Tobacco Documents Online

Page 43 NT®0033044 l ARGUS Rock Island, Illinoie June 25, 1964 A Harsh Cigaretfe Edict The Federal Trade Commission treated the tobacco industry very roughly when it ordered that by neat year all cigarette labels and advertising kdorm the public that "cigPptte smoking is dangerous to health and may cause death from cancer or other diseases." It would be just as reasonable for the oommisslon to require the labeling of all sutfmmhllere es dangerous to life unless dri+en very carefully. The highway toll continues to rise despite many ingenious and valiattt efforts of the auto people lo making driving safe But intelligent 'mo torlsts are aware of the risk they take, and don't need to be reminded of It. Neftiter do cigarette smokers. jOlALD Dttrbam, North Carolina June 25, 1964 Staking A Claim To New Empire The Federal Trade Commission's orde! rn cigarette labeling and ad• v-e:t:S.ng eeems to have been issued mote to stake a claim to a new em- pn•e for its bureaucracy than on iusti• fiable grounds for protecting health. The Department of Health, Education and Welfare wants ite Food and Drug Administration to have jurisdictiou over labeling cigarettes. By acting when it did, the FTC got the jump of the FDA. In bureaucracy. we sup• pose, possession is nine-tenths of the law, and the outfit which grabs juris• diction first gets a position of strength trom which to hold it. In the light of the tobacco mdus- try'e own plans to regulate ite adver- tieing. the FTC order was tnnnecea- eary. Because the industry itself pro. poses to police its advertising, and has drawn up a code and chosen an administrator, it deserves to be given a cnance to see vahat it can do on its eur, rne Justice Department hae egreed to give the tobacco industry eych a ehance, and the FTC should hd.ve doee so. By issuing the order when it did, the FTC in effect said that the Juetice Department was dere. Iict in the performance of its duties Insofar as regulation of cigarette ad- vertieing Is concerned. Against such a background. it ap• pears that the FTC's prime concern u•as to grab jurisdiction in cigarette labeling and advertising before an- other agency did. The order Is as discriminatory as It is unfair. It is unfair because it denies to the indus- try the opportunity it has rn good faith sought to police itself. It is dis- criminetosy because it does not re- quire other possible sources of can• cer and other diseases to be so labeled. From the evidence at hand. exhaust fumes and smog can he charged with :eaponeibtlity for lung cancer as much is ciaarettes. If the FTC is so coneernea about health, it Is morally obligated to require the sources of exhaust tumes and smog t•~ carry a label similar to that it would requira for clgaretteF. The order will. and slmuld. be ch-ol- lenged In the cour;s. In this new field, no federal agency should aa- sume jurisdiction, but Congress should epecificalw authorize juriadic- tion. by moving t- enlare.- ae own empire, the FTC has put the issue o! control of cigaretle labeling and a!- vertising where it ran be definitivrl,y decided by the com-ts. The industry, though, should have been given .a chance to prove the e'dectiveness of its own selt-regulation.