Big Tobacco’s Ruse

The industry doth protest too much–in fact the McCain bill is just what they’ve always wanted.

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


In the month since they announced they are walking away from the negotiations over tobacco legislation, the tobacco companies have taken an unprecedented pounding. The Clinton administration, members of Congress from both parties, and the media have lined up to take potshots at the tobacco industry’s shocking display of arrogance—after all, under the constitution, corporate CEOs do not have a vote in Congress, nor do they share the president’s veto power.

It has been the best month Big Tobacco has enjoyed in a long time.

By denouncing the legislation introduced by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) as an extremist, “big government” approach that is likely to bankrupt the industry, the tobacco merchants have succeeded in luring many into a defense of the McCain bill.

That is exactly what the industry hoped to accomplish. Big Tobacco cannot help but be happy with the McCain bill, which grants the industry a wide array of concessions and protections. But it knows the best way to generate support for the bill is to pretend to oppose it—a tobacco industry endorsement would be the kiss of death for any legislation on Capitol Hill.

Here are some of the reasons why the industry loves the McCain bill:

  • A cap on liability: The McCain bill specifies that the tobacco companies cannot pay more than $6.5 billion a year in damages in civil lawsuits. This lets the tobacco companies predict future expenses—their most cherished goal, because the uncertainty surrounding litigation and the potential of huge punitive damage awards keeps tobacco stock prices depressed.

  • Consumers pay, not the companies: The McCain bill requires the companies to make annual payments to the government, and to pass through the costs to consumers. All proposed tobacco legislation would, through “pass-throughs” or direct taxes, raise prices for consumers, so this is not unique to the McCain bill. But it does put the lie to the industry’s claim that tobacco companies may face bankruptcy under the bill. It is consumers who will pay the costs, not industry (although resultant sales volume declines may lower the companies’ profits).

  • An exemption from the nation’s antitrust laws: The antitrust exemption will permit the companies to collude to raise prices more than required — meaning the industry may actually profit from the legislation.

    In a September 1997 report, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) concluded that similar antitrust immunity provisions in the June 20, 1997 state attorneys’ general deal with the tobacco industry “may permit the industry members to discuss pricing arrangements that reach beyond the amount of a 100 percent ‘pass-through’ to consumers of the cost of the annual payments,” and that “the industry may be able to increase prices and generate substantial profits.”

  • Payments under the McCain bill are tax deductible: That means taxpayers will cover the cost of about 40 percent of the industry’s payments—even though consumers, not the companies, will really be paying the McCain bill’s costs. This is an enormous opportunity for company profiteering.

  • Big Tobacco’s real assets shielded: The McCain bill would permit only domestic tobacco manufacturing subsidiaries to be sued. The parent companies and the foreign subsidiaries of Philip Morris and R.J. Reynolds would be completely protected from litigation. That means tobacco company victims would be denied access to most of the assets and earnings of the tobacco company conglomerates (Philip Morris already earns more than half of its tobacco profits from overseas sales, and the portion is growing).

  • Preemption of state action: The McCain bill would prevent states from enforcing regulations stronger than those in federal legislation through civil suits against the tobacco companies. That would deter states from trying to invent more effective regulatory measures. Other preemptive provisions in the McCain bill would also undermine community and state campaigns to control the tobacco companies.

    Congress, the media, and the public shouldn’t be fooled by Big Tobacco’s ruse. It is time to pass tough tobacco legislation—without worrying about industry’s support, and without providing sweetheart deals to the Tobacco Lords. If Congress cannot pass broad legislation to control the industry, then it should pass more focused legislation—including, for example, a tax increase, affirmation of Food and Drug Administration authority to regulate tobacco, and international measures—that doesn’t confer any special protections and benefits on the Merchants of Death.

    Russell Mokhiber is editor of the Washington, D.C.-based Corporate Crime Reporter. Robert Weissman is editor of the Washington, D.C.-based Multinational Monitor. This article first appeared in their weekly column, Focus on the Corporation, which is available on the Web or via e-mail.

    (c) Russell Mokhiber and Robert Weissman

  • WE'LL BE BLUNT

    It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

    The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

    Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

    The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

    Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

    And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

    Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

    If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

    payment methods

    WE'LL BE BLUNT

    It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

    The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

    Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

    The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

    Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

    And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

    Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

    If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

    payment methods

    We Recommend

    Latest

    Sign up for our free newsletter

    Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

    Get our award-winning magazine

    Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

    Subscribe

    Support our journalism

    Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

    Donate