Stop Adolescent Smoking Without Excessive Bureaucracy Act of 2008

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

(Mr. BARTON of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Madam Speaker, on the next bill, the Consumer Product Safety Commission reauthorization bill, I will be standing in this very spot saying extremely complimentary things about Chairman Dingell, the process that he has used and that Speaker Pelosi has used to bring the Consumer Product Safety Commission reauthorization bill to the floor of the House of Representatives. But that's the next bill.

On this bill, I must say I still have the greatest personal respect for our distinguished chairman, Mr. Dingell, and our subcommittee chairman, Mr. Pallone, but I cannot say anything kind about the product of the legislation that they're bringing to the body today.

At the beginning of this Congress, Madam Speaker, our Speaker for the entire full House of Representatives, Speaker Nancy Pelosi said, ``Bills should generally come to floor under a

procedure that allows open, full and fair debate consisting of a full amendment process that grants the Minority the right to offer its alternatives.''

That's not the case with this bill, Madam Speaker. The final product that's before us was given to the minority at about 1:05 this afternoon, which is approximately 3 hours and 5 minutes ago. We did have a committee markup. We did have some process. We did have some hearings in Mr. Pallone's subcommittee. We did have a legislative hearing on the bill, but once that was concluded, the bill disappeared into a sinkhole, only to reemerge today as a suspension bill.

As you know, Madam Speaker, suspensions are theoretically about noncontroversial items in which there is little controversy and no disagreement between Members of the body on either side of the aisle. It's not the case on this bill, Madam Speaker.

This bill will cost jobs in the agricultural sector. This bill has been so controversial that we, as I said earlier, didn't even get a work product until early this afternoon.

On the substance of the bill, I disagree with the central premise, that the Food and Drug Administration should have the authority under this bill that actually certifies that tobacco is a responsible product. Isn't that an ironic thing? This bill is, in my opinion, a marketing allocation bill more than it is a regulation bill.

The FDA does not have the resources to do this new responsibility. The FDA is not the tobacco police. The FDA should not be responsible for going into every convenience store and grocery store and tobacco shop in America making sure that the tobacco products are sold exactly as required.

I could go on and on. I could quote Chairman Dingell and Subcommittee Chairman Pallone and Chairman Waxman of the Government Reform Committee where in a letter they said back in January about how short the FDA was of resources. I'm not going to do that. I might put it in the Record, but I won't quote them at this time.

The FDA has only increased its total number of employees in the last decade by 646. Its appropriations in adjusted dollars is about $300 million less than the inflation-adjusted dollars that the FDA says it needs. Yet we're going to give the FDA another huge responsibility and not give them the resources to do the work that the bill says they should do.

If we really need to do more to restrict advertising for tobacco products or to prevent marketing to children, we can do that by going to other agencies that have that responsibility in the marketplace right now. If there should be more enforcement to prevent children from buying cigarettes because they're under age, we should bring a bill to the floor that would strengthen the Synar amendment, a former congressman from Oklahoma and a former member of the Energy and Commerce Committee.

We could certainly encourage States to actually use their master settlement agreement funds to do things like the smoking cessation programs. It's ironic to me that less than 30 percent of the funds that have been given to the States under the master settlement agreement are being used for anti-smoking campaigns. That would be one area where I think both sides of the aisle, Republicans and the Democrats, could have bipartisan agreement.

In short, Madam Speaker, what we don't need is creating at the FDA a new, Draconian bureaucracy since they're already overburdened and have more work than they know what to do with.

I do agree that cigarettes are bad for people's health. I have never smoked a cigarette. I don't allow smoking in my office. I don't take any kind of campaign funds from tobacco companies. So I do practice what I preach, Madam Speaker, but I do not believe that this bill addresses the underlying problem in a satisfactory way.

And for that purpose, I will strongly urge a ``no'' vote--again, since this is a suspension bill which on process alone, it shouldn't be but it is--it only takes one-third vote to defeat the bill.

That would be the perfect solution to this bill, would be to send it to the boneyard of other suspension bills that shouldn't be on the suspension calendar in the first place.

Madam Speaker, it is getting a little tiresome to keep saying here we go again, but here we go again.

