DOCSLIB.ORG

Tobacco Control in California 2003-2007: Missed Opportunities

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Tobacco Control in California 2003-2007: Missed Opportunities UCSF Tobacco Control Policy Making: United States Title Tobacco Control in California 2003-2007: Missed Opportunities Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/7ck056qf Authors Hong, MPH, Mi-Kyung Barnes,, Richard L, JD Glantz,, Stanton, PhD Publication Date 2007-11-02 eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education UC San Francisco Title: Tobacco Control in California 2003-2007: Missed Opportunities Author: Hong, MPH, Mi-Kyung, University of California, San Francisco Barnes,, Richard L JD, University of California San Francisco Glantz,, Stanton PhD, University of California, San Francisco Publication Date: 11-02-2007 Series: Tobacco Control Policy Making: United States Publication Info: Tobacco Control Policy Making: United States, Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education, UC San Francisco Permalink: http://escholarship.org/uc/item/7ck056qf Keywords: california, tobacco, policy Abstract: While smoking prevalence in California continued its decline (reaching an historic low of 13.3% in 2006), this rate was slower than in earlier years, reflecting the fact that tobacco control efforts in California in the period 2003-2007 continued to drift, with no clear indications that California would regain its international leadership in tobacco control. Neither the Schwarzenegger Administration nor the California Legislature sought to divert the Proposition 99 funding allocations, but continued the policy of the Davis administration to emphasize aspects of the California Tobacco Control Program that are not proven to be effective, such as school-based education programs, while moving slowly with those that are effective, particularly a strong media campaign. The Administration has continued to shift increasing amounts of funds from the Proposition 99 Research Account away from the Tobacco Related Disease Research Program to the Department of Public Health Cancer Registry, leading to marked reductions in funding for important and innovative tobacco control research. The state continued to refuse to use any money from the Master Settlement Agreement for tobacco control. In 2003 and again in 2006, the Legislature sold the state’s share of the Master Settlement Agreement payments for immediate revenues (“securitization”) by the tobacco eScholarship provides open access, scholarly publishing services to the University of California and delivers a dynamic research platform to scholars worldwide. companies through 2030. Counties and municipalities, which receive 50% of California’s Master Settlement Agreement funds, have increasingly securitized their share of these monies. Only 30% of the 58 counties allocated any MSA funds for tobacco control. Under Bill Lockyer, the Attorney General’s office has vigorously enforced tobacco industry compliance with the Master Settlement Agreement. Campaigns to end tobacco industry violations of the Master Settlement Agreement (primarily by R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company) with regard to youth marketing tactics and youth access to tobacco products were successful. Former Attorney General Lockyer was active in the campaign of a multi-state group of Attorneys General to get smoking out a movies targeted at children; but Attorney General Jerry Brown has not participated in this effort since taking office in 2007. The tobacco industry intensified its efforts to influence California politics with its campaign contributions to legislators, legislative candidates, political parties and constitutional officers. The industry steadily increased monies spent on state level political activities in the period 2003-2007, from $4,086,553 in 2003-2004 ($1,083,448 to candidates) to $4,359,205 in 2005-2006 ($1,895,584 to candidates). Campaign contributions from the tobacco industry continue to heavily favor Republicans. In 2005-2006, $1,797,484 was contributed to the Republican candidates and officeholders, to the California Republican Party and other Republican controlled committees compared to $98,100 to the Democrats. In the 2006 general election for constitutional offices, neither candidate for Governor, State Treasurer, Insurance Commissioner, or Superintendent of Public Instruction took any tobacco for industry campaign contributions. The Republican candidates for Lt. Governor (McClintock, $8,364), Secretary of State (McPherson, $15,200), State Controller (Strickland, $7,100), Attorney General (Poochigian, $8,100) and two Board of Equalization seats (Leonard, $7,600 and Steel, $1,500) all took tobacco industry money. Among Democratic candidates for onstitutional offices, only Jerry Brown ($5,600) for Attorney General and Betty Yee ($2,000) for Board of Equalization took tobacco industry money. In the Legislative races in 2006, Dutton (R) in the Senate ($9,100) and Garcia (R) in the Assembly (($14,800) were the top recipients of tobacco company money. Of the 56 legislators who took no tobacco industry campaign contributions in 2005-2006, 52 were Democrats. By far the most significant tobacco-related event in the 2003-2007 period was the defeat of the effort to increase cigarette taxes through Proposition 86 in 2006. The proposition would have increased the cigarette tax by $2.60 a pack. What began as a well-planned initiative petition campaign by health groups for a $1.50 tobacco tax increase became an excessive, badly structured joint initiative with the California Association of Hospitals and Health Services. The fact that most of the money from the proposed tax was directed towards funding hospitals, the size of the tax, and