For many senators, tobacco bill is personal (AP article)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Limoncello

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Mar 28, 2009
125
0
oHIo
The Associated Press: For many senators, tobacco bill is personal
By JIM ABRAMS – 15 hours ago
WASHINGTON (AP) — Sen. **** Durbin was just 10 or 11 when he and his cousin Mike sneaked out behind a garage in East St. Louis, Ill., to have a smoke, Durbin's first. He didn't care much for the taste of the cigarette but, unfortunately, Mike did.
Mike died two weeks ago of tobacco-related lung disease.
"There he was, on oxygen, smoking the night before he died," remembered Durbin, D-Ill. "He just could not quit. It is a terrible addiction."
Durbin's father, also a smoker, died at age 53 of lung cancer. "It was devastating to my family," Durbin said during Senate debate last week on legislation to give the Food and Drug Administration powers to regulate tobacco products.
Debate on the bill has offered a glimpse into the personal lives of senators, with revelations of individual struggles with smoking addiction, the deaths of fathers, mothers and other relatives, and a mother's concerns for her soon-to-be teenage twins.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., confided that "everyone in my family smokes." His father, his mother and his brothers also started as kids and "my dad's miner's consumption was terribly exacerbated by his smoking."
Reid said he, too, was 10 or 11 when he begged a puff from his older brother, who had come home from duty in the Marines. "Suck in as hard as you can," his brother said. "I did that," Reid recalled, "and that was the last cigarette I ever smoked or ever wanted to."
It wasn't that easy for Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., a chief sponsor for the FDA bill. "It is a very addictive product," he said. "So as a former smoker, I know what this is like and how hard it can be for people to break the habit."
The Senate could vote as early as Wednesday on the legislation that for the first time would give the FDA powers to regulate the sale, manufacturing and marketing of tobacco products. The House has passed a similar bill and President Barack Obama supports it.
The Senate cleared the way for passage Tuesday when it defeated, 60-36, an alternative offered by North Carolina's two senators that would have created a new agency, instead of the FDA, to regulate tobacco and would have been more open to development of new, less harmful tobacco products.
Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., said Obama has his own personal reason for backing the anti-smoking campaign. "He has struggled with tobacco addiction," she said. "He knows how tough it is to say no to cigarettes."
Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., recalled that when he was in the Army in World War II he received rations containing some food, a chocolate bar and four cigarettes in a little sleeve. "Everyone got cigarettes free, even if you didn't use them before. The temptation to use them then was great, and it was right down addiction alley."
Lautenberg, who with Durbin led the effort to ban smoking in commercial planes two decades ago, said he quit smoking more than 30 years ago. The catalyst, he said, was when his daughter, then 7 or 8, said she had learned in school that smokers get a black box in their throat, and she didn't want that to happen to him.
Supporters of the legislation repeated estimates that every day 3,500 more young people smoke a cigarette for the first time, a figure that hit home with some younger senators.
"My twin boys will be turning 13 in a couple of weeks," said Sen. Blanche Lincoln, D-Ark. "Let me tell you, the pressure on our young people across this country is very real and very tough."
Sen. Mike Enzi of Wyoming, the top Republican on the health committee, said he was opposing the FDA bill because it didn't go far enough to help people quit smoking or stop kids from picking up the habit.
"My fierce opposition to smoking is a result of smoking killing my dad, and my mom, and my mother-in-law, and secondhand smoking conclusively affecting me," he said in a statement. "This is not political. This is personal."
 

TropicalBob

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Jan 13, 2008
5,623
65
Port Charlotte, FL USA
I couldn't help notice that the Senate in no way reflects the makeup of America. I'm not necessarily criticizing, because these are smart men who rose to the very top in politics. But they are a private, exclusive club.

The body is overwhelmingly male. Mature male. Many full heads of white hair. Few tobacco users, no doubt (smoking would not pass muster with the four out of five non-smoking electorate). No obesity. None, not even in the pages that circulate. I wonder when any of them eat.