Once again we come to the House floor to consider a major piece of legislation under suspension of the rules. Traditionally, we suspend the normal rules for things like naming post offices and other noncontroversial bills. For those watching on C-SPAN, suspension of the rules means limited debate and no amendments. We all remember that Speaker Pelosi told us that--and I'm quoting here--``bills should generally come to the floor under a procedure that allows open, full and fair debate consisting of a full amendment process that grants the minority the right to offer its alternatives.'' The reality has been different. Promise made, promise unmade.

Madam Speaker, this bill is hardly ordinary. Honestly noncontroversial bills do not require committee mark-ups that stretch over multiple days. Noncontroversial bills do not contain billion- dollar tax hikes. Noncontroversial bills do not cause working people to lose their jobs or their farms. In fact, the provisions of the bill were so controversial that the majority could not even produce a bill to be seen in public until this morning because they couldn't agree among themselves about what should be in it. Madam Speaker, handling legislation of this importance in this way is not the open and transparent process that was promised. It is the opposite.

Now, on the substance of the bill, I disagree with the central premise of the bill that the Food and Drug Administration should be given this responsibility. The FDA is tasked with protecting the safety of the food we eat, and ensuring the drugs we take, and the medical devices we use are safe and effective. It is an agency that we have held numerous hearings on and have come to a bipartisan conclusion that the agency lacks sufficient resources to do its current mission. Congress affirmed that conclusion when we appropriated an additional $150 million in the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for the FDA. Speaker, the FDA is still the wrong agency, at the wrong time, to become the tobacco police. They need to focus on their current mission.

Here's what Chairman Dingell, Chairman Pallone and Chairman Waxman said about the current problem in a January 23, 2008 letter to FDA:

Experts from every affected sector agree that this

desperate funding situation has rendered FDA unable to

protect the American public from even the most basic threats,

including contaminated food, tainted and dangerous drugs, and

faulty medical devices. According to FDA's own Science Board

. . . American lives are now at risk.

FDA has plenty to do just to save those lives that are at risk. We, the Congress, have passed 125 laws over the last 20 years that directly impact FDA's regulatory responsibilities, yet our appropriated resources to the agency have not kept pace. During the same time period, FDA has only increased its total number of employees by 646 people; and its appropriations are about $300 million less now in inflation-adjusted dollars. We're pretty good at telling FDA what to do and how to do it, but not so good at paying for what we order. And here we go again. Instead of making it possible for FDA to do the jobs we've already given it, we are here today adding new regulatory responsibilities that dwarf any of those given to the FDA in the past two decades.

If we need to do more to restrict advertising or prevent marketing to children, we can find the right agency to do that. If there should be more enforcement to prevent children from buying cigarettes, we can strengthen the Synar amendment. The best way to reduce smoking is for States to use more of their Master Settlement Agreement funds on things like smoking cessation products. So let's talk about encouraging States to use more of their MSA funds for this purpose.

These are problems we can solve without creating a new, draconian bureaucracy at an already over-burdened agency that Members on both sides of the aisle agree needs to do a much better job at conducting its current mission.

Cigarettes are bad for people's health, period. Madam Speaker, if people believe there should be an increased Federal role in tobacco regulation, we can do better than this deceptive process and we can do better than this bill. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' and send a message that promises are meant to be kept.

With that, Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I want to yield 1 minute to our distinguished minority leader from the Buckeye State of Ohio (Mr. Boehner).

I would yield to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Buyer), a member of the committee, for a unanimous consent request.

(Mr. BUYER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

I now want to yield to the distinguished tri- captain of the victorious congressional Republican baseball team, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Davis), 1 minute.

Madam Speaker, can I inquire as to the time on each side that is remaining, please.

Madam Speaker, I wish to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble).

Madam Speaker, I wish to recognize a distinguished Member from the great State of North Carolina, a great former professional quarterback, member of the Democratic baseball team, Mr. Shuler, for 1 minute.

I give the gentleman an additional 1 minute.

I yield 1 minute to the distinguished deputy whip from the great State of Virginia (Mr. Cantor).

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlelady from the committee, Mrs. Blackburn of Tennessee.

Madam Speaker, I yield for the purpose of unanimous consent to the distinguished gentleman from Connecticut.