the fact that only 10.7% of the money would go to genuine tobacco control provided legitimate points of criticism that the tobacco industry could use to attack the proposal in its $66 million campaign against Proposition 86. Voters rejected Proposition 86, with 51.3% voting “no.” In 2003, the Legislature passed a tobacco sales licensing law (AB 71) that requires every entity in the commercial chain from manufacturers to retailers to obtain state licenses to sell tobacco. While it lacks any penalty for selling tobacco to minors, it did not preempt local jurisdictions from enacting stronger licensing laws. Forty-two California communities have strong local retailer licensing ordinances that include fees high enough to sufficiently fund administration and enforcement, and fines and penalties including suspension and revocation of license to deter violations. In 2005, the Legislature passed AB 178, which mandated that all cigarettes sold in California on and after January 1, 2007 be so-called “fire safe” cigarettes or reduced ignition products (RIP). eScholarship provides open access, scholarly publishing services to the University of California and delivers a dynamic research platform to scholars worldwide. Manufacturers are required to certify that the cigarettes are self-extinguishing at least 75% of the time. Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed two important tobacco control bills in 2006, a ban on internet sales of cigarettes (SB 1208) and a mandate for health insurance coverage of smoking cessation services (SB 576). Six tobacco control measures were passed in the 2007 Session. SB 7 prohibits smoking in any motor vehicle with any minors present, and AB 1467 would have eliminated the remaining exceptions in the original 1994 smoke-free workplaces law (AB 13). The other four bills strengthen youth access laws. AB 1617 would have prohibited the shipping or transporting of cigarettes to individuals in California (another attempt to control internet sales of cigarettes), and SB 624 broadens enforcement of the STAKE (Stop Tobacco Access to Kids) Act from just the Department of Public Health to all law enforcement agencies and increases penalties for violations. The Governor vetoed two of the 2007 tobacco control bills, another ban on internet cigarette sales (AB 1617) and a bill closing loopholes in the original California smoke-free workplaces law (AB 1467). Local tobacco control policymaking in California since 2003 has seen innovation. Momentum for nonsmoking multi-unit housing has been building, with surveys showing that 80% of nonsmoking tenants in California wish to live in smoke-free buildings. In 2004, the Thousand Oaks City Council unanimously became the first city in the nation to pass a mandate on by requiring that one-third of new multi-unit affordable housing units funded by the city would be nonsmoking. Another important first in California local tobacco control policymaking came when the City of Calabasas in 2006 mandated an all-inclusive smoke-free policy in the entire city except in small (no more than 40 square feet) designated smoking areas in shopping malls, so long as no smoke is permitted to enter adjacent areas in which smoking is prohibited, and outdoor areas in which no nonsmoker is present or likely to be present. Then in October 2007, Belmont became the first city in California to ban smoking in the residential units of all multi-unit housing. Adding to this expansion, smoke- free ordinances for public beaches have also been passed by local communities in many locales in California. The history of tobacco control in California has been local activism and voter initiatives, with statewide legislation following. Local activism is still the key source of innovation in California. eScholarship provides open access, scholarly publishing services to the University of California and delivers a dynamic research platform to scholars worldwide. Tobacco Control in California 2003-2007: Missed
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Philip Morris International Inc. 2014 Third-Quarter Results Conference Call October 16, 2014
    Philip Morris International Inc. 2014 Third-Quarter Results Conference Call October 16, 2014 NICK ROLLI (SLIDE 1.) Welcome. Thank you for joining us. Earlier today, we issued a press release containing detailed information on our 2014 third-quarter results. You may access the release on our web site at www.pmi.com. (SLIDE 2.) During our call today, we will be talking about results for the third quarter of 2014 and comparing them to the same period in 2013, unless otherwise stated. A glossary of terms, data tables showing adjustments to net revenues and OCI, for currency and acquisitions, asset impairment, exit and other costs, free cash flow calculations, and adjustments to earnings per share, or “EPS”, as well as reconciliations to U.S. GAAP measures are at the end of today’s webcast slides, which are posted on our web site. Please note that Reduced-Risk Products, or “RRPs”, is the term we use to refer to products with the potential to reduce individual risk and population harm in comparison to smoking combustible cigarettes. (SLIDE 3.) Today’s remarks contain forward-looking statements and projections of future results. I direct your attention to the Forward-Looking and Cautionary Statements disclosure in today’s presentation and press release for a review of the various factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from projections or forward-looking statements. It’s now my pleasure to introduce Jacek Olczak, our Chief Financial Officer. Jacek. 1 JACEK OLCZAK (SLIDE 4.) Thank you Nick, and welcome ladies and gentlemen. Our volume and financial results in the third quarter came in slightly above our expectations.
