Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]  CSPAN  June 12, 2009 7:00am-7:30am EDT

7:00 am
host: we're going to begin this first half-hour with your reaction to the tobacco bill, which president obama has indicated he will sign. also in washington today, a house committee will hear from the heads of chrysler and gm, how their bankruptcy is affecting those dealers forced to close. the prpresident meets with the president of zimbabwe today. in iran, it is election day. voters in that country are electing a president. on this friday, june 12, our question is on the fda regulating tobacco products.
7:01 am
you can call us at 202-737-0001 for republicans. beeline for democrats, 202-737- 0002 -- the line for democrats, 202-737-0002. and for independents, 202-628- 0205. good morning to taking a look at the headlines today, "the richmond times dispatch," " senate approves federal regulation of tobacco. a big story in virginia, a strong tobacco state. from the "houston chronicle," "landmark tobacco bill." in "the wall street journal," "companies are weighing the impact of the bill, which they say also puts severe restrictions on advertising and packaging.
7:02 am
those limits couldn't do business plans based on smokeless tobacco products. they're fighting to derail the legislation." first call this morning comes from the democrats' line from kansas city, missouri. tony, good morning. seagucaller: good morning. my friend died of cancer, smoking for seven years. he was so sick, that, looking at him, you know, i believe the best thing to do is to, you know, but make sure that people are not dying for nothing, ok? host: du think it is of to the fda to relate -- do you think it is up to the fda to regulate tobacco? caller: yes. it should be done. i am so glad it is done.
7:03 am
i hope the president does it as soon as possible. host: our next call is from sarah on the democrats' line from right here in washington, d.c. caller: i would just like to say that i think, indeed, the fda should regulate the tobacco industry. tobacco has called -- has caused serious, serious health problems in this country from second-hand smoke and from those who actually do smokeless cigarette. -- who do smoke the cigarette. i know people that smoke the pipe, the cigar, and they do not inhale. but the cigarettes are just absolutely -- they have to be controlled. people have died in my family from cigarette-related illnesses, and something has to
7:04 am
be done. i do not know if -- it has got to be maybe the chemicals and the other garbage in, garbage out that is placed into the tobacco. but something seriously has to be done, and i appreciate that, you know, people are recognizing this now, and the fda -- they regulate everything else under the sun, from butter to bread to what ever, drugs and everything. but this has got to be the number-one issue on their plate because of the health problems and the cost, the cost that are caused by the health problems. and my sister died of lung cancer. i filed papers on her behalf. no one has attempted to pay or even just do anything to just,
7:05 am
you know, recognize the fact that all of this is costing so much money. in the insurance companies had to pay for my sister, my cousin, and my father, who all died from smoking-related illnesses. host: sarah, have you ever been a smoker yourself? caller: know, in fact, i have never been a smoker, cannot stand secondhand smoke. my family calls me the smoke police. the past 20, i would say 20, 25 i years, it seems like when you walk in a room, it is just so horrible. host: thank you for recall. it is interesting to see how the culture has shifted when it comes to approval of smoking in public. let's look at this article from "the new york times."
7:06 am
some of the measures that this would allow would be approved or ban proposed new tobacco product. prohibit use of terms like light, mild, and low tar. it is not co as far as eliminating menthol, but it comes close to that. do you think the bill goes far enough? would you like to see it go farther? the house will be taking a vote today follow-up -- the house will be taking a vote today to follow up on yesterday's action. patty is on the republican line. good morning. what do you think about this? caller: i do not think the government should control tobacco. they are already controlling everything else. they are getting everything that they can possibly control and will control under this administration.
