In Washington's Federal Trade Commission building last week, visitors carefully snuffed out cigarettes before entering the special FTC hearing in Room 532. For the next three days, Congressmen, Governors, doctors, lawyers and businessmen argued an issue that is of overwhelming concern to the nation's $8 billion tobacco industry and its 70 million customers. The issue: Can the FTC force the cigarette companies to label every one of their packages and advertisements with an explicit warning that cigarettes are harmful?
Fantasy? The defenders of the cigarette companies did not dispute the Surgeon General's report that cigarette smoking endangers health. Instead, they put forth their case on the grounds of economic necessity and freedom of enterprise. Said North Carolina Governor Terry Sanford: "We do not label automobiles dangerous, although they are one of the greatest killers. We do not insist that whisky be labeled with advice that one out of 15 who takes a first drink will become an alcoholic." The cigarette company presidents were conspicuously absent, but their attorney argued that only Congress—not the FTC —has the power to order such drastic labeling rules. Other critics pointed to the apparent folly of one Government agency's attempting to cut down tobacco sales while another—the Agriculture Department—has shoveled out $100 million to subsidize tobacco.
Under the FTC's plan, a TV pitchman might have to say: "Pall Mall's natural mildness is so friendly to your taste"—and then add "Cigarette smoking is dangerous to health. It may cause death from cancer and other diseases." Or a newspaper ad might read: "Not Too Strong, Not Too Light, Viceroy's Got the Taste that's Right . . . Cigarette smoking is a health hazard: the Surgeon General's committee on smoking and health has found that 'Cigarette smoking contributes substantially to mortality from certain specific diseases and to the overall death rate.' "
To avoid such nightmares, industry spokesmen called for self-regulation by the companies, though they were vague on specifics. Oregon Senator Maurine Neuberger, a longtime crusader for labeling laws, was unimpressed: "Self-regulation is at best fantasy and at worst a dilatory tactic." FTC Chairman Paul Rand Dixon was determined to carry out the labeling; once the commission finishes studying arguments next month, it will probably hand down such an order. At that point, following FTC procedure, the industry will have to go into federal court to overturn the order—and the case is almost certain to end up in the U.S. Supreme Court.
A Kick from Lyndon. The cigarette companies were getting burned on many sides. New York City's Health Commissioner, Dr. George James, said that the city was considering a labeling law of its own that could well extend to all the advertising carried by TV programs or publications originating in Manhattan. Even Lyndon Johnson kicked the industry in his hour-long television interview: "I gave up cigarette smoking because the doctor recommended that I do so, and I have missed it every day, but I haven't gone back to it, and I am glad that I haven't."