What is the nature of politics of S.1415

According to the four sections of the Wilson-Lowi Matrix non-market public politics may be of one the four types * Interest Group - harm and benefit are concentrated * Majoritarian Politics - harm and benefit are widely distributed * Client Politics - benefit is concentrated, harm is widely distributed * Entrepreneurial Politics - Benefits are widely distributed, harm is concentrated
S.1415 was an outgrowth of the Tobacco Resolution. Tobacco Resolution is an example of “entrepreneurial politics”. The resolution was a result of a negotiated bargain among the state attorneys general, tobacco companies, and class action lawyers. The lawyers represented the class-action plaintiffs looking to file a claim. The interests comprised of the trial lawyers and the state attorneys, plaintiffs and taxpayers, acting as entrepreneurs and the tobacco companies bearing the costs of the resolution. The motivations of the bargainers were distributive and probably moral. The state attorneys general, sought funds to cover healthcare costs borne by taxpayers through the state budget and also wanted to position themselves for political success.
The S.1415 is an example of “client politics”. The stakes are mostly distributive. The bill sought to increase tobacco regulation including giving the FDA authority to regulate tobacco as a drug. The bill also restricted tobacco advertising and promotions and imposed an excise tax on the price of each cigarette. According to its provisions retail stores would require a license to sell tobacco. Liability of tobacco companies would be capped at $6.5 billion a year. The interests in favor of the bill include include tobacco companies, trial lawyers for plaintiffs, cigarette only stores, state attorneys, antismoking groups such as ASH, ENACT, the BADvertising institute etc. The