7:07 am
i think people should know that cigarettes are not good for you, ok? and you know better than to put things in your body that is going to hurt you or kill you. but as far as the government getting into it, no, they are already controlled -- they are going to control us. i am saying everything that can be stopped. as far as the government controlling, they should stop this administration. we have got to stand up and say, no, you are not going to control us. you are not going to be our ruler. obama is supposed to be our president, not our ruler. host: thank you for your call. taking a look back at the new york times article, "despite its financial studies in the 19 -- in the 1950 concert -- despite studies in the 1950's linking smoking to cancer, congressional
7:08 am
efforts to regulate tobacco met stiff opposition from lawmakers from tobacco growing states and their political allies. joining with a handful of republicans, it passed yesterday in a vote of 79-17. what do you think that indicates about the culture of smoking in our country? how do you think should be regulated or not regulated? our next call is bob on our independent line, calling from amherst, massachusetts. caller: i think congress is making a mistake by eliminating the nicotine in cigarettes because that is what hooks people, the nicotine so people will be smoking twice as many people to get the nicotine. the thing that causes the harm is the car, the formaldehyde in the paper. so people will be -- is the tar,
7:09 am
the formaldehyde in the paper. people will be smoking twice as much to get the nicotine. it is not very good scientific thinking. host: our next caller is anthony, from the democrats' line, charlotte, north carolina. caller: good morning, how are you doing? this issue got me thinking about prohibition. you know, but it seems to me what they really want to do is to prohibit the tobacco pproduct anyway. you see the kind of job that the fda does, regulating food, regulating drugs. now they are going to move to tobacco. if the aim of this administration is to actually get rid of tobacco products altogether, just go ahead and get rid of tobacco products altogether.
7:10 am
why not just stopped it this and get rid -- why not to stop this and get rid of alcohol? alcohol does more damage to people in this country every day, every night, every weekend. i am smoking myself. you know, i choose to smoke. host: anthony, what would you do if prohibition came about? when you find ways to get tobacco on the black market? caller: i have a tobacco farm. so i'm going to get tobacco. people are going to smoke, regardless. you know, there are things in our society, in our country altogether. it just go ahead and get rid of all the harmful things in the country, then. host: last night on the senate floor, dick durbin spoke right before the tobacco bill passed. >> in just a few minutes the
7:11 am
senate will make an historic decision, and i think they will make the right decision. joe camel will be given a life sentence and put away forever. we are going to give our kids, our families across america, a fighting chance for life. this bill is a story, and thank you for making it possible. host: president obama is himself a smoker. he has acknowledged his trouble including the habit, and he says he will sign this if it passes the house, which is expected to. dennis is calling from long beach, california. caller: they should regulate tobacco, and also i think they should go after this fast food industry in the united states. i mean, on every corner you go, you see fast-food restaurants.
7:12 am
you see very young children that are obese, adults that are obese, and i think as time goes by, the same kind of lawsuits that are going against the tobacco industry will go against the fast-food industry. so they should really go all the way with this kind of thing and go after tobacco and go after the fast food. it is just ruining the united states. host: atrial of senators have sponsored legislation that -- a trio of senators have re sponsored legislation that would regulate food in diners and shops. caller: i think anything they do is a positive, but i think they have to go further than that. i think they target the uneducated and poor, and it almost sounds like it is a
7:13 am
conspiracy against these people, and i think that the people that work in the fast-food industry are people that come from other places other than the united states, and it is just -- is ruining the united states, and i think it is even worse than the tobacco industry. they really have to go after these fast food. host: our next call is angela on the independent line, from portsmouth, ohio. angela, you are on the air with us. caller: yasseah, well, this country was built on tobacco. host: can you turn off your tv, angela? caller: i can turn it off. host: thanks. caller: i am sorry. this country is built on tobacco. and there is a lot worse things than tobacco.
