Okay, here we go again.
First, let me begin my comments by clearly stating that I am not a smoker, I don’t encourage or condone smoking, and I will do everything in my power to prevent my son from smoking.
However, on Thursday, the FDA once again took what I believe are unconstitutional steps to regulate the advertising of cigarettes (http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN186393120100318). The goal is to make it harder for cigarette manufacturers to target children at public events with “harmful and addictive products”.
As a parent and a non-smoker, I admire the good intentions behind this effort. However, as a believer in the US Constitution, I think that the FDA is in violation of the 1st amendment by attempting to further limit the rights of a company to market a legal product.
In 1996 the Clinton administration tried the same thing. Fortunately, these efforts were overturned by the Supreme Court who even then found the FDA’s attempts at regulatory control unconstitutional.
I also find the FDA’s selectivity interesting. Under the new FDA rules, tobacco companies can no longer sponsor sporting events or sell merchandise using their brand logos.
If the goal is to make it harder to target children at public events with “harmful and addictive products”, why are these same restrictions not also thrust upon, oh lets say… beer or liquor manufacturers? Last I heard these were also harmful and addictive, yet I can’t recall the last sporting event I attended where Budweiser’s logo wasn’t everywhere.
I’m not proposing that the government slap similar restrictions upon alcohol manufacturers, but I find a certain hypocrisy in how they selectively choose some potentially harmful products over others. These decisions seem to be determined by the direction the wind is blowing (or perhaps by special interest groups and lobbyists).
If the government wants to end the marketing of harmful products to children, why not just make the manufacture of such products illegal? Oh yeah, they tried that once. It was called the 18th amendment. And we all know how that turned out! I guess this time they figured it would be better to kill these products slowly by regulating them out of business; starting with marketing. I get it.
