[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 56 (Thursday, April 2, 2009)]
[House]
[Page H4491]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




           FAMILY SMOKING PREVENTION AND TOBACCO CONTROL ACT

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from California (Mr. McClintock) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Madam Speaker, today this House passed H.R. 1256, 
which takes tobacco regulation to a whole new level and, at the same 
time, imposes onerous new fees that are going to be transferred to 
consumers as higher prices. The entire debate over the bill was over 
what method should be used to do so. Before we close today's 
proceedings, I'd like to offer a somewhat different perspective.
  Many years ago, author and commentator Bruce Herschensohn made this 
point. He said, ``For every pleasure in life, there is a corresponding 
risk. I think that's a universal truth--for every pleasure in life, 
there is a corresponding risk.
  And he pointed out that it's true that with enough taxes and laws and 
restrictions and regulations and penalties and lectures, government can 
produce a virtually risk-free society. But it will also be one of the 
most colorless, pleasureless, tedious, and miserable societies ever 
conceived by the mind of man. I believe that's the case.
  The health risks of smoking are real and they are well-documented. 
Our schools rightly make a concerted effort to inform every child of 
the health risks of tobacco--and they do a good job of it. Our 
government warns every adult of the health risks of tobacco--and they 
do a good job of it, too.
  As a result, I don't believe there's a single individual in the 
United States who doesn't well and fully comprehend the health risks of 
tobacco. But once those warnings are issued, how much farther should 
government go to make individual decisions for rational adults if they 
weigh the risks of smoking for themselves?
  Ten years ago, after California had imposed yet another tax on 
tobacco products, I got a letter from a woman who said, ``I'm 81 years 
old. I have been smoking my entire life. If I have to quit now, I'm 
going to die.'' She then went on to meticulously calculate how much the 
new tax cost would cost her on her limited, fixed income, and asked if 
I could help.
  Madam Speaker, in every society, in every part of the world, in every 
period of history there is always a large group of people who simply 
want to be left alone to live their lives according to their own best 
judgment. And there's always a smaller but more domineering group who 
believe they're so good at running their own lives that they're just 
naturally entitled to run everybody else's as well.
  Rarely has that conflict between these two groups come into sharper 
focus than in the ongoing efforts to restrict and regulate and tax and 
harass and intimidate individuals who, after weighing all the risks, 
decide to smoke anyway.
  Personally, I think they're making a very bad decision. But they 
probably think others are making a very bad decision when they decide 
to go skiing or bungee jumping or skydiving or thousands of other 
pleasures that incur corresponding and calculated risks.
  I wonder tonight whatever happened to the notion of personal 
responsibility and whatever happened to the notion, as Jefferson put 
it, of ``a wise and frugal government which shall restrain men from 
injuring one another but shall leave them otherwise free to regulate 
their own pursuits of industry and improvement.''

                          ____________________