"Do you think Clinton's tobacco ad crackdown will have any effect?"
(asked at the Kirkland Library on 08-23-96; published in the JA on 08-25-96)

Ronald J. Booth, Retired engineer, Bainbridge Island

"Yes, I do. Probably to some limited extent at first, but I think it will take hold later, when younger children become teenagers because they would not have been exposed to ads over time. It will take effect more and more. In a way, it is a Freedom of Speech issue, but tobacco is so harmful and carries such health costs to this country that I think it should be limited."

Pat Sweeny, Builder, Seattle

"That's a tough question. I think it's more of a psychological issue than a government issue. This way, it's made into an 'us against them' issue. There should be more emphasis on what happens with cigarettes, with drugs, and it should be accurate... I had a friend, 42 years old, good-looking, healthy. He announced he quit smoking. I looked him up two or three years later and learned that he'd died from lung cancer... It's the practical issues of smoking that are most important. For example, health and the ability to function properly."

Reggie Gausman, Medical technologist, Kirkland

"I hope so. I have a feeling somebody will try to stop it in court, though. But smoking is bad -- it's particularly bad for kids. Maybe, eventually, this will have an impact because they won't smoke. But they took ads off of TV and it didn't appear to make any difference... I used to take "Life" magazine and I cancelled it because there were so many tobacco ads... It's a health issue and even though I'm getting tired of the government being in on everything, I guess in some areas, it's important. But the timing? Politics. Definitely."

Dan Perry, Electronic publisher, Seattle

"Yes, I think it will. I think it's a trend toward the growing regulation of tobacco and I think it will have some effect on the regulation of tobacco advertising. Personally, I think there should be market freedom and you should be able to print whatever you want. But this is a growing trend. I also think that Clinton sees this as a major political issue, a strategic move, and he's getting on the good side of the issue... Generally, I agree that you should be able to sell cigarettes with some limitations, age 18, for example. But there's a growing reality of the dangers of tobacco and a majority of the people think it should be regulated."

Coral Kramer, 10th grader, Scio, Oregon

"No, I don't think so. Kids will still be around people who smoke and stores will still sell cigarettes even when the kids are underage. That kind of bugs me -- that they're selling my friends cigarettes. And cigarettes bother me because I have a lot of friends who have a lot going for them and they're wasting their lives because smoking makes it hard for them to run, to breathe okay. And a lot of them smoke from watching their parents."

Georgette Lind, Development director, Bellevue

"No, because I think tobacco companies have a very strong hold on a lot of campaign dollars and I don't think even Clinton is going to ignore those dollars. And furthermore, I don't think anything Clinton has ever done he's followed through on. I think he's great at making promises but his follow-through is hollow... I think smoking is a health issue for young people, and I'm an ex-smoker... Also, I have a good friend who's just had lung cancer surgery, so I think that this is definitely an issue."

Copyright © 1996 by the Bellevue, WA-based Journal American newspaper.

If you'd like to comment on this Q, you can e-mail JA Editorial Page Editor Craig Groshart by clicking here. Please be sure to include the following in your message: