GOP Rep. Buyer: Harness Market Innovation For Safer Tobacco Products
Rep. Steve Buyer (R-IN) took to the House floor this morning to denounce the tobacco regulation bill as a big step on the road to Tobacco Socialism. His argument: That the bill narrow-mindedly attempts to stop tobacco use entirely, as opposed to harnessing the powers of market innovation to develop and encourage people to use safer, less harmful tobacco products.
Buyer said that cessation programs have a success rate of only 7% -- meaning that we are accepting failure by going down this road. Instead, he said, we should be using market innovation to migrate populations over to safer and more mild tobacco products, which in turn could help people quit.
Buyer noted that people make "harm-reduction choices" every day, in terms of what they eat or drink, what car to drive, etc. "But how come we don't apply harm-reduction strategies to tobacco?" He asked. "We should. In the marketplace right now, there are many types of products."
And to keep the public informed, Buyer then reviewed the various types of nicotine products that are out there, laying out the whole range of relative harms that each option poses: Cigars, chew, non-filtered cigarettes, filtered cigarettes, nicotine inhalers and others, all the way to Swedish snus (a type of snuff that is better, he explained, because it is pasteurized rather than fermented).
"What we have in the bill is abstinence," he said -- explaining that while it does mention harm-reduction, there is such a complicated regulatory mechanism that it effectively locks in the current market.
For once, an American conservative has recognized that it's pointless to teach abstinence. The real answer is safe smoking.
Josh
Matt
Eric
Brian
"as opposed to harnessing the powers of market innovation to develop and encourage people to use safer, less harmful tobacco products."
That has to be the dumbest free market argument I've ever heard in my life.
June 12, 2009 11:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
I've read that Big Tobacco has actually invested some serious research over the years into efforts to create safer (and doubtless still more addictive) cigarettes. And failed to get anywhere. Part of the problem is that medical science still doesn't even know which of the hundreds of chemicals produced by the damned things are carcinogenic and to what degree.
Personally, I've been tobacco-free for three years after smoking for 16. I'm now addicted to nicotine gum, which is expensive but probably not especially dangerous (though it's impossible to say in the absence of long-term, large-scale studies, and you're supposed to get off the gum after a couple months). On balance, I'd rather give my money to an evil drug company whose products do save or extend some lives than to scum-of-the-earth cigarette peddlers.
June 12, 2009 1:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Putting the "no" in "innovation"?
June 12, 2009 2:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am not necessarily in favor of everything in this bill, but I will say this: This guy is fucking stupid.
Harnessing the powers of market innovation? What the hell does he think we HAVE been doing? The market has been wide open to do what it wants. Of course, the answer is that he doesn't really have faith in the market for any reason other than these republicans have an undying devotion to the free market at all times. It isn't an ideology. It is a theology. It is the answer to everything. They learned this in Econ 101.
June 12, 2009 11:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
Right on! They think money=god and god=money. In every situation where there is a choice between doing the right thing by their fellow human beings and doing the right thing by the profit motive ..... Republicans choose money.
Watch the health care debate for any sign that a Republican gives a shit that thousands and thousands of Americans will die this year from the lack of timely or sufficient medical care. They do not care. They will stand on "free market" and "for profit" PRINCIPLES every god damned time they have a choice.
We need Jeebus the Magic Jew to come back and kick the "money changers" out of the temple again!
June 13, 2009 4:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
So we don't want to the government to regulate a product, but we should infringe on the manufacturer's right to market the product?
Still LMAO over the term Tobacco Socialism
June 12, 2009 11:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
Voting is always a case of harm reduction.
June 12, 2009 11:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
How about selling this bill as 'safe tobacco' in the same way they sell "clean coal".
June 12, 2009 11:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry John, but I really don't give a shit what they call this bill, it is utterly ridiculous that it has taken over 30 some odd years to get the FDA to regulate something that kills people. I have zero issue with tobacco smokers, they have a right to smoke if they want, just like my co-worker has the right to eat as many of those BK breakfast muffins of 1200 calories as many times as he/she wants regardless of whether it affects my offices overall insurance rates. By all means indulge yourself, I am not perfect either and partake in some less than healthy choices from time to time.
I would almost guarentee that this bill will do more to affect underage smoking than all the campaigns of the recent past. And you know what there will still be smokers after this bill and their will still be companies who make money off of smokers.
June 12, 2009 11:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
Josh,
my post was, of course, sarcasm. :-)
Since nicotine is more addictive than many of the drugs behind the counter of your local pharmacy I think cigarettes should be sold only in a pharmacy and with a prescription.
June 12, 2009 1:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
What responsible, ethical doctor would ever write a script for a substance that has no medicinal value?
June 12, 2009 2:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Since when did a repuglican NAZI have a clue about socialism?
First, I smoked for 11 years. During my last year, I was going thru 3 packs of Dorals a day. One day, I accidentally forgot to take my smokes with me on a 12 hour well logging run about 50 miles from the base camp. Turns out I spent an entire week working that exploratory well. No one on the drilling crew smoked and they kept forgetting to bring me any from my room. After 7 days, I returned to camp and found my need/desire for smoking was about as strong and wanting a glass of water. Within a week, I completely stopped. This was back in 1982.
