On Sunday evening, President Joe Biden declared that “the pandemic is over.” This was an interesting proclamation considering that a few weeks ago his administration stated that the authority for student loan forgiveness is because the country is still in a “national emergency.” Is COVID “over?” Who knows? What I do know is that with multiple viable vaccines available to all who want them and COVID hospitalizations and fatalities dropping, the country is at a point where COVID is manageable. However, his administration is still insistent on extending emergency authority for itself to implement partisan agenda items and to spend billions more in hard-earned taxpayer dollars. It’s time to stop using COVID as a reason to bankrupt the country.
Smoking, Cancer, and Suicide
Every day, 1,300 Americans die from smoking-related diseases. Tragically, some people die from other causes such as suicide because smoking has made them unbearably ill. Rather than focusing on the primary goal of reducing diseases and deaths from smoking by authorizing proven ways to stop smoking, the United States has turned its attention to youth use of novel nicotine products such as vapes. While the Food and Drug Administration dawdles and delays authorizing life-saving tobacco harm reduction products, adults who smoke have been tossed aside, left to suffer and die from horrible causes. The regulatory process in the United States that makes it nearly impossible for safer nicotine products to replace lethal combustible cigarettes needs to change and embrace innovation. Smoking is the leading preventable cause of death in the United States. Diseases that are related to smoking include multiple forms of cancer (not just lung cancer) including lip, oral cavity, esophagus, stomach, pancreas, larynx, cervix, kidneys, bladder, liver, and colon. Smoking also causes respiratory and vascular disease.
For those who can’t, or won’t quit smoking, there are safer alternatives on the market which allow them to continue to enjoy nicotine without the harms of combustion. Some examples of safer tobacco products are snus, smokeless tobacco, and heated tobacco products. Examples of tobacco-free options are nicotine pouches and vapor products. Tobacco harm reduction is a proven strategy of converting adults who smoke to the use of safer forms of nicotine to reduce the morbidity and mortality caused by smoking. Cigarette smoking is linked to about 80 to 90 percent of the lung cancer deaths in the United States. Dual-use of two or more nicotine products can be a pathway for people who are trying to switch from smoking to a safer alternative. For those who smoke heavily, a 50 percent reduction in the number of cigarettes they smoke can reduce the risk of lung cancer. Once they transition completely away from smoking, they reduce their risk even more. Cancer causes physical, emotional, and financial burdens on patients and their loved ones. And, a cancer diagnosis can lead to other causes of death outside of the potential to die from cancer. For example, the risk of cancer patients dying from suicide is four times that of the general population, with lung cancer patients belonging to the group with the highest risk. In 2020, suicide was the twelfth leading cause of death in the United States, resulting in 45,979 deaths. Nearly twice the number than those that died from homicide.
September is Suicide Prevention Awareness Month. An appealing assortment of quit smoking strategies, including tobacco harm reduction, will help reduce not only the number of people who smoke and die from cancer, it will help diminish the number of people who die from suicide. It is surely irresponsible to shy away from products which offer potential to reduce the incidence of cancer, heart, and respiratory diseases along with the risk of suicide. Yet, that is the regulatory environment being created by those who are opposed to nicotine use in whatever form. The country cannot go on ignoring the potential public health prize of tobacco harm reduction based on ideology and prejudice.
NFL and Antitrust
The NFL is back in full swing, to the delight of football fans across the nation. There have already been several instant classics just two weeks into the season. One of the most exciting games was the week 2 matchup between the Kansas City Chiefs and the Los Angeles Chargers. Beyond being a competitive game between great offenses, the game was the first under the NFL’s deal with Amazon to exclusively broadcast Thursday night games on Amazon Prime. The deal represents an exciting innovation in bringing the excitement of football to fans. A federal antitrust bill targeting big tech companies like Amazon would threaten this new arrangement. The American Innovation and Choice Online (AICO) Act, introduced by Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), would make it presumptively illegal for a company to favor its own products and services on its platforms. And, given that Amazon’s Thursday Night Football streams are made available at no extra cost, it is very possible this could invoke the ire of the federal government.
