Tobacco Documents Online

370 Statement of Senator Howard H. Baker, Consumer Subcommittee, February 10, 1972 Mr. Chairman~, I am pleased to have this opportunity to make a statement for the record on S. 14541, a bill to require the Federal Trade Commission to establish acceptable levels of tar and nicotine content of cigarettes. I regret that I have been unable to attend the previous hearings omthis measure, but I understand that a good deal of excellent testimony has been presented, by my colleagues in the Senate and by representatives of the tobacco in- dustry and the medical profession~, in an effort to point out the potential effects of this legislation. I would like to express at this time my own concern about the possible economic impact of this measure on the state of Tenn- essee, and my feeling that the bill is unneeded and unwarranted'by the evidence which is now available. In weighing the relative merits of legislation such as this, Mr. Chairman, I believe it is important that we remember that we are dealing here with an industry that is as old as this-nation~it- self. It is an industry which is vitally important to the economic stability of one whole area of the country, which makes a sizeable coritribution to our trade balance each year, and which is an enor- mous source of revenue for federal, state, and local governments. I know of no agricultural commodity which returns more for invest- ment than the tobacco crop. I understand from reviewing the testimony presented by witnesses at these hearings that there is considerable controversy about exactly how an "'acceptable" level of tar and nicotine content in cigarettes would be determined. Even if such a determination could~be made easily, however, the setting of any level could~do irreversible damage to~tobacco growers who have no control over climatic conditions which determine, in many cases the amount of e tar and nicotine in their crop. 20504C980

-2- The tobacco industry has beemmuch maligned~in recent years by those who seek the prohibition of cigarettes im~this country. I submit that the industry has shown a cooperative spirit that all of us can be proud of and that it has discharged its re- sponsibility to the Americaniconsumer in a most honorable fashion. It has voluntarily devoted millions of dollars to medical and:sci- entific research into the effects of smoking upon health. It has voluntarily agreed to discontinue advertising,over radio and tele- thee vision. It has printed in its advertisementsA tar and nicotine content of various brands of cigarettes. It has displayed the Surgeon General's warning on cigarette packages, and it has now volunteered to show this warning iniall printed advertisements. In addition, the industry has responded to concern about the possible effects of tar and~nicotine by developing cigarettes with lower tar and~ nicotine content and any smoker who desires to reduce his intake of these substances has a wide variety of reduced tar and nicotine brands to choose from. Mr. Chairman, surely no one caniargue that the American citizen does not have adequate information to make an intelligent and informed'decis,ion for himself as to whether or not to smoke and as to which cigarette he will smoke. Surely he does not need the help of the federal government in making this decision, and I seriously doubt that he wants that decision made £or him. There is a growing body of statistical and cliinical evidence of a linkage betweenicigarette smoking and health; but it seems to me that the basic issue confronting us is whether to make the Congress the universal guardian of the medical welfare of the public, or to provide a full and appropriate disclosure of the effects of a given product or practice so that informed individuals can make their ownidecisions. IG.O1.3d4SSoJ. As I have said on the floor of the Senate during debate on the Public Health Cigarette Smoking Act, I would be equally concerned for health hazard warnings on alcoholic beverages, for automobiles, or for any number of patent medications which are sold in voluminous quantities without prescriptiom. I am not arguing, therefore, against the action which we have already taken in this area, but I feel that

if we go further, as many propose, we will be abandoning the role of legislative policy determination and assuming the role of public protector. I very mucli doubt that that is what the Congress should do.