[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 125 (Monday, July 31, 1995)]
[House]
[Page H7993]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                       TOBACCO AND GRIDLOCK KILL

  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise this morning to talk for a few minutes 
about the critically important public health issue of keeping America's 
youngsters from beginning to smoke. This is a public health problem 
that is growing. Three thousand youngsters in our country every day 
start smoking and eventually 1,000 of those kids will die of smoking-
related illnesses. Most importantly, this is a public health problem 
that is getting worse. Last week, we learned the tragic news based on a 
study from the University of Michigan that smoking among eighth graders 
is up 30 percent in our country.
  Until recently, there have been two options for dealing with all 
this. One was to regulate tobacco through the Food and Drug 
Administration.
  Last year, I asked each of the tobacco executives whether they 
believed nicotine was addictive. Each one of them said, no, but they 
are clearly wrong. Tobacco is addictive. It has drug-like properties, 
and the evidence is in that the Food and Drug Administration has the 
legal authority to regulate the product.
  Unfortunately, if this option is chosen, if the FDA chooses to 
regulate tobacco, what will happen is the tobacco companies will go to 
court, they will sue and we will lose another generation of our 
children to political gridlock and infighting. So I and other Members 
of Congress believe that it is time to explore other options. In 
exploring these options, let us try to set aside the politics that rage 
about this issue and do what is best for our children.
  Some of my colleagues say that if the FDA does not regulate tobacco, 
that would be good for the South, particularly Democrats in the South. 
Other colleagues say that if the FDA regulates tobacco, even if nothing 
gets done, that will be good for the President because the President is 
taking on tobacco.
  Both of those views, in my opinion, do a disservice to our Nation's 
children.
  Tobacco kills, but gridlock kills also. So for that reason, I and 
Congressman Rose of North Carolina have suggested another approach. We 
believe it is worth exploring the concept of the Federal Government 
entering into a written, binding, legal agreement between the tobacco 
companies and the Federal Government to take dramatic, immediate 
measures to
 stop young people from smoking.

  We are talking about banning vending machines from where children 
congregate. We are discussing banning advertising targeted at young 
people, and most importantly, at a time when the Federal Government is 
cutting funds from health and social services, we are talking about the 
tobacco companies putting up at least $100 million for the States to 
have tough enforcement of the laws banning sales to minors and public 
education efforts to stop young people from smoking.
  Most particularly, I believe that this agreement cannot be voluntary. 
It would have to be legally binding, and if at any point the tobacco 
companies breached the agreement, then the Food and Drug Administration 
would go forward and regulate tobacco.
  Mr. Speaker, the interests of children has to be our top priority. If 
there is more gridlock and more political infighting, the tobacco 
companies can surely hold off FDA regulation to the point where 
President Clinton is no longer in office. They have deep pockets for 
lawsuits, and I know personally, because they have taken me and one of 
our colleagues, Mr. Waxman to court over our efforts to make sure that 
the health of our young people is protected.
  Now is the time to act in the interests of our children. Tobacco 
kills, but so does gridlock. Let us act quickly to protect our 
children.

                          ____________________