An Ideology of Victimization
I have known various people who smoked for a good part of their lives. Members of my immediate family have smoked. Three of those longtime family smokers lived to ripe old age, another two died a bit younger and my guess is that smoking likely played a part in those premature deaths. Obviously, I wish they had chosen to stop smoking. But who really was at fault – those who chose to smoke contrary to decades of warnings not to, or the tobacco companies?
That question leads to another query that gets less and less attention with each passing day it seems: What about personal responsibility? It has taken a beating at the hands of left-wingers, politicians and their appointees, and the courts. Indeed, a healthy sense of taking responsibility for one’s actions and decisions in life has given up considerable ground to an ideology of victimization.
I once again am reminded about all of this as another government lawsuit against the tobacco industry reached trial on September 21. It certainly is not the only segment of the business community under assault by the victimization peddlers, but the tobacco business has been out front taking the biggest blows.
In the 1990s, state attorneys general sued cigarette makers for the costs of treating people with smoking-related illnesses. This was an odd argument. After all, politicians set up these health care programs understanding that people get sick for all kinds of reasons. It certainly was no secret that smoking was bad for one’s health. That was clear since at least the early 1950s.
Nonetheless, the suit slogged forward, and the major U.S. tobacco firms in the late 1990s agreed to fork over $246 billion to the states over a 25 year period, while also going along with a variety of advertising and marketing restrictions. Naturally, the billions of dollars paid to state governments thus far have been lost down the rat hole of government waste.
Then along came President Bill Clinton (D) and the U.S. Justice Department in 1999 to take their legal licks against tobacco firms. In 2000, the court actually threw out the federal government’s attempt to recover its costs for treating smoking-related illnesses, but allowed the government to move ahead with its desire to recover so-called “ill-gotten gains” under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO).
Never mind that RICO was meant to go after organized crime. Also, never mind that we had changed administrations in January 2001. On the campaign trail in 2000, George W. Bush (R) criticized this lawsuit, yet his Justice Department continues the case. The Wall Street Journal, in fact, quoted Attorney General John Ashcroft declaring that the case was “an important effort to prevent fraudulent activity and uphold corporate integrity.” In reality, this ranks as a far-fetched case driven purely by political considerations.
The government alleges that a massive industry conspiracy tried to hide the ill effects of smoking, and seeks to disgorge $280 billion in industry proceeds over 30 years. I guess its obvious ineptness, if such a fantastic conspiracy was to exist, doesn’t matter. Also, isn’t it funny that the suit doesn’t go after the billions of dollars in tobacco-related tax revenues raked in by federal, state and local governments over these same decades.
This RICO case also has nothing to do with the companies’ products and harm to consumers, but instead, the government must prove illegal business activities. So, when in doubt, go for a conspiracy.
Interestingly, RICO requires proof that wrongdoing is likely to occur going forward. Given all the restrictions on how these companies can sell their goods now, this seems rather preposterous. But the Associated Press reported, “Justice attorneys say showing fraud occurred in the past is enough to infer it will happen again.” That’s chilling. If such a view were to prevail, the precedent would be devastating to countless businesses, along with their employees, that got into some kind of trouble some time in the past. It also spells trouble for businesses operating within the law, but at some future time fall prey to a government-led, politically correct crusade.
In fact, this multi-year assault launched by big government through the courts against tobacco firms has laid the groundwork for attacks on many other industries. If your firm or industry falls into disfavor among lefties, lawyers and politicians, get ready to lose time, resources and perhaps eventually your business to abusive lawsuits from the government.
And as is apparent from this tobacco case, neither major political party can be counted on to defend personal responsibility and legal business endeavors against the ideology of victimization. Perhaps, though, U.S. District Judge Gladys Kessler will rule correctly, finding that this largest racketeering case in history amounts to nothing more than abusing the courts to score political points against an industry under attack from all sides.
Raymond J. Keating serves as chief economist for the Small Business Survival Committee.