(Mr. SHAYS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Coppell, Texas and Flower Mound, Texas (Mr. Marchant).

Madam Speaker, I have no other speakers other than my close. I am going to reserve the balance of my time at this time.

Madam Speaker, I would assume the majority has got the right to close, so I am just reserving until they are ready to close.

Don't I have 4 minutes?

I would be happy to yield a minute and a half of my time to the majority so that they have 2 minutes and I have 2\1/2\ minutes, if that would help.

I am going to recognize myself for the balance of my time.

I want to point out a couple of things. This bill does not ban tobacco. Most of the rhetoric on the other side has, rightfully so, been about the evils of tobacco. But the bill before us doesn't ban tobacco. In truth, what the bill before us does is allocate market share of the existing marketers of tobacco in the United States. It also sets up a huge regulatory machine at FDA, where the Food and Drug Administration literally has to go into every convenience store apparently in America and make sure that certain displays are at a certain eye level and all this kind of thing.

It bans, as I understand it, flavored cigarettes, except for menthol, in which it requires a study of menthol cigarettes to be reported by a date certain, which I think is 1 year. And then, in order to pay for this huge new bureaucracy that has to be created for the tobacco police, it sets up some sort of a gimmick in the Tax Code for people to choose between a thrift savings account and a Roth IRA. If you invest in a Roth IRA, you pay taxes before you put the money in the account. If you decide to invest in a thrift savings account, you don't have to pay taxes until you take the money out of the account.

Somehow, and we don't know much about this because we only got the bill with this section about 3 hours ago, there's something in there that they think scores about $2 billion over 10 years because more people will opt to take the Roth IRA, where they pay taxes up front.

Last, but not least, Madam Speaker, it sets up some sort of a records inspection for the Secretary of HHS to go in and look at the records to make sure that tobacco products are not smuggled or counterfeited unless those tobacco products are sold on Indian lands, in which case the Indian tribe has the right to opt out of that, which I think is going to set up a huge loophole because my guess is that the Indian tribes, not being foolish, are going to obviously opt out of Federal regulation of this inspection program.

In short, this is a bill that, while noble in intent, is very flawed in implementation. It shouldn't be on the suspension calendar. It shouldn't have come up only 3 hours before it's debated.

We should vote this bill down. If you really want to do something about tobacco products, let it go through the

regular process. I would urge a ``no'' vote on the pending legislation.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1108) to protect the public health by providing the Food and Drug Administration with certain authority to regulate tobacco products, as amended.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and to insert extraneous materials on the bill under consideration.

Madam Speaker, I want to place the legislation we are about to consider in its proper historical context.

Fifty-one years ago, the Surgeon General first stated that tobacco smoking was linked to cancer.

Forty-three years ago, in 1965, tobacco products were for the first time required to carry labels warning of the health hazards to consumers who used them.

Fourteen years ago, the chief executives of the tobacco companies were summoned to appear before the Committee on Energy and Commerce to answer questions about their knowledge of the dangers to human health caused by tobacco and their reluctance or refusal to disclose what they knew.

Ten years ago, the tobacco companies entered into a master settlement with the attorneys general of the States, under which they would pay out billions of dollars to address the costs of smoking, amongst other purposes.

Today, the House will consider H.R. 1108, the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act. This landmark legislation will, for the first time, grant the Food and Drug Administration the authority to regulate tobacco products and to protect consumers on this particular, difficult matter.

It is hard to believe that 51 years after we first became aware of the harmful effects of smoking--and three years after a United Nations tobacco control treaty was enacted--the U.S. government has been unable to take the steps necessary to stem the tide of smoking. With this legislation, we can change that.

Cigarette smoking accounts for about one in five deaths annually, or about 435,000 deaths each year. Each day, more than 4,000 young Americans try a cigarette for the first time, and each day 1,000 of these become addicted to tobacco. One in every three of these smokers will die prematurely.

With this legislation, we will place sharp and sorely needed limits on access to tobacco products and on tobacco advertising and marketing.

Public health organizations have fought for this legislation for 20 years, and I want to commend in particular the Campaign for Tobacco- Free Kids, the American Lung Association, the American Heart Association, the American Cancer Society, and other of our colleagues in particular, Representatives Waxman, Davis and Pallone, who deserve great credit for their diligence and persistence in bringing this legislation to the point where it is.

