Congress sends Obama bill to regulate tobacco

[Hot Mega]

By JIM ABRAMS, Associated Press Writer – 5 mins ago

WASHINGTON – Congress sent legislation to the White House Friday granting the federal government unprecedented authority to regulate and restrict cigarettes, the single largest cause of preventable death.

President Barack Obama quickly expressed his support, appearing in the Rose Garden almost immediately after the House gave final approval to the bill giving the Food and Drug Administration control over tobacco production, marketing and sales.

For more than a decade, Obama said, leaders in Congress have been trying to prevent the marketing of cigarettes to children "and provide the public with the information they need to understand what a dangerous habit this is." He said the outcome was "a bill that truly defines change in Washington."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090612/ap_on_go_co/us_fda_tobacco

This is the A, No.1 problem I have with state sponsored healthcare, is that the government gets to officially decide what's good for you and what isn't. Or better yet, take away your right to choose to be unhealthy if you want to. I feel a slippery slope coming.

 

[busenbust]

Too little/too late I was inclined to say: but if it stops anyone smoking then :thumbsup:

 

[CunningStunts]

Hell, why not. The feds already control the car industry, most of the banks, and now the tobacco industry among other things...

 

[Hot Mega]

Hell, why not. The feds already control the car industry, most of the banks, and now the tobacco industry among other things...

The Feds intervened on behalf of the banks and the auto manufacturers at their behest as a matter of necessity and not policy.

 

[HeartBroker]

Fuckin' cocksuckers!

Nothing will be legal (or affordable) before too long!!!!!!!

 

[HeartBroker]

---Edit---

Sorry, double post due to internet lag :o

 

[CunningStunts]

The Feds intervened on behalf of the banks and the auto manufacturers at their behest as a matter of necessity and not policy.

Not necessarily. A friend of mine works for Wells Fargo, they were FORCED to take tarp money from the feds, when they didn't need it. And when they tried to pay it back, they were told NO.

The point is that freedom and individual responsibility are being swept away one item at a time, and now the government seems to know what's best for all of us and how we should live our lives. And that's just wrong IMHO. If people want to smoke, let them! If people want to watch porn, let them! If people run a company into the ground, fuck em, let it fail!

 

[HeartBroker]

^^^Couldn't agree more!

 

[Hot Mega]

Not necessarily. A friend of mine works for Wells Fargo, they were FORCED to take tarp money from the feds, when they didn't need it. And when they tried to pay it back, they were told NO.

The point is that freedom and individual responsibility are being swept away one item at a time, and now the government seems to know what's best for all of us and how we should live our lives. And that's just wrong IMHO. If people want to smoke, let them! If people want to watch porn, let them! If people run a company into the ground, fuck em, let it fail!

I imagine it's a little more complicated than it looks, Wells was attempting to purchase Wachovia and it's "Toxic Assets" and the fed using it's indicators saw that Wells while at the time solvent, could fall victim to the same conditions that damaged the interest of the other banks...judgement call.

But Ford isn't staked by the government. Explain how they avoided the socialist takeover?

It's easy to think one dimensionally and say allow something to fail..hell, I don't disagree with that concept on principle.

But to understand the threat to global economies this represented at a time I have no problem with the government loaning them money....remember..these are loans.

 

[Legzman]

Fuck that

 

[gunslingingbird]

Socialism? Did someone say socialism?

 

[USNinc]

This is the A, No.1 problem I have with state sponsored healthcare, is that the government gets to officially decide what's good for you and what isn't.

So tobacco is good for you?

Or better yet, take away your right to choose to be unhealthy if you want to. I feel a slippery slope coming.

No they didn't. You can still go to the store and buy a pack if you're of age.

 

[titsrock]

Smoking is evil. I applaud any effort to curb its existence. Big Tobacco has worked *around* whatever regulation has been passed to ensure that only Adults smoke. The Winston Cup, sponsoring sports teams, etc. where all ways to get on television. The Camel camel appealed to kids..etc.

They lost the right to be treated as anything more than a shady business sector filled with reckless, dangerous companies...

 

[Hot Mega]

So tobacco is good for you?

No they didn't. You can still go to the store and buy a pack if you're of age.

There are plenty of things that do more or less harm to you. The standard Big Mac isn't considered "healthy" by most but who should get to decide if you can have one or not? I would say you and your wallet.

Further, the government through the FDA now gets to determine how the end product is made. That certainly affects your right to buy what you want with respect to cigarettes.

Listen, I don't smoke cigarettes. However, both my parents did for 30 years which was a big enough influence on me not to. Both my parents are relatively healthy for people their age...I'm sure there were times they wished they didn't smoke but probably times they believed they got some perceived benefit from it. To me, that should be up to the individual in our so called "free" society.

A government that provides health coverage for you, especially a government who's logical stated goal is prevention rather than treatment obviously a stake in limiting your risk...the necessary sibling of limiting risk is limiting choices. That's the slippery slope.

This is the no. 1 problem I have with government sponsored health care. I believe it's a worthy undertaking but downside is the government's potential encroachment on your personal, lifestyle choices.

 

[USNinc]

There are plenty of things that do more or less harm to you. The standard Big Mac isn't considered "healthy" by most but who should get to decide if you can have one or not? I would say you and your wallet.

A person eating a Big Mac...or smoking knows they aren't exactly treating their body with a great product.
I don't see the government telling me I can't eat a Big Mac if I want to. I've never been stopped by some shady government official outside a McDonalds.
Homeless people asking for change...different story.

This is the no. 1 problem I have with government sponsored health care. I believe it's a worthy undertaking but downside is the government's potential encroachment on your personal, lifestyle choices.

How are they encroaching on your choice?
Are they sending secret service to your place to flog you after each time you have a smoke?

 

[Hot Mega]

A person eating a Big Mac...or smoking knows they aren't exactly treating their body with a great product.
I don't see the government telling me I can't eat a Big Mac if I want to. I've never been stopped by some shady government official outside a McDonalds.
Homeless people asking for change...different story.

How are they encroaching on your choice?
Are they sending secret service to your place to flog you after each time you have a smoke?

I'm going to try this one more time....I apologize in advance if I fail you in adequately explaining this.

Here's the scenario; If I like Big Macs the way they are...who should decide if they stay that way? McDonalds or the government?? Theorectically (as with the tobacco industry) the government can say to McDonald's and places like them we don't like what you product is doing to the people we insure. Change your product so that it meets our approval. These entreprenuers have gone through the process of perfecting a recipe that has been lucrative and successful for them. Now they have to change it because the government thinks it's not good enough for the people they insure?? What if I don't like this new Big Mac? What if other people don't like it? What impact does that have on their bottom line...their ability to stay in business potentially?

Now the government has essentially harassed out of the marketplace a product that I and others liked. In that sense, they are the de facto "deciders".

Now you may think that's extreme but consider this, just based on this new legislation regarding cigarettes there will be types of cigarettes you will not be able to get now. They will likely be in weaker strengths meaning people may ultimately buy more of them. While new smokers won't get hooked as fast, existing smokers may require more of them to satisfy their needs.

 

[D-rock]

I have always said it's not the government’s job to protect adults from themselves. I don't have a problem with the government making people pay for the stupid choices people intentionally made when they knew they were bad decisions, but people should have the right to make them, even if they have to pay the consequences for that.

 

[Mr.Bungle]

I think we should get RFID chips installed into our right hands (The mark of the beast. OMG!) already so we can speed this totalitarian Communist regime development. How bout it guys? :dunno:

 

[24788]

I am on the other side of the wall on this one. I enjoy tobacco on occasions.

I hate eating fast food and think it's a waste of money though. I don't think that should make me feel like I need to ban it so other people can't enjoy it though. Just because I think it's bad for myself doesn't mean others are looking at it the same way.

 

[Wainkerr99]

When I came here from South Africa over a year ago now, I expected very few people to smoke. I thought that we - in SA - we copying the example of the so called developed countries by adopting a more healthy lifestyle.

There were the usual complaints about freedoms being taken away. South Africans have a habit of accepting too many things without complaint.

But boy oh boy oh boy. You can't walk down the street here in Portland OR without breathing in second hand smoke. Every time I stop to look at the mountains in the distance, I have to shuffle around until I can breathe in normal air. It does not matter where I stand. Next to the streetcar stop. At a bus stop. Waiting for the max.

Stepping outside a building. Stepping into a building. Just walking down the street. Everyone smokes. Almost every last person.

Begs the question, why make it illegal to smoke indoors? Almost all the old people smoke. Many youth, especially women.

So from where I am standing it looks like America is way behind on tobacco policy.