Local residents give views on tobacco ruling

Willie Karashin/Exponent Photographer The anti-smoking movement had some of the life sucked out of it when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that the FDA had no control to regulate tobacco as an addictive drug.

By Jessica Webster
City Editor

Anti-smoking activists got a kick in the gut Tuesday when the U.S. Supreme Court said government lacks authority to regulate tobacco as an "addictive drug."

The decision was a 5-4 ruling that perturbed President Bill Clinton and the American Cancer Society, yet elated mammoth tobacco businesses Philip Morris and R.J. Reynolds. Though the Supreme Court stated tobacco may be the "single most significant threat to public health," it noted that Congress has clearly precluded the Food and Drug Administration from regulating tobacco products.

Purdue student John Yucei, a junior in the School of Science, said the Supreme Court is on the right path. "I don’t think government should have the right to regulate it or to have a say in what I can do," said Yucei, with a lit cigarette in hand. "As long as I’m not harming anyone else, I should be able to do what I want."

Yucei, who started smoking at 16, is in the pool of Purdue students who smoke regularly. According to the Purdue Student Wellness Office, that smoking pool is about 27 percent of the Purdue student population. About 23 percent of the American population smokes.

Third-year pharmacy student Adam Schmitt said he’s cut back to three cigarettes a day, but he still needs that daily dose of nicotine. "It’s a social thing as well, you know — at the bars and when you’re out."

Schmitt said he would like to see more government regulations on tobacco. "You just see younger and younger kids smoking. It’s a drug and they may as well regulate the most addictive drug in the country."

Chuck Gose, public relations for the American Cancer Society in Indiana, said Tuesday’s Supreme Court decision was unfortunate. "While we’re disappointed with the outcome, the Supreme Court decision only underscores the need for the Congress to pass meaningful and comprehensive FDA authority over tobacco products."

However, local tobacco businesses see the Supreme Court’s decision as a protection of individual rights. The primary fear of government control is that if the FDA has control over tobacco, it might ban cigarettes because they are too harmful.

Dawn Angela Cecil, assistant manager of Smokes for Less Store in Lafayette, said the government should keep its nose out. "They shouldn’t have any control," said Cecil. "It’s your American right to smoke … nobody is holding a gun to your head when you light up.

"If I’m smoking, it’s not hurting the next guy; it's hurting me."

Just Smokes employee Becky Sneider agrees. "I won’t serve anyone under 18, and I don’t think kids should smoke," she said. "When you’re an adult, you have the right to make your own decisions.

"Everybody’s got a choice, and we know what the downfalls are and we have the right to make that choice."

But Lafayette resident Janice Sharp said that "choice" is killing too many Americans. "The government has taken the power to regulate what goes into food and into other drugs, and I just don’t know why they can’t regulate tobacco," she said. "It’s the No. 1 problem drug. Politicians don’t want to alienate these big companies, so they turn their backs on this problem that is killing off the American population.

"But I guess we cannot legislate behavior. I just think they should do something more to protect the people."

People like Sharp point to potent statistics. According to the American Lung Association, 3,000 children start smoking the United States every day. And 438,000 people die of smoking-related lung diseases every year.

But "responsible use" is what tobacco companies tout. Mark Smith, spokesman for Brown and Williamson Tobacco Corp., said the ruling was a sign. "Business and industry throughout the nation ought to breathe a sigh of relief. The highest court in the land has confirmed that a federal agency cannot on its own go beyond its limits of authority set by Congress."

Local residents give views on tobacco ruling

Campaign 2000

Purdue Exponent 2000