MSA onder vuur

Het anti-tabakskartel van de Amerikaanse overheid ligt sinds vandaag onder vuur nu een organisatie, die zich opwerpt voor meer vrijheid en minder overheid, de overeenkomst die in 1998 werd gesloten tussen 46 staten en de grootste tabaksproducenten (Master Settlement Agreement) voor de rechter daagt vanwege het ongrondwettelijk karakter ervan.

In de overeenkomst werden de tabaksfabrikanten verplicht in de daaropvolgende 25 jaar een slordige $246 miljard te betalen aan de staten. Met het geld wordt anti-tabak junk-science gefinancierd en zwaar gelobbied om rookverboden gerealiseerd te krijgen.

Washington, D.C., August 2, 2005—The Competitive Enterprise Institute on Tuesday filed a constitutional challenge to the 1998 tobacco settlement.

The suit alleges that the agreement between 46 states and major tobacco companies is unconstitutional because it violates the Compact Clause of the Constitution:

No State shall, without the Consent of Congress … enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State.  (Article I, Section 10)

The Compact Clause was meant to prevent states from collectively encroaching on federal power or ganging up on other states.  The tobacco settlement set up a national government/tobacco cartel that harmed consumers and small businesses by increasing cigarette prices and restricting competition. 

According to the terms of the settlement, major tobacco companies would make annual payments to the states in perpetuity, with an estimated cost of $206 billion over 25 years.  Small tobacco companies that were never part of the settlement are nonetheless required to make separate payments to the states.

“The tobacco settlement was a major government power grab at the expense of taxpayers and the rule of law,” said CEI President Fred L. Smith, Jr..

“This lucrative backroom deal between state attorneys general and the trial bar has created a new model for targeting other politically incorrect industries and their customers,” said Sam Kazman, CEI General Counsel.

“The States became business partners in establishing one of the most effective and destructive cartels in the history of the Nation,” the complaint alleges. 

The suit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana on behalf of a distributor; two small tobacco manufacturers; a tobacco store; and an individual smoker, against the state’s attorney general, Charles C. Foti, Jr.

Competitive Enterprise Institute
Commentaar van Michael Siegel

Geef een reactie

Het e-mailadres wordt niet gepubliceerd. Vereiste velden zijn gemarkeerd met *

Download poster


  • "Es ist schwieriger, eine vorgefaßte Meinung zu zertrümmern als ein Atom."
    (Het is moeilijker een vooroordeel aan flarden te schieten dan een atoom.)
    Albert Einstein

  • "Als je alles zou laten dat slecht is voor je gezondheid, dan ging je kapot"
    Anonieme arts

  • "The effects of other people smoking in my presence is so small it doesn't worry me."
    Sir Richard Doll, 2001

  • "Een leugen wordt de waarheid als hij maar vaak genoeg wordt herhaald"
    Joseph Goebbels, Minister van Propaganda, Nazi Duitsland

  • "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."
    Mahatma Gandhi

  • "There''s no such thing as perfect air. If there was, God wouldn''t have put bristles in our noses"
    Coun. Bill Clement

  • "Better a smoking freedom than a non-smoking tyranny"
    Antonio Martino, Italiaanse Minister van Defensie

  • "If smoking cigars is not permitted in heaven, I won't go."
    Mark Twain

  • I've alllllllways said that asking smokers "do you want to quit?" and reporting the results of that question, as is, is horribly misleading. It's a TWO part question. After asking if one wants to quit it must be followed up with "Why?" Ask why and the majority of the answers will be "because I'm supposed to" (victims of guilt and propaganda), not "because I want to."
    Audrey Silk, NYCCLASH