Passage of H.R. 1108 will stand as an historic achievement. I urge my colleagues in the strongest terms to vote for the health of America's children and to vote for the health of the American people.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield to my dear and valued friend from West Virginia, the chairman of the Natural Resources Committee, 1 minute for the purposes of a colloquy.

My good friend from West Virginia is correct. The FDA is required in the legislation, to the extent feasible, to enter into contracts with Indian tribes for the inspection of tobacco retailers located on Indian lands.

I thank my good friend.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself 15 seconds for the purpose of responding to my beloved friend, the minority leader.

This legislation is on the floor because people are killing themselves by smoking these evil cigarettes. The distinguished gentleman, the minority leader, is going to be amongst the next to die. I am trying to save him, as the rest of us are, because he is committing suicide every time he puffs on one of those things.

I didn't yield to the gentleman.

At this time, Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to my good friend from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone).

Madam Speaker, I submit the following exchange of letters for the Record.

House of Representatives,

Committee on the Judiciary,

Washington, DC, June 18, 2008.

Hon. John Dingell,

Chairman, Committee on Energy and Commerce, U.S. House of

Representatives, Washington, DC.

Dear Chairman Dingell: This is to advise you that, as a

result of your working with us to make appropriate revisions

to provisions in H.R. 1108, the ``Family Smoking Prevention

and Tobacco Control Act,'' that fall within the rule X

jurisdiction of the Committee on the Judiciary, we are able

to agree to discharging our committee from further

consideration of the bill in order that it may proceed

without delay to the House floor for consideration.

The Judiciary Committee takes this action with the

understanding that by foregoing further consideration of H.R.

1108 at this time, we do not waive any jurisdiction over

subject matter contained in this or similar legislation. We

also reserve the right to seek appointment of an appropriate

number of conferees to any House-Senate conference involving

this important legislation, and request your support if such

a request is made.

I would appreciate your including this letter in the

Congressional Record during consideration of the bill on the

House floor. Thank you for your attention to this request,

and for the cooperative relationship between our two

committees.

Sincerely,

John Conyers, Jr.,

Chairman.

Madam Speaker, I couldn't agree more with what Mr. Dingell said, but I do also want to point out to the minority leader that this is about kids.

In fact, many adults smoke, and I'm sure they're very much aware of what they're doing. I suppose you could argue that, if people want to kill themselves and they're adults, then let them do so, but every day, approximately 4,000 kids, children, try a cigarette for the first time, of which 1,140 become new daily smokers.

According to my calculations, this means that since 1996 almost 5 million children have become tobacco addicts and that one-third of those kids will end up dying prematurely from tobacco-related illnesses.

So I say to the minority leader: Forget about the adults for the time being. We've got to stop the kids who are not aware and who don't understand the dangers of tobacco. They shouldn't start smoking. I think that's really what this is all about. This is a very important day, and I do resent the fact that the minority leader is belittling it by saying this is a boneheaded idea.

I want to thank Mr. Waxman. He has been at this for I don't know how many years--12, 15, 20 years.

Twelve years after the FDA first published a comprehensive rule that would protect children from the harmful effects of tobacco, we are finally one step closer to actually implementing its provisions and protecting millions of Americans, and particularly the children, from a lifetime of addiction and of poor health.

Madam Speaker, it's hard to believe that tobacco products are exempt from the basic health and safety regulations that apply to other consumer products, but in fact, they are. Presently, the FDA is prohibited from regulating tobacco products, one of the most dangerous products available to consumers, and that's why we have to act today. Imagine that the FDA regulates toothpaste but not cigarettes. They monitor cereal but not chewing tobacco. Ironically, the FDA regulates both over-the-counter and prescription medications to help people quit smoking; yet it has no authority over the cause of the addiction. By passing this bill today, we're one step closer to changing all of that.

In closing, I just want to say that this is a very important bill, and I urge its passage.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Virginia.

Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the sponsor of the legislation, who has worked tirelessly on this for so many years, Mr. Waxman.

Madam Speaker, I would like to recognize the gentlewoman from the Virgin Islands, but I do have to remark that it is wonderful to see our colleague, Bobby Rush from Illinois, back here today. Thank you for being with us today.

