IMO, the cause-effect attribution between industry and govt is confounded in the US, particularly in the case of tobacco.
I'm inclined to think that the FSPTCA and PACT were the brainchild of industry (Tobacco Control Industry, BT, BP) and well-financed special interest groups from the ANTZ terrorist network (i.e. cause). The govt only responded to these pressures (i.e. effect) and also happened to find ways to profit from the enterprise. I do not think govt decided unilaterally to demonize smokers in an effort to propel otherwise unsuspecting industries to market dominance, as would be the case made by the fascism model. Thus, imo, the tobacco situation is clearly a case of oligarchy, where industry interests co-opted govt forces to do their bidding, setting up the largest public-private joint venture in history, which quickly expanded into a global-scale cartel.
The situation today may appear different because govt has become addicted to the proceeds from the tobacco racket and are now attempting on their own (i.e. independent of industry pressure) to stop anything that may threaten the long-term prospects of their tobacco income. That being said, powerful industry and special interest forces are still at play and are still part of the same cartel, all profiting from the the same illness and deaths of millions of smokers.
For the more general case, the professor said «Government policy-making over the last few decades reflects the preferences [...] of economic elites and of organized interests.» That does not say anything about who started it. However, as I discussed in my post
here, BT views FDA as a pillar of their business model. And govt agencies in service to industry or special interests is the very definition of oligarchy.
