UCSF policy analysis paper examines the proposed tobacco settlement agreement.

Analysis of the proposed "global tobacco settlement" of 1997 concludes it would have kept the tobacco industry profitable and done little for the public.

Analysis of the Master Settlement Agreement by Fox, Lightwood and Glantz; examines whether it lives up to its billing and what it's likely to do for the industry and for the public.

Analysis by Brion Fox and Stan Glantz of how the proposed June 20th 1997 "global settlement" deal compared with established standards.

Information about the Master Settlement Agreement negotiated with the tobacco industry, including original agreement, amendments, and related issues.

Scholarly article analyzes how well the proposed June 20 1997 federal tobacco deal addresses the impact of tobacco on the African American community; internal tobacco industry documents are cited on how the industry targetted African Americans.

Analysis compares the provisions of the proposed 1997 "global settlement" with what was achieved without it, finds the settlement has little to offer.

Paper provides a legal and public policy analysis of selected topics and provisions of the multistate Master Settlement Agreement of November 23, 1998, including effects on other legal actions, tobacco advertising, youth access, lobbying, and the national foundation.

Paper in the Kansas Journal of Law and Public Policy examines what the Master Settlement Agreement between the tobacco industry and the states has and has not accomplished.