I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from the Virgin Islands.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps).

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman).

Madam Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from California.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. DeGette).

Madam Speaker, I yield now 2 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Van Hollen).

I have no remaining speakers, Madam Speaker. How much time remains on this side?

I will reserve the 30 seconds.

Let me thank the ranking member of the full committee for the time. I have no remaining speakers, and will reserve the balance of my time to close, Madam Speaker.

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

I just want to stress in closing that this really is a bipartisan bill that is supported overwhelmingly by both sides of the aisle. I have had the opportunity under the auspices of Tobacco-Free Kids, which is one of the big supporters of this bill, to go to an elementary school in my district one day recently. And I found out that the kids there were all from fifth grade down. It was incredible to me to realize that some of them had already started to smoke and they were very much unaware of the fact of the dangers of tobacco.

That was really a revelation for me that day, to realize that there are a lot of children at a very young age that start smoking that are unaware of the dangers, even with all the declarations and disclaimers that are out there.

So I really think that this legislation that we are passing today is for the kids. It for those children who will stop or never, hopefully, have the opportunity or think about smoking because they will realize how dangerous it is because it's now regulated by the FDA.

I just want to thank Mr. Waxman; I know he has worked for many years on this, and Mr. Dingell and so many on both sides of the aisle because I think they recognize while it may be true that a lot of adults know what they are doing when they smoke, and they do it regardless of the health impact, that really what we need to address are those kids that start smoking at a young age, that become addicted, that are not aware of the perils, and then later just simply can't stop.

So I would urge all of my colleagues. This is a very historic day. This is a very important piece of legislation. Let's pass it overwhelmingly today on a bipartisan basis.

Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to this bill.

As we discuss H.R. 1108, the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, the question before the House is not whether we want to decrease youth smoking as the bill is purported to do. The question is, after years of headlines and alarming stories about the FDA's failure to protect our Nation's food and drug supplies, do we in Congress believe that the FDA is in a place to take on a multi-billion dollar tobacco industry?

I believe that each one of us agrees that the FDA is under-funded and cannot perform its current functions. Over the past 2 years, this Congress has spent enormous amounts of time negotiating legislation to reauthorize programs such as the Prescription Drug User Fee Act and the Medical Device User Fee Act. Not only did we reauthorize the programs as they existed, but we added to these programs and increased the FDA's workload.

In the past several months, there have been numerous hearings in the Energy and Commerce Committee to try to determine what needs to be fixed at the FDA so that we can assure the American people that their food, their drugs, and their medical devices are safe.

Unfortunately, we all understand the realities that exist within the FDA. Foreign drug manufacturing facilities are mostly going uninspected by the FDA, and the inspections that take place are not effective. FDA's surveillance over the drugs on our market today is not where it should be. Bad actors are getting into our drug supply chain and diverting good drugs out of the supply chain and bad drugs into the chain. Hundreds of thousands of unregulated and potentially harmful drugs

are streaming into our country's international mail facilities every day and being sent to American homes with no FDA inspection or testing whatsoever. And, these problems only cover the problems with FDA's oversight over our Nation's prescription drug supply. We could go on about the problems that exist with our Nation's food supply.

It is important that we look back at our discussions over the past year in this Congress and the discussions that we have before us over the FDA's lack of resources and ability to fulfill the duties that we have vested in the Agency.

Every morning when I pick up the paper there is a new article about the dangers facing our country due to an underfunded and ill-equipped FDA. A few recent headlines have read:

``FDA inspections lag in overseas drug factories.''--Washington Times (2/28/08)

``FDA Chief is in a Budget Bind.''--WSJ (2/27/08)

``FDA Needs $375 million more to address shortcomings.''--Congress Daily (2/27/08)

In fact, just this morning in an article in the Wall Street Journal, the Chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee is quoted as saying, ``There's a total inability of the FDA to carry out its mission.''

Many of my colleagues on the Energy and Commerce Committee have been vocal about the FDA's ineffectiveness in recent congressional testimonies.