First, neither the text of the bill nor its proponents have made a compelling case for why a company preferring its own products is something that needs to be tackled by law. If a company does not trust its services more than others or does not want to promote them to the wider public, one must wonder why they would be in business. Amazon’s deal is the first of its kind, with a marquee broadcast team of legends Kirk Herbstreit and Al Michaels. Even if Amazon were able to convince a Federal Trade Commission (FTC) tribunal that their agreement with the NFL was not anticompetitive, there are other drawbacks should AICO be passed. The bill – with its private right of action – is an open invitation to litigious competitors in the legacy media to try and bury the company in lawsuits. While Amazon might win the battle, they could incur millions of dollars in legal costs to fight to keep their stream afloat. Amazon’s competitors in this space are legacy outlets like CBS, Fox, NBC, and ESPN, who might otherwise have the broadcast rights to these games. Just a few years ago, the notion that a streaming service could adequately broadcast NFL games on a regular basis, with production quality that rivals traditional outlets would be unthinkable. Contrary to what pro-antitrust skeptics might say, deals like these actually represent a breakthrough for competition against entrenched players. This is hardly new for this space too. Further back in time, it might have been outlandish to suggest that an upstart network like ESPN could compete with the big networks in sports broadcasting. Yet, the network is now essentially synonymous with sports itself.
Rather than being evidence of why antitrust is needed, these deals are actually evidence of the contrary. Amazon and Apple are new entrants to this market, upsetting the traditionally entrenched powers and offering something new. This is competition at its finest, the way it was intended. While pearl-clutching over “monopolies” might be popular on Capitol Hill, markets are constantly shifting, and dominant companies do not remain so for very long. Pointing to current dominance is missing the entire picture. Not only would an anti-tech antitrust push like Klobuchar’s not help empower competition, it would actually serve to stifle it. The streaming revolution that is coming to the NFL, posing a threat to major networks is perhaps the clearest evidence Americans will get of that truth. With so much else going on with the economy – and in the world at large – it hardly seems appropriate for Congress to spend its time trying to go after companies who are – among other things – trying to make football more widely accessible and enjoyable.
BLOGS:
MEDIA:
September 17, 2022: Townhall.com ran TPA’s op-ed, “The Tragic Combination of Smoking, Cancer, and Suicide.”
September 18, 2022: The Daily Caller quoted TPA in their story, “‘Legalized Corruption’: Democrats’ Delay On Stock Trading Ban Is ‘Disappointing,’ Watchdogs Say.”
September 19, 2022: WBFF Fox45 (Baltimore, Md.) interviewed me about mobile sports betting in Maryland.
September 19, 2022: The Livingston Parish News (Denham Springs, La.) ran TPA’s op-ed, “Misinformation is deadly for people trying to quit smoking.”
September 20, 2022: Business Insider mentioned TPA in their story, “A House Republican and Democrat are introducing a bill that would require members of Congress to file financial disclosures electronically.”
September 20, 2022: Vaping Post mentioned TPA in their story, “Everything Wrong With the Juul Settlement.”
September 20, 2022: WBFF Fox45 (Baltimore, Md.) quoted TPA in their story, “City asked to OK nearly $10,000 bill after Nick Mosby aide attends overseas conference.”
September 20, 2022: Newsmax mentioned TPA in their story, “Bill Would Require Congress Members to File Financial Disclosures Electronically.”
September 21, 2022: Dan Savickas joined ‘The Barrett Brief’ (New Orleans, La.) to discuss the Congressional stock trade ban proposal and President Biden’s announcement of the end of the pandemic.
September 21, 2022: I appeared on WHO Radio 1040 AM (Des Moines, Iowa) to discuss the Biden administration’s use of pandemic emergency powers and student loans.
September 21, 2022: I appeared on Real America’s Voice to discuss President Biden’s announcement of the end of the pandemic.
September 22, 2022: I appeared on KRC 550 AM (Cincinnati, Ohio) to talk about tobacco harm reduction and spending on water infrastructure.
September 22, 2022: WBFF Fox45 (Baltimore, Md.) interviewed me about a new Inspector General report about the Baltimore City Health Department.
September 22, 2022: I appeared on WBOB 600 AM (Jacksonville, Fla.) to talk about inflation and interest rates.
Have a great weekend!
Washington, D.C. xxxxxx
