Email
Password
(Forgot Password?)
on Monday, in a special summer session, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear a major challenge to the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act — better known as the McCain-Feingold law, after key sponsors Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Russell D. Feingold (D-Wis.).
Most notably, the law prohibits the large contributions — known as "soft money" — to political party organizations. But some legal experts believe the court battle will focus on whether the government can regulate campaign ads like the one that helped keep Yellowtail out of Congress. . .
But this system of limits had sprung leaks by the late 1980s. Politicians and party leaders realized they could evade the limits of the law if they funneled money into issue ads.
The tobacco industry, pharmaceuticals, gambling interests, the telecommunication industry and organized labor were the leading sources of the free-flowing funds dubbed soft money during the 1990s, according to briefs filed with the court.
Jump to full article »
Some apartment and condominium complexes in Connecticut and across the country have introduced smoking bans .
Real estate experts say rental management companies are increasingly concerned that smoke infringes the health rights of non-smokers in nearby units or common areas. They are also concerned that smoke will reduce property values because of damage to rugs and curtains.
And, they reason, cigarettes are a fire hazard.
"It's an issue for sure," said Frank Rathbun, spokesman for the Community Association Institute in Alexandria, Va., a national advocacy group that represents the interests of condominium, housing and rental associations.
Some real estate experts say bans could become a selling point for complexes.
Despite months of debate about the economic effects that a smoking ban could have on the city, a local economist and two Fayetteville aldermen on opposing sides of the issue say only time will tell what a ban will mean for the city in the long term.
The City Council approved the ban with a 5-3 vote at its Sept. 2 meeting. The ban is scheduled to go into effect Feb. 1 unless members of the opposing group collect nearly 3,000 signatures to put the issue on the ballot, where the council's decision could be overturned.
Jeff Collins, director of the Center for Business and Economic Research and an assistant professor of economics at the University of Arkansas, said none of the studies he researched uncovered a negative effect when all other economic factors were considered.
The amber streams of tobacco and saliva that flow from his mouth and into the nearest available trash can are a source of embarrassment for Conrad Burns. . . .
Burns' colleague, Sen. Jim Bunning, R-Ky., insists that the former high school football referee and auctioneer should hold his head high, rather than hang it in shame. . . .
Tobacco is native to the Americas and played a central role in the success of the Jamestown Colony. It was the staple crop for the colonies, and according to the Joseph Roberts book, "The Story of Tobacco in America," it was so valuable that it was used as legal tender. During the American Revolution it was used to pay interest on loans from France and purchase supplies for the soldiers, according to Roberts. . . .
Burns' accuracy puts him head and shoulders above the men who filled the Senate during the 19th century. During that time a spittoon was located next to each desk on the Senate floor, but according to many observers senators often missed the mark.
While visiting the United States during the 1840s, the famous English author Charles Dickens was disgusted in general by Americans' use of tobacco and particularly amazed at the senators' poor aim.
Altadis welcomes the fact that its arguments were accepted by the Montpellier District Court, which rejected the applications filed by the family of Emmanuel Arenas, rightly ruling that Seita cannot be held liable today for the lack of information cited by the plaintiffs.
The Court has emphasized the fact that at the time Seita was not legally entitled to take such a decision as placing health warnings on cigarettes packs. Therefore, SEITA could not be reproached for having failed in some obligation to inform that did not come within the scope of its competence.
Emmanuel Arenas died in 1999 from lung cancer which his family attributed to his consumption of tobacco.
Local health officials are struggling with their newfound authority to grant exemptions to the state's six-week-old smoking ban, leaving bar and restaurant owners banking on a waiver in limbo.
"It's a very difficult position for us to be in," said Jack Parisi, director of environmental health for Schenectady County.
State health officials said in July that they did not believe the no-smoking law allowed any waivers, but they now say that was a mistake and have left it up to county health departments to decide if a business should be exempt.
As word of potential waivers spread this week, business owners began lining up seeking the exemption. But health officials said they will not grant any waivers until they receive more guidance on where smokers could be permitted to light up in public. . . .
A loophole allows county health departments to grant waivers for business owners who face financial hardship "which would render compliance unreasonable." Interpreting the criteria for financial hardship and a timetable for doing so is up to each county. . . .
Some fear the rules could vary greatly from county to county, local politics could play a factor in who gets the waivers, or counties might deliberately relax standards to encourage smokers from outlying areas to come and bolster local businesses.
"What you get is arbitrary and capricious standards of every local department of health," Wexler said.
Lead negotiators reached agreement Friday on the main provisions of a $16 billion tobacco buyout bill, moving the House closer to the Senate on ending the support program and increasing the chances of enacting legislation this year.
FDA regulation of tobacco, a controversial issue linked to the buyout, would not be part of the House legislation, but it would be added later in a separate measure. Many senators say such regulation is the political price for gaining passage of a buyout.¸ . . .
Tar Heel lawmakers at the center of the fast-moving negotiations said daily meetings among congressmen and their aides had broken an impasse that had stalled progress on a measure that could bring $5 billion to North Carolina, the country's top tobacco-producing state. . . .
Most cigarette companies and tobacco-belt lawmakers oppose FDA regulation.
"I still have problems with that," Etheridge said. "We'll fight that battle another day. I learned you can only fight one battle at a time."
The Supreme Court hears arguments tomorrow in a case that will very likely determine whether we, as a nation, have the ability to cleanse our democracy of the poison of huge special-interest campaign contributions. The justices are returning early from summer break to hear a challenge to the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law. The law closes two gaping campaign finance loopholes, reining in corrupt "soft money" expenditures and bogus "issue ads." It falls squarely within Congress's power to regulate federal elections, and does not infringe on any constitutional rights. The Supreme Court should uphold the law in its entirety. . . .
Everyone involved is in on the soft-money charade. Parties wink when they accept money secretly earmarked for Senator X's campaign. And when the donor comes by later for a favor, Senator X is well aware of the soft-money gift. According to evidence in the case, soft money played a key role in blocking Congressional action on generic drugs, tort reform, tobacco-control laws and new accounting rules for stock options. . .
At issue before the justices tomorrow is more than a single piece of cleanup legislation. The issue, in a very real sense, is democracy itself . . . .
If the Supreme Court holds that Congress cannot make these small but critically important fixes, it will be condemning the nation to a democracy forever held captive to the corrupting influence of monied special interests.