Showdown for Clinton on Smoking

President Clinton faces a choice between public health and presidential politics this week. He can either uphold a proposal by the Food and Drug Administration to declare that nicotine is legally a drug and therefore cigarette sales and advertising can be regulated or he can cave in to tobacco-state Democrats and accept a weaker compromise under which tobacco companies would agree to help deter sales to children.

The FDA proposes to use its authority narrowly, not to ban cigarettes but to reduce smoking by children through banning vending machines from places frequented by youths, limiting advertising and implementing stricter enforcement of state laws against selling tobacco products to minors. The industry fears this will be, well, the camel’s nose under the tent that will lead to far broader federal controls on smoking by adults in the future, theoretically even prohibition.

The President is reportedly wavering under intense political pressure from Southern Democrats. According to published reports, they have found support from the House minority leader, Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo.), who has received more than $60,000 in campaign contributions from tobacco industry sources. Gephardt is backing the compromise plan offered by Reps. Charlie Rose (D-N.C.) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.).

That plan would attempt to avoid FDA action by having tobacco companies sign a binding accord with the government to underwrite efforts to educate children about the dangers of smoking, eliminate advertising directed at youngsters and help states enforce bans on sales to minors. The government would retain the right to impose regulations if the companies failed to live up to the agreement.

By rights, the industry has long since lost its chance to cooperate with the government. The record shows that tobacco companies have consistently concealed information on the dangers of tobacco and nicotine for decades, and advertising campaigns like Joe Camel are certainly aimed at young people. More than 1 million children become regular smokers every year, even as 420,000 older Americans die from smoking-related diseases. There is little reason to believe the industry is likely to act in unison and abide by the quasi-voluntary steps of the Rose-Wyden compromise.

The President is undoubtedly worried about the economies of tobacco states like North Carolina and Virginia, and thus the potential political impact of any decision on his reelection chances. We remind him, though, that it is unlikely he can win reelection next year without California’s 54 electoral votes. California voters have repeatedly spoken on this issue, voting to devote millions in cigarette taxes to anti-smoking education and to rebuff industry efforts to repeal the state’s strong rules against smoking in restaurants and other public places.

Perhaps Clinton’s choice is not so hard after all. He can both stand up for public health and boost his chances for reelection.