The FDA is ``a sorry mess.''--Chairman Dingell (7/17/07)

``The warning signs are clear: FDA is an agency in crisis.''--Henry Waxman (author of the tobacco bill) (5/5/07)

``Unfortunately, as this Committee under both Republican and Democrat leadership has documented, FDA's resources have become woefully inadequate given the agency's expansive mission. Accordingly, the agency's ability to protect American families from unsafe foods, drugs, medical devices, and other products has radically deteriorated.''--Bart Stupak (1/29/08)

Despite these strong statements, these very members want to put a multi-billion dollar industry under an Agency that is not adequately performing its current functions.

The FDA itself has expressed its concerns about being mandated to regulate tobacco. The current FDA Commissioner, Andrew von Eschenbach, outlined his concerns in a recent letter to Members of Congress. Commissioner von Eschenbach wrote, ``Enactment of H.R. 1108 would redirect Agency priorities and resources to a new regulatory area, which is not only inconsistent with FDA's mission, but also diverts attention from the significant public health matters of the safety of food, drugs, biologics and medical devices.''

And, if I remember correctly, none of the last few FDA Commissioners has supported FDA regulating tobacco.

Madam Speaker, I ask that we all think long and hard about that one big question before us today. Is the FDA ready to take on this multi- billion dollar industry in the midst of the challenges already before the Agency today?

I agree that we need to keep tobacco out of the hands of our youth. I agree with the statistics that show that people become addicted to tobacco while they are in their youth. I am concerned about the growing prevalence of disease and death attributable to tobacco in our country.

However, I believe that we have means to increase enforcement in our States to keep tobacco out of our children's hands. We do not need a new government bureaucracy which will inevitably be underfunded and ill-equipped to effectively regulate the tobacco market.

Madam Speaker, first I want to thank Chairman Dingell, Chairman Pallone and Chairman Waxman for your leadership and for working with us on the CBC to address some of our concerns about the bill.

Colleagues, we've heard and read of all the methods and additives tobacco companies have allegedly used to target young people and communities, particularly African Americans and Hispanics, as well as to increase the likelihood of addiction. We also know that tobacco is the leading cause of death in this country, with or without menthol.

I rise in strong support of H.R. 1108 because we will finally end these practices and put in place the strongest standard for product regulation ever, as well as a mechanism for funding to support research and enforcement.

Madam Speaker, this bill does not contain everything that all of us wanted, but it is supported by the public health community because it is the important first step we must take in order to get to the point where products like menthol, that we believe may injure the health of minorities and others, will no longer be available.

I urge all of my colleagues to vote ``aye'' and the President to sign this bill so that we can move forward, after long years of trying, to finally protect the health of our constituents. And I will place in the Record a statement by the CBC.

We, the undersigned members of the Congressional Black

Caucus, issue the following statement:

Recognizing the difficulty in getting a bill which would

garner the sufficient votes in the House and Senate for

passage, we the members of the Congressional Black Caucus

stand firmly with the Public Health Community in support of:

The strongest standard for product regulation ever given to

the FDA (stronger than food, drugs or medical devices);

Barriers to and serious consequences for those who try to

market and sell to children;

The banning of additives used to manufacture flavored

cigarettes, which are marketed to children and which are used

to get children of ALL racial and ethnic backgrounds addicted

to cigarettes in the first place;

A faster track for the development of smoking cessation and

nicotine-replacement therapies; and

The authority for greater regulation--including of

menthol--in the future.

And the other provisions of H.R. 1108.

Taking into consideration the disproportionate rates of

cancer in the African-American community and the high use of

menthol in our community, and given the fact that an attempt

to ban menthol has already been offered and failed, we feel

that this important first step which gives the authority to

the Secretary to ban menthol and speeds up the research

recommendations and report of the Scientific Advisory

committee, is worthy of our support.

The Congressional Black Caucus has a long history in

promoting smoking cessation programs in our community and

will continue to make this a priority both as a Caucus and

through partnership with the Congressional Black Caucus

Foundation.

Our objective has been and will always be the well-being of

the African-American community, other communities of color

and all Americans. With our support for H.R. 1108 we continue

this proud tradition.

Banning menthol and regulating tobacco are priorities for

the CBC. We are pleased with the leadership role we assumed

to accomplish both because this bill, which regulates

tobacco, also represents a giant first step toward the

elimination of menthol.