7:14 am
our president smoke's tobacco. host: thanks for your call, angela. our next caller is brian from the democrats' line, birmingham, alabama. caller: yes, i think that any regulation should be, of course, it will scrutinize -- it will scrutinize -- well scrutinized. i have had a heart attack, i am 37 years old, and it is simply because i was dumb enough to smoke cigarettes. host: what do you think would have stopped you? what would ban -- it would that have changed your attraction to smoking? caller: no, i think that
7:15 am
ultimately you pick it up somewhere along the way, and you are hooked to. that is all there is to it. so i do not know what would change to stop me from putting a cigarette in my mouth. host: thank you for your call. our next caller is maggie on the republican line, calling from kingston, new york. good morning. caller: hi. thank you for c-span. your the only thing worth listening to are watching. i think this is ridiculous beyond belief that this country is falling -- i mean, it is nobody's business. now they are going to tell us what we can smoke, how much we can smoke, the next thing is how much we can way. this is the home of the -- how much we can weigh. this is the home of the free, i thought. this is what happens in iran. you have to wear a hat, you have to wear a dress. whenever. it is happening here now. thanks.
7:16 am
host: taking a look at this grass that was created by "usa today," you can -- taking a look at this graph that was greeted by "usa today," "immediately, tobacco makers may no longer make claims that products pose fewer health risks. within three months, candy and fruit flavored cigarettes will be banned, and the fda could extend that ban to cigars and moist snuff. menthol will be exempt. labels will take effect 15 months later. canada has a similar labeling system where it says right on the pack what dangers smoking cigarettes could have with graphic photos. i do not know if you have seen those, but if you have come and give us a call and tell us if those are effective. next call is cheryl calling from chesney, south carolina, on
7:17 am
our independent line. caller: i am really tired about these -- yes, i smoke. they have products that help you stop smoking. why then not going after alcohol? i go to restaurants where there is no smoking, but there are people in their drinking alcohol. my choice is to walk out if i do not want to be around it. and the same thing is for somebody who does not want to be around smoke. i do not want children to smoke, but people have been smoking since, i do not know, the beginning of time, just like they have been drinking alcohol. i just feel we are going into a big brother country, you know, and they are starting to nitpick at everything. host: we have a, this morning on twitter. this came in from norman.
7:18 am
"is the fda capable of regulating itself? the selective enforcement standards that apply is ineffective at best. next call from jeaane in st. louis, missouri. caller: i need to tell the story for mothers and their grandchildren. i worked as a respiratory therapist for nearly 30 years. i have never smoked, thank god. it never interested me. but out of my three daughters, two of them smoke, and, i mean, really on almost a daily basis i came home and i talked about smoking in the awful things that i had seen day to day. and even in spite of that, i have two daughters right now that smoke. my oldest it does, she cannot quit. my middle daughter says that she cannot quit on her own, but
7:19 am
perhaps with medicine she can. and we need to start somewhere. my two daughters, i sat down and talked with them and i said why did you start smoking? what was it? out of the conversations that we had, i got mostly that it was peer pressure. i asked them, because back then cigarettes were cheap. i do not know how much they were back then, $1, two dollars a pack. kids could come up with that kind of money. right now, what are they, for dollars, $5 a pack? kids have a hard time coming up with that, and so that should have been done years ago. maybe i might not have had two daughters smoke because they did not have that kind of money, especially to seek my me. host: tying into her comments, in this "new york times" article, "the law would be the first big for most -- even if the clientele is
7:20 am
dwindling, they can raise prices to be profitable." they talk about how it may curb young people from smoking because of the cost, but it will probably not deter smokers already from continuing their habit. our next call is from the republican line, plainfield, illinois. caller: the morning, c-span. good morning, c-span. the fda cannot do the job it is already trying to do. we have senators and representatives at committee meetings talking about the fda and how it is not doing its job. so it seems to me they ought to first get the job that they are supposed to do done right before they start adding more things to them. and talk about tobacco, are you then going to talk about alcohol, obesity? you know, it just seems like the government -- there are people
7:21 am
who want to do too much regulation. people have got to think. host: thank you for the call. we got the gist of that. from new jersey, "i do not believe the bill goes far enough. why should we control the price with supports? people do not want government control and get price supports are okay? i for one thing cannot." our next call is jean \ =ane oe independent line. caller: how are you doing? i have never called your show before. i am so glad that i got on. host: welcome. what do you think about the tobacco bill? caller: i think it is absolutely ridiculous because they do not
7:22 am
regulate or they are not even talking about alcohol. i have seen ruin -- i have seen alcohol ruined so many lives in my life, and other lives. people that have just died from alcohol-related accidents, alcohol-related illnesses, and i think alcohol causes far more problems across the united states then tobacco ever will. host: thanks for your call. our next caller is kenny on the democrats' line from grundy, virginia. caller: good morning. what i would like to say is that the history of tobacco is that sir walter raleigh brought tobacco to the united states of america and it became a marketable product. of course, that made money. i just want to tell everybody that everybody's body has the gene that allows sleep.