So it's really no wonder there's a certain disconnect between the average person and these elected elite. Just as I don't understand the concerns of the very rich, they don't understand the day-to-day concerns of the average citizen. That's just the reality of the way things are.

But I do appreciate AP's summary: This bill is not political. It's personal. And, no, these mature men with dead friends and relatives will never vote to perpetuate addiction to nicotine. They know it's quit or die. Those who cannot quit, die.

"Without objection ..."
 

Limoncello

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Mar 28, 2009
125
0
oHIo
These are just the people who should be in support of PVs IMO.
You would think that........but then again, that makes too much sense to you and me. They see things in a whole different light.
Like TB said--there is a disconnect. Somewhere along the line where they forget about US, the people that employ them.
I think it's that Potomac H2O
 

Bryn

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Mar 22, 2009
352
1
Arkansas, USA
Doesn't D.C. have a high rate of alcoholism? (Ban alcohol). A higher than average divorce rate? (Ban marriage). Don't all those Congressmen have friends/relatives who were killed/injured in car accidents? (Ban cars).....

Hell, ban Life! People die eventually, "proof" that life is deadly.....8-o

How about Ban on Wars? We've lost way too many loved ones in wars, I lost my brother whom I was close to in Viet Nam war. Their reasoning is dumb!
 

NY JETS

Unregistered Supplier
ECF Veteran
Feb 9, 2009
288
5
40
NYC
www.CitySmoker.com
But I do appreciate AP's summary: This bill is not political. It's personal. And, no, these mature men with dead friends and relatives will never vote to perpetuate addiction to nicotine. They know it's quit or die. Those who cannot quit, die.

"Without objection ..."

Maybe so, but which type of argument is stronger; Emotional, or logical?

Just because you are addicted to nicotine does not mean you have to die.
 

Kevin

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Jan 28, 2009
136
0
SW Ohio
Too bad they didn't read the bill. No where did it say it would bring back family members or friends. To lessen the affects of a bad habit your need alternatives, which there trying to leave us with none. My father also died of lung cancer, but I can still make decisions for myself. The government needs to stick to upholding the laws we already have. Too force us to do as they say without us having choices is certainly not freedom or liberty. Just one more example of big brother over stepping it's boundries as always.
 

Vicks Vap-oh-Yeah

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Mar 9, 2009
3,944
46
West Allis, WI
www.emeraldvapers.com
To lessen the affects of a bad habit your need alternatives, which there trying to leave us with none. .


No....not "none" There are alternatives out there - our lovely and totally sanitized and sterilized range of NRT's - brought to you by big Pharma. This is the mental hand slammed in our faces again and again.

Of course, there is the slight problem of the 95% failure rate that nobody mentions because big Pharma regularly doses Washington and the Anti's with huge infusions of cash.

I do agree with your sentiment, however. If they want to eliminate tobacco products from commercial sale (which is the take of the anti's "Not One More Generation Addicted to Tobacco!" rallying cry) conciveably, they could very soon. It's a short hop from "regulation for the public's own good," to "prohibit for the public's own good." This bill is a fundamental shift towards that, irregardless of how it will be implemented.

BUT - in order to keep the black market from rising in its place in a prohibition-style culture, they need to offer alternatives, safe, clean, and wanted. They failed on that count with alcohol, (offering none) and they will fail with NRT's, too.

Why can't our leaders learn from the past mistakes, instead of repeating them?
 

sherid

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
May 25, 2008
2,266
493
USA
This same group of lawmakers who use their family tragedies to bring some tears to the crowd fail to support lung cancer research. Of all the cancers that take lives, lung cancer is the most pitifully funded because of the attached stigma. I find that troubling since we all know that not all who have lung cancer got it from smoking. If the Senators were so troubled by the illnesses that smoking may cause, should they not also be demanding that lung cancer, a disease that they say is more deadly than any other cancer, be given front row attention and the same status as the lead for breast cancer research. There are some that suggest that doctors of the future may refuse to treat smokers with lung cancer. Should that time come for me, I hope it is still legal to buy a gun to off myself. These people care nothing about health. They care only for showcasing themselves in front of an audience and getting re elected.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread