before lawmakers could reach consensus. "As the doubts grow, the arguments for pushing this on a fast track become harder and harder," he said. "There's really developing an attitude: Slow this down, take another look." |
