The House Energy and Commerce Committee on Wednesday overwhelmingly approved a bill that gives the Food and Drug Administration powers to regulate the tobacco industry.

The controversial bill gives the FDA the authority to monitor smoking products and ban flavored cigarettes - such as candy-flavored kinds - with an exception for menthol-flavored cigarettes. It also bars companies from claiming their tobacco products are low in tar or light.

The bill could have drastic effects for cigarette makers such as Reynolds American Inc. (RAI), maker of the Camel brand of cigarettes, and is aimed at preventing youth from picking up smoking.

"This legislation will give FDA the authority to prevent the dangerous and all-too prevalent marketing and sales of tobacco to kids," said Rep. Henry Waxman, D.-Calif., chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee. Waxman introduced the bill last year, where it was passed by the full House but got held up in the Senate.

Thirty-nine members of the committee voted to approve the bill, and 13 voted against it.

Several Republican members of the Energy and Commerce Committee voted against the bill, saying the bill would give people the perception that FDA approves the use of tobacco products. Critics also said the FDA's handling of recent drug scandals and food outbreaks involving the bacteria salmonella show the agency doesn't have the resources and can't handle the responsibility of overseeing another area of the public's health.

"The FDA is the wrong agency at the wrong time to be given this responsibility," said Joe Barton, R.-Texas, ranking member of the committee.

Democratic leaders acknowledged the FDA's lack of resources and noted that the tobacco industry would be funding the regulation via user fees, in which the government charges the industry to review applications for tobacco products. Tobacco companies would have to pay those fees quarterly based on their market share.

Rep. Steve Buyer, R-Ind., gave a spirited presentation in his quest to introduce an amendment that would create a separate program within the Department of Health and Human Services to regulate tobacco rather than the have the FDA oversee the industry. The amendment would have put few limits on tobacco advertising, a provision Buyer said would make it easier to implement. He said he fears Waxman's tobacco bill, which puts extensive limits on what tobacco makers can say in ads, will end up in courts for years.

Buyer characterized his approach as "pragmatic" and Waxman's as an "abstinence-only approach." Waxman disagreed, saying his bill acknowledges people will continue to use tobacco products and that it doesn't ban all tobacco products. Buyer's amendment was rejected by the committee.

Buyer introduced a handful of other amendments, all of which were either rejected or withdrawn.

Health advocacy groups have widely supported the bill, and although industry has for years opposed any such regulation, Philip Morris USA, maker of Marlboro cigarettes and unit of Altria Group Inc. (MO), has said it supports it. Critics argue, however, that the company is supporting the bill because it would make it harder for newer tobacco companies to bring products to market that compete with Philip Morris' already widely used tobacco products.

Republican critics of the bill noted that when the bill was in play last year, former FDA Commissioner Andrew von Eschenbach said giving the agency authority over tobacco would cause problems for oversight in other areas. Former Secretary of HHS, Michael Leavitt, said the bill would divert FDA resources and personnel to an area in which it has no experience.

The bill will likely come to a vote by the full House sometime this year. It's unclear what will happen when it reaches the Senate, where Sen. Richard M. Burr, R-N.C., last year repeatedly threatened to vote against the bill.

-By Jared A. Favole, Dow Jones Newswires; 202.862.9207; jared.favole@dowjones.com