Big Tobacco, Miniscule Fine
The government goes for $10 billion instead of $130 billion, writes Carol D. Leonnig, in the Washington Post:
As he concluded closing arguments in the six-year-old lawsuit, Justice Department lawyer Stephen D. Brody shocked tobacco company representatives and anti-tobacco activists by announcing that the government will not seek the $130 billion that a government expert had testified was necessary to fund smoking-cessation programs. Instead, Brody said, the Justice Department will ask tobacco companies to pay $10 billion over five years to help millions of Americans quit smoking.Before it was cut, the cessation program was the most significant financial penalty still available to the government as part of its litigation, which had been the largest civil racketeering and conspiracy case in U.S. history. The government contended that six tobacco companies engaged in a 50-year conspiracy to defraud and addict smokers and then conceal the dangers of cigarettes.
No! Really?
Sources and government officials close to the case said the trial lawyers wanted to request $130 billion for smoking-cessation programs but were pressured by leaders in the attorney general's office, particularly McCallum, to make the cut. Arguments within the Justice Department continued behind the scenes through yesterday morning, according to the sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the controversy over the matter.When the case began in 2004, the government sought to force the tobacco industry to pay $280 billion in allegedly ill-gotten profits. But in February, a federal appeals court ruled that the administration could not seek that penalty.
Michael Fiore, the government expert who recommended $130 billion for cessation programs, is a medical professor and director of a tobacco research center who chaired the subcommittee on tobacco cessation in the Department of Health and Human Services' Interagency Committee on Smoking and Health.
...The strength of the government's case hinged on a large collection of internal tobacco company documents, many of which were never before made public. The government began its case in September by showing on an oversize projection screen the written memos of tobacco executives and scientists as they described their plans to keep customers in the dark about whether their habit was addictive or dangerous and to encourage young people to smoke.
...Lead government attorney Sharon Eubanks had summed up the trial early yesterday, saying the government had proved the industry engaged in a "decades-long pattern of . . . misrepresentations, half-truths, deceptions and lies that continue to this day."
Tobacco company executives should be jailed, not just fined, and the companies should be run into the ground to pay the cost of everything from emphysema to lung cancer, including big bucks for pain and suffering. What do you want to bet this is the most costly public health issue of our time?
via Metafilter







"Tobacco company executives should be jailed, not just fined, and the companies should be run into the ground to pay the cost of everything from emphysema to lung cancer, including big bucks for pain and suffering. What do you want to bet this is the most costly public health issue of our time?"
Why is it that no one notices that their own government got to step away from the fracas? At the same time government health officials were proving that smoking kills people, the governments licensed, regulated and abetted the growing of tobacco and the production and distribution of tobacco products.
Radwaste at June 9, 2005 3:56 PM
Why can the government sue tobacco companies time and again for the same stupid reason? Is there anyone alive that doesn't realize that smoking kills you? With all the support for choice in these hallowed pages, why does the choice to abuse tobacco not qualify for the same support?
Stop picking on tobacco companies and smokers. If you want to pick on a particular group of undesirables, start picking on American fat people, who, I am convinced, cause blindness for onlookers over protracted viewing.
Little ted at June 9, 2005 4:01 PM
Well, you don't see the fat people flicking butts at every intersection and into the woods, apparently incapable of seeing or using an ashtray. But I see what you mean about viewing; the healthy are a great pleasure to see, because they are successful animals as well as (I hope) thinkers.
Radwaste at June 9, 2005 5:32 PM
My response was looking a little too much like a blog post, so I just posted my response to this on my own blog rather than use up the space of the Goddess.
:)
Goddyss at June 9, 2005 6:14 PM
>fat people flicking butts at every intersection and into the woods
I was going to turn that phrase into something about having to see fat peoples' f-ing butts blocking my view of the woods, but it didn't read right.
But honestly, what more is there to sue about? Cigarettes are bad for you and the tobacco companies lied about that for a long time.
Fine.
All the victims of this deception are dust by now.
That it costs the states and feds money to treat terminal lung cancer patients on medicaire/caid?
Smokers don't live to be senior citizens. And even if they do, I'm sure six months worth of morphine for the soon-to-be-dead costs a hell of a lot less than the twenty years of assisted living or manorcare that everyone else gets to turn into eighty year old Schiavos.
On what basis are the tobacco companies being sued again? Does New York not have enough sprinklers on a ninth green somewhere? Do the Carolinas need more money to plant Tobacco fields? Why is any of this the problem of Phillip Morris?
I highly reccommend watching South Park's anti-anti-smoking episode and ask anyone how they can defend this stupid anti-tobacco company crusade, afterwards.
P.S. Goddyss, I was going to read your response, but I don't seem to know how :(
Little ted at June 10, 2005 12:22 AM
Leave a comment