 |
The 130th Annual Meeting of APHA |
|
The 130th Annual Meeting of APHA |
Jamie F. Chriqui, PhD, MHS1, Lisa Lineberger2, Randi Field, JD2, and Regina el Arculli, MA3. (1) Center for Health Policy and Legislative Analysis, The MayaTech Corporation, 1100 Wayne Avenue, Suite 900, Silver Spring, MD 20910-5645, 301-587-1600, jchriqui@mayatech.com, (2) Health Policy and Legislative Analysis Program, The MayaTech Corporation, 8737 Colesville Road, 7th Floor, Silver Spring, MD 20910-3921, (3) Office of Policy Analysis and Response, National Cancer Institute, Building 31, Room 10A-48, 31 Center Drive, MSC 2580, Bethesda, MD 20892-2580
On August 28, 1996, the federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) published a final rule to, among other things, restrict minors' access to tobacco products (US FDA, 1996).1 Following the issuance of the FDA rule, a number of states responded by enacting laws that encompassed many of the provisions of the FDA rule.2 Yet, on March 21, 2000, the United States Supreme Court upheld a Fourth Circuit court ruling that the FDA did not have statutory authority under the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetics Act to regulate the nicotine in tobacco as a drug.3
This paper reviews how state legislatures have addressed the youth access issue both following the promulgation of the FDA rule and following the Supreme Court decision. Specifically, the paper examines the extent to which state legislatures enacted key provisions contained in the FDA rule (before and after the Supreme Court decision) related to: (1) photo identification requirements, (2) out-of-package sale/minimum cigarette package size, (3) vending machine location restrictions, (4) self-service display bans, and (5) product samples distribution bans. All data were obtained from the National Cancer Institute's State Cancer Legislative Database (SCLD) Program.
The data illustrate that with the exception of out-of-package sale/minimum cigarette package size provisions, states have not "picked up" where the FDA left off. Consequently, state laws are not providing the protections that would have been afforded by the FDA rule.
Learning Objectives:
Keywords: Tobacco Control, Tobacco Legislation
Related Web page: www.scld-nci.net
Presenting author's disclosure statement:
Organization/institution whose products or services will be discussed: National Cancer Institute State Cancer Legislative Database (SCLD) Program
I have a significant financial interest/arrangement or affiliation with any organization/institution whose products or services are being discussed in this session.
Relationship: Contract