Notice dip$h1t Buyer would rather leave it to business and free markets to pander to smokers with exotic methods of quitting smoking for a tidy sum of money, rather than voting for a public option for health insurance which would do the job for pennies on the dollar.
So why isn't the MSM screaming about the hypocrisy the repuglicans are proposing to thwart the will of the public on the issue? Fact: the repuglicans are more interested in putting the public's hard earned money into the pockets of the corporate elite with no regards if the service provided has the valued of the price paid. They just want to make sure the river of money keeps flowing regardless of the hazards in the way.
June 12, 2009 11:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
The tobacco industry promised to go to the ends of the earth to develop a "safer" cigarette in the 50s when the cancer link data began to become harder to deny. Under cover of that promise, they created a "research" institute devoted to the cultivation of expert witnesses espousing denialist theories for what it knew would eventually be a wave of litigation. They're the model for the energy industry funding of global warming deniers.
The one thing they didn't do was to market a truly safer cigarette because they were scared that doing so would a) represent an admission that their product was dangerous and, b) make it impossible for them to market anything else.
FDA regulation is the only thing that will make it possible for the industry to actually develop and market reduced lethality cigarettes.
And hey, it is possible to quit--I know. All you have to do is undergo the inconceivably excruciating procedure known as the adult tonsilectomy and then spend the next two weeks suffering from a level of pain in your throat that's so high that the mere thought of smoking makes you wince and so bombed out of your mind on narcotic pain pills that you don't have a receptor left in your brain for a nicotine molecule to plug into anyway.
Piece of cake.
June 12, 2009 11:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
On the subject of quitting:
I've known several people who went the hospital route of quitting. One was unconscious in the ICU for 5 days followed by 10 more days in the hospital and 2 weeks in a nursing home. Another had a non-smoking related cancer surgery followed by a nosocomial infection, so about 2-1/2 weeks of hospital altogether. A third had a heart attack followed by a stint placement and strict orders to stop smoking. The first of these people is a man and the other two are women.
All 3 had the desire to make that last cigarette before the hospital be their last ever and were highly motivated. Only 1 of this group has kicked the habit in the long run. All I can say is that cigarettes are among the toughest addictions I've ever run across and I don't judge those who can't seem to quit as wusses. As long as they don't smoke on me or in my environment, I leave them in peace. It's about time the FDA had some say in this market.
June 12, 2009 12:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Does this guy know that the Surgeon General believes that cigarettes lead to cancer? Why is he against a cancer free american?
Just kidding, I can barely listen to the utter crap that is coming out of this guys mouth.
June 12, 2009 12:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why is someone from Indiana so interested in this legislation?
June 12, 2009 12:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
North of Kentucky.
June 12, 2009 12:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
they do grow a bit of tobaccy in southern indiana.
June 12, 2009 1:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ah. Buyer.
Another mutant from the small gene pool that is Indiana.
One of the "House Managers" responsible for the pointless Presidential Pee Pee Posse of 1998.
Ignore.
June 12, 2009 12:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
As I resident of Indiana, I apologize on behalf of my state for this guy (though he is not my congressman).
We aren't all this stupid.
Why he cares, I'm not sure. We don't farm tobacco here. Smoking is becoming less and less fashionable all the time, same as the rest of the country. The state legislature is considering a smoking-in-public-places ban, my city already has one. No clue what his deal is, unless he just opposes everything Dems propose just on principle. That whole "Party of No" thing, I guess.
June 12, 2009 12:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Just goes to show that just about anyone can be bought.
June 12, 2009 1:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
uh, yes you do.
June 12, 2009 1:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually in a way he is correct. All attempts at legislating behavior have failed miserably. Drugs, Alcohol, Sex....all have failed. Does anyone really believe that this will work any better ??
People will still smoke and teens will still get tobacco just like they get alcohol and drugs.
In fact it could even backfire and cause even greater use.
C
June 12, 2009 1:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
I suspect Buyer cares about this issue because he is paid to. That and general opposition, on principal, to anything proposed by Dems.
It is weird to see him talk* about harm reduction, and use the word abstinence - and argue that it is, to quote Bristol Palin, "unrealistic". Why is he using that loaded term here - hoping that liberals would be squeamish about arguing FOR abstinence as a policy? I just don't think this line is really going to fly. Except on Comedy Central of course.
*ok, I haven't watched the video yet, I confess. I'm going by Eric's reporting here.
June 12, 2009 1:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have no problem with this, if Buyer takes the consistent step of introducing a bill legalizing the use of marijuana and other recreational drugs. Abstinence doesn't work, after all!
June 12, 2009 1:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good point!
June 12, 2009 1:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
These days, 'market innovation' means campaign donations and gutting oversight.
June 12, 2009 1:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
I want to hear a democrat respond by saying:
Tobacco companies are cancer inducing terrorists! They are harming america and making us unsafe to death threatening diseases. More Americans die every year due to these companies than any war America has fought in.
Just for kicks!
June 12, 2009 2:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Cap and Trade!
Ewww..
June 12, 2009 3:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Want to see something cool: Google "American Energy Act"
Very first entry is "Error - GOP.gov"
3:17pm EST
June 12, 2009 3:18 PM | Reply | Permalink