7:23 am
you do not have to be a smoker. you do not have to go out and lay in the sun. i have an uncle that is dying of cancer, but he never would wear a short sleeve shirt or go without a shirt in the sunshine, and he would never smoke cigarettes. and yet he is dying of cancer. host: kenny, being from virginia -- phil morris and austri-- phip morris and poultry are there -- there is a concern that this will have a negative economic impact. john is calling us now from the independent line. he is calling from denton, texas. good morning, you are on the air. caller: thanks. yeah, when they came for the spot smokers -- when they came
7:24 am
for the pot smokers i did not say anything because i was not a pipe smoker. yet, bend over america, we deserve it. host: we have eight tweet -- we had a tweet. he calls it a no-brainer to our next call is rob from republicans line, bridgeport, ohio. good morning, robert, welcome. caller: good morning. i think this is crazy. you know, i mean, talk about big brother. you know, they are messing around with tobacco. why don't they do something about the price of gas? look at the car companies. i mean, this is ridiculous. that is about all i have to say. have a good day. host: thank you very much. thanks for joining us, talking about the tobacco bill, which is
7:25 am
likely to be voted on today in the house, taking up the work of the senate from yesterday. coming up later in the program, we will be hearing from john mecham, -- jon meacham, managing editor of "newsweek." parisa hafezi it is the reuters bureau chief in iran. good morning. >> good morning. host: how long have the polls been open? what is the mood like in iran? guest: local time, it caught 15, the polls were open. it is an unprecedented event because in 1997 cut the president was elected. it was not like this, and people were killing in front of the station -- where -- people were
7:26 am
queueing in front of the station. they say they want a moderate candidate to lead. the turnout is expected to be around 18%, 26 million iranians are eligible to but note -- are eligible to vote. when you go to poor areas like tehran or rural areas, you can see supporters of president ahmadinejad, but the rest of the country is going to vote for hussain masaaki. he has been campaigning with his wife. how was that a priority?
7:27 am
>> in iran, women and beyond are very important for the outcome of the election. because he can say that he is the first politician who is accompanied by his wife during the election and she has been supporting him and giving speeches and encouraging people to vote for him. he insists on women's rights in iran, and that is really a tracking women's votes in the country. host: we have been hearing about the youth vote in this election. are you seeing a lot of young people out today in this election and are you talking to them? guest: sherer, a lot of people are what it voting. -- sure, a lot of young people
7:28 am
are voting. their main slogan is about social freedom in iran because under a ahmadinejad their social freedoms were limited. many newspapers were closed down. there was a crackdown under attack and a job, so they are going for mousavi, and they want to go green bay are saying, because that is the color he chose for his -- and they want to go green, they are saying, because it is the color he chose for his campaign. having any green material, the police said last night that whoever has the green symbol, no matter what, a green headscarf, t-shirt, what ever, will be banned from working, so
7:29 am
therefore you cannot see that color today very much at the polling stations. host: what happens if neither candidate gets 50% of the vote today? guest: then the election will go to the second round. and that's -- candidates can get 50% plus one of the vote, then it will go to june 19. host: what is being done to ensure this is a fair election? there have been concerns from various sides wanted to make sure this is conducted in a fair manner. guest: well, each candidate can have his representative at the polling stations, and the government and the supreme leader have promise people that it is going to be -- host:, the supreme leader, the ayatollah khamenei, is he endorsing anyone?


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on