Tobacco politics
Tobacco politics refers to the politics surrounding the use and distribution of tobacco.
Taxation
Tobacco has been taxed by state governments in the United States for decades . The cumulative revenue of US tobacco taxation was $14,974,713,000 in 2006, creating a major source of income for government.[1]
Lobby
In 2010, the tobacco industry spent $16.6 million on lobbyists to represent the industry to Congress.[2]
Major big tobacco lobbying companies include (in order of U.S. market share) Philip Morris, R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, and Lorillard Tobacco Co. The tobacco lobby lost a chunk of its support when the U.S. National Association of Attorneys General (NAAG) filed charges against the Tobacco Institute, a tobacco industry advocacy group.
This resulted in the Master Settlement Agreement, which forced the organization to disband and place all records on a website.[3]
Litigation
The lawsuits brought against various tobacco manufacturers, attempting to hold them responsible for wrongful death, injury, or medical expenses related to cigarette smoking and other tobacco use. Cases have been brought both by individual plaintiffs and by government officials, including U.S. State Attorney General. Punitive damages for the plaintiff have often been awarded as a result of a successful litigation. However, the vast majority of court decisions have been in favor of the defendant tobacco companies.[4]
History
There has been an increased number of deaths related to tobacco smoking in the past decades. People are more aware of the risks and dangers that can be associated with tobacco smoking. People have died as a result of lung cancer from tobacco smoking and were often unable to prove that it was the cigarettes of the tobacco manufacturer that caused the person's death. Tobacco litigation is not new but has involved thousands of people in class-actions as well as individual private lawsuits since the mid-20th Century. There was an explosion of tobacco litigations in the mid 1990s, worldwide, but in the United States in particular.[5]
The first major study that showed the causal link between smoking and lung cancer was published in a study done by Sir Richard Doll in 1950.[6].
Significant cases
Grounds of claims
- Civil Rights
- Tobacco companies have marketed menthol cigarettes specific to African Americans; groups have pursued civil rights remedies in court.[7]
- Design defects
- The design of tobacco products defectively causes adverse health effects.
- Strict liability
- The strict liability of the product.
- Product liability
- The liability of the product lies on the manufacturer.
- Depriving of health hazards information
- There is an ongoing civil court case in Finland, where three plaintiffs have sued tobacco companies on the basis that they marketed "light cigarettes" as non-hazardous to health, a claim the plaintiffs initially believed, before contracting serious lung diseases.[8][9] The Helsinki district court rejected the claim in 2008, and the appeals court considers the appeal in 2010. "Light cigarettes" are actually more hazardous to health than regular cigarettes — they contain less nicotine, so that the smokers tend smoke more of them. "Light cigarettes" were officially recommended against in 1986 and banned in 2002 in the European Union. Other claims in the case are marketing to minors, purposefully aggravating nicotine dependency in smokers and denial of the hazards of passive smoking. The defendant Amer claims that the hazards of smoking have sufficiently been discussed publicly since the 1950s.
Defenses
- Volenti non fit injuria
- Volenti non fit injuria, or "to a willing person, no injury is done," is a common law doctrine which means that someone willingly places themselves in a position where they are negatively affected by tobacco consumption.
- Contributory negligence
- Contributory negligence is a common law defense to a claim based on negligence, that before the cases, the adverse affects were unknown. This has been one of the commonly used defences that defendants have used. Most of them will assert that it was the plaintiff himself that has contributed to his own injury as he has prior knowledge of the harm associated with tobacco smoking.
See also
References
Notes
- ^ "State and Local Tax Revenue, Selected Years 1977-2006". http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=403.
- ^ "Lobbying Spending Database, Tobacco 2010". OpenSecrets.org. http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/indusclient.php?id=a02&year=2010.
- ^ "Tobacco Institute". Sourcewatch.org. http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Tobacco_Institute.
- ^ Stephen E. Smith, "'Counterblastes' to Tobacco: Five Decades of North American Tobacco Litigation", Windsor Review of Legal and Social Issues, vol. 14, Nov. 2002, pp. 1–32.
- ^ J.P.I. Law 2006 1
- ^ Doll, R., Hill, A.: "Smoking and carcinoma of the lung. Preliminary Report", BMJ Journals (1950) ii B.M.J. 739-748
- ^ Jain, S. Lochlann "'Come Up to the Kool Taste': African American Upward Mobility and the Semiotics of Smoking Menthols" Public Culture 15(2), Spring 2003. http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/public_culture/v015/15.2jain.pdf
- ^ http://www.turunsanomat.fi/kotimaa/?ts=1,3:1002:0:0,4:2:0:1:2008-12-21,104:2:583624,1:0:0:0:0:0:
- ^ http://www.taloussanomat.fi/tyomarkkinat/2008/03/03/naiskolmikko-vaatii-tupakkayhtioita-tilille/20086421/12
Bibliography
Further reading
External links