Tobacco.org

• Lawrence Wasden: George Will is wrong about tobacco settlement agreement 

A recent column by George Will published in this newspaper (Jan. 2), ignores or misrepresents important facts about the 1998 tobacco Master Settlement Agreement (MSA). First, the MSA is primarily a public health agreement. It contains the strongest and most effective array of tobacco advertising and promotion restrictions ever implemented in this country. Second, the MSA has dramatically reduced youth smoking rates. Third, the MSA forced the tobacco companies to fund a highly successful program of counter-advertising to reduce youth smoking. Fourth, MSA payments, although substantial, do not begin to compensate the states for the costs imposed on taxpayers for treatment of tobacco-related diseases. Fifth, the MSA's constitutionality has been upheld against numerous legal challenges.

The U.S. Supreme Court has characterized the MSA as a "landmark public health agreement." Before the MSA, cigarette companies denied that nicotine was addictive. They denied that cigarettes caused death and disease. . . .

Mr. Will erroneously asserts that the states have a financial interest in maintaining cigarette smoking because they earn more from MSA payments than they spend to pay for the costs of treating tobacco-related disease. In fact, the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports that the true cost of treating tobacco-related disease far exceeds these payments. The states would be much better off financially if no one smoked. . . .

Finally, in suggesting that the MSA may be unconstitutional, Mr. Will appears to be unaware that numerous courts have already rejected constitutional challenges to the MSA, and no court has upheld any such challenge. The MSA is sound and beneficial public policy, and it is fully consistent with the Constitution of the United States.

--Lawrence Wasden is the Idaho attorney general.

Jump to full article »