• Michael Givel.
• Department of Political Science, The University of Oklahoma, 455 West Lindsey, Room 217, Norman, OK 73019, USA. mgivel@ou.edu
• Health Policy. 2007 Oct 1; 83 (2-3): 343-52.

ObjectivesSince the early 1980s, neo-liberals have argued that command and control regulation (such as modern tobacco control programs) are costly in supporting corporate markets and profits. Some recent social constructionists have also argued that weak and symbolic command and control policies are necessary to maintain corporate productivity. This paper examines whether the command and control-oriented United States cigarette warning label law is symbolic thus helping to maintain corporate profitability.MethodsThis paper compares United States and Canadian requirements that promote significant smoking cessation such as color pictures or graphics on cigarette packs. This paper also provides a detailed overview of the respective cigarette pack warning label laws through an archival and content analysis of tobacco industry documents, LexisNexis, web pages, and peer reviewed journal articles.ResultsCigarette pack warning label requirements under the command and control United States Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act are currently fairly symbolic and weak in promoting tobacco cessation when compared with the much stronger Canadian warning label requirements.ConclusionsContrary to the arguments of neo-liberals, symbolic command and control policies can actually support corporate private profit making, which for the tobacco industry occurs at the expense of the public health.

19 keywords...

hide…