Tobacco Documents Online

P- As Presidential H'ealth Advisor Dr. Peter Bourne out last year: "No matter how much one may favor prohibition of'tobacco products, such a move is 300 years too late."' « s•. A third'and fundamental is'sue at stake is the question of individual freedom of choice. The choice rests -- as it should -- with the individual. Those who want to use tobacco will...those who prefer not to,, won't. You cannot legislate choice -- that.'s what living in a democracy is alll about. ' There is one final point that needs to be made, Mr. Chairman. The sheer economics of this situation dictate finding a solution rather than abolishing the industry -- which, in effect, this legislation could do. Tobacco is a multi-billion dollar business. More than 600,000 farm families -- more than 90 percent of'small family farms in,my state alone -- derive much of'their income from tobacco.. Throughout the years of'exhausti've debate over tobacco,''no one has come forth with an alternative crop that these families could grow which would keep them self-sufficient. ~ I have no doubt that okra, bibb liettuce, cucumbers or hundreds of other crops would'thrive in the rich farmland of'my state and elsewhere. But the cash receipts to be derived from any'of these alternatives would be far from sufficient to support either a family or the farm. Mr. Chairman, I don't want to see the Congress, through this legislation, be a willing accessory to the further demise of'the family farm -- because unless we find a suitable alternative, that''s what will happen and these people are going to be left with only two choices -- leave the family farm or end up on welfare. ~ A

The end result is that we are seeing a classic .illustration of the value of'freedbmlof choice -- the free -choice of smokers on the one handito smoke cigarettes that critics say are safer, and'the free choice of the manufacturers on the other hand to respond competitively'to' that growing market. ',Y`~. - .. .. .. . . . . . Now, it appears that the federal government wants to recognize the industry's i!nitiatives...to reward the industry's efforts tolproduce a safer product...with punitive legislation. Why must this be the direction we take? Is it that unreasonable to consider supporting -- insteadiof underming -- what I perceive to be a sincere and intense effort to save an industry that provides billions of dollars of income for millions of Americans? As I have reminded my distinguished'colTeague many times, tobacco is a pliable product...a product from which impurities can be removediin as short altime as two growing seasons. That flexibility facilitates research such as the kind which is now being conducted on smoking and health at the University of Kentucky's Tobacco Research Institute. Since the Tobacco Research Institute's creationlin 1972', more than $3.7 inillioa annually of State's funds has been directed'into massive research and study. That research helped develop the current low tar and nicotine cigarettes which are now on the market. - Yet my repeated calls for increased1research initiatives, at the federal level continue to fal!1' on deaf ears. According, .to Health, Education, andiWelfare Secretary Califano, the only budget increase for research on health-related aspects of smoking will amount to a mere $4 milTionlin Fiscal Year 1!979 -- : an amount just slightly more than what is now being directed, " to research in one state -- with non-federal dollars as we?:1!. The d'ividends to occur from this research will be far more rewardingiand productive than to pump millions and millions of dollars into anti-smoking,initiatives and'punitive legislation .which have no guarantee of success. Another question that must be addressed is why tobaccoo has been singled out as the focal point of this Subcommittee's preventive health program. Why aren"t similar efforts being directed'towardlthe thousands of'new chemicals which are poured into the environment eachlyear?' Why isn''t equal enthusiasm1bei:ng directed toward the estimatedil,SAQ subst.ances in the working place which,HEW suspects to be cancer-causing? I'm al]l for finding new ways to cut down the high, incidence of cancer in this country, but I'm not convinced that the approach you have proposed'will produce any substantive results.

UNI TED STATES SENA TE' STATENYENT,BY 'SENATORWENDEL'L H. FORD 4107' Dirksen Senate Office Building , Washingtpnl D.C. - 202/224A343' SENATE SUBCOMiMITTEE'oN HEALTH & SCIENCE RESEARCH RE: ANTI-SMOKING LEGISLATION NTAY 25, 1978 is non-existent in the Senate!' but I can guarantee you that as long as you maintain your strong!interest in this area,, I'm not going to have any trouble at all convincing my constituency that idle time myself sitting across the aisle from you to talk about tobacco -- and I dare say it won't be the last. II don't know how much~enjoyment you get out`of these sessions, lyfr. Chairman,`this isn't the first time I"ve found legislation. . WS RELEASE WENDELL H. FORD of KENTUCKY Quite frankly,, I do not expect you to be swayed by any arguments I'might make this morning, but I do hope that you recognize the Subcommittee's responsibility to ensure that the points I raise are carefully considered and, given their due process as youlmove forward1with thi~s its sole intent. Let me make it clear at the very beginning that I have no problems with the intent behind the provisions of this legislation which pertain to children and smoking. I would support legFi.sliation to this effect -- if' that were those limits. Unfortunately, that is not the case, and the legils- . lation which is now before this Subcommittee gpes far beyond of this industry which is so very important to so many states. elements, if they are found to exist in tobacco, and then remove them. Through research, we can make important strides'. toward lessening any risks found to be associated with smoking, ; whil'e at the same time maintaining the economic stability Through research~we can work to identify harmfuT ,' I will be the first to admit that serious questions continue to persist about tobacco. But I'will also be the first to declare that the proper and logical response to 'finding answers to these questions is not through punitive legislation, but through accelerated research. ?' In fact, I find it ironic that we have to even consider a renewal of governmental assaults on tobacco at the very time the marketplace is so rapidly doaling with the problems that smoking adversaries talk so much about. Tar and nicotine,yields have been cut in half in recent years. The cigarette industry is involved in the most vigorous and expensive competition in its history to convert smokers to the low-tar brands. 4