352 



9- 



Coalition on Smoking OR Health has suggested that FDA could ban "image" adver- 

 tising under the bill. 



To be sure, H.R. 2147 is more subtle and indirect than Rep. Synar's earlier 

 proposals, which date back to 1986, to ban or restrict tobacco product advertising. But 

 the effects of his most recent back-door approach would be the same as the effects of 

 his earlier proposals and would be equally incompatible with the First Amendment.-' 



Health dainos. H.R. 2147 would prohibit truthful statements about or char- 

 acterizations of tobacco products (e.g.. "light," "lower tar," "medium," "lowest"), unless 

 the FDA first determined that such statements and characterizations were justifiable 

 as "health claims." But they are not health claims. They are descriptions of product 

 characteristics, including taste, that distinguish one brand of cigarettes from another. 



Advertising has little value if manufacturers cannot distinguish their brands 

 from those of their competitors. The Federal Trade Commission has long recognized, 

 moreover, that "it is in the public interest to promote the dissemination of truthful 

 information concerning cigarettes which may be material and desired by the 



-'' H.R. 2147 would ban outright the distribution of free tobacco product samples 



and coupons redeemable for free or discounted tobacco products. There is no jus- 

 tification for banning these promotional practices. The bill also would direct the 

 Secretary of Health and Human Services to issue regulations prohibiting manufac- 

 turers from sponsoring any event or function open to the public at which the name 

 or logo of one of the manufacturer's brands is displayed. The result of the latter 

 prohibition would be a reduction in the amount of financial support for the arts and 

 sporting events. The underlying assumption - that people attending a sponsored event 

 will be overcome with an urge to begin smoking ~ obviously is untenable. 