    [Show full text]
  • Current Status of the Reduced Propensity Ignition Cigarette Program in Hawaii
    Hawaii State Fire Council Current Status of the Reduced Propensity Ignition Cigarette Program in Hawaii Submitted to The Twenty-Eighth State Legislature Regular Session June 2015 2014 Reduced Ignition Propensity Cigarette Report to the Hawaii State Legislature Table of Contents Executive Summary .…………………………………………………………………….... 4 Purpose ..………………………………………………………………………....................4 Mission of the State Fire Council………………………………………………………......4 Smoking-Material Fire Facts……………………………………………………….............5 Reduced Ignition Propensity Cigarettes (RIPC) Defined……………………………......6 RIPC Regulatory History…………………………………………………………………….7 RIPC Review for Hawaii…………………………………………………………………….9 RIPC Accomplishments in Hawaii (January 1 to June 30, 2014)……………………..10 RIPC Future Considerations……………………………………………………………....14 Conclusion………………………………………………………………………….............15 Bibliography…………………………………………………………………………………17 Appendices Appendix A: All Cigarette Fires (State of Hawaii) with Property and Contents Loss Related to Cigarettes 2003 to 2013………………………………………………………18 Appendix B: Building Fires Caused by Cigarettes (State of Hawaii) with Property and Contents Loss 2003 to 2013………………………………………………………………19 Appendix C: Cigarette Related Building Fires 2003 to 2013…………………………..20 Appendix D: Injuries/Fatalities Due To Cigarette Fire 2003 to 2013 ………………....21 Appendix E: HRS 132C……………………………………………………………...........22 Appendix F: Estimated RIPC Budget 2014-2016………………………………...........32 Appendix G: List of RIPC Brands Being Sold in Hawaii………………………………..33 2 2014
    [Show full text]
  • Cigarette Brands Certified As Fire-Safe and Legal For
    CIGARETTE BRANDS CERTIFIED AS FIRE-SAFE AND LEGAL FOR SALE IN VERMONT, APPROVED PACKAGE MARKINGS, AND RYO BRANDS LEGAL FOR SALE IN VERMONT LAST UPDATED September 19, 2018 Brands of cigarettes and roll-your-own tobacco not included in this combined listing may not be stamped or sold or offered for sale in Vermont. Any roll-your- own tobacco or cigarettes not on this combined listing are contraband and are subject to seizure and destruction. Sale or attempted sale of products not listed on this combined listing may also be punishable by license revocation and/or imposition of civil or criminal penalties. A. Cigarettes: This listing includes cigarettes for which both (a) the Attorney General has determined the manufacturer is in full compliance with 33 V.S.A.,Chapter 19, Subchapters 1A and 1B, and (b) the Department of Public Safety has approved fire-safe certifications and package marking pursuant to 20 V.S.A. §§ 2756 - 2757. Brand Style Flavor Filter Package Manufacturer 1839 Blue 100 Menthol Y Box U.S. Flue Cured Tob. Growers 1839 Blue 100 Y Box U.S. Flue Cured Tob. Growers 1839 Blue King Menthol Y Box U.S. Flue Cured Tob. Growers 1839 Blue King Y Box U.S. Flue Cured Tob. Growers 1839 Green 100 Menthol Y Box U.S. Flue Cured Tob. Growers 1839 Green King Menthol Y Box U.S. Flue Cured Tob. Growers 1839 King N Box U.S. Flue Cured Tob. Growers 1839 Red 100 Y Box U.S. Flue Cured Tob. Growers 1839 Red King Y Box U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Tobacco Regulation Review, V. 4, No. 1, May 2005
    Tobacco Regulation Review University of Maryland School of Law Volume 4, Issue 1 Legal Resource Center for Tobacco Regulation, Litigation & Advocacy May 2005 WWW.LAW.UMARYLAND.EDU/SPECIALTY/TOBACCO Congress Considers FDA Regulation of From the Director Tobacco Products As state and local goverments Public health advocates have of tobacco would pass as well. continue to make strides in reducing campaigned for federal legislation Despite Herculean efforts by advo- youth access to tobacco products granting the Food and Drug Adminis- cates and key legislators, the tax and and in protecting workers and the tration authority to regulate tobacco buyout bills passed without the FDA public from secondhand smoke, products since the Supreme Court provisions. In response, a free- advocates have long known that ruled in 2000 that the agency lacked standing bill providing FDA regulation federal action is necessary for such authority in FDA v. Brown & of tobacco was introduced. That bill regulation of the manufacturing and Williamson Tobacco Corp. 529 U.S. passed the Senate (78-15) but died in marketing of tobacco products. A 120 (2000). A close call on legislative the House without a vote. glimmer of hope from last year’s efforts in 2004 inspired advocates to Congressional session has given Like the 2004 version, the 2005 FDA return to Congress this year with rise to optimism about this year’s bills create a new standard by which clear, comprehensive and bipartisan bills that grant the FDA authority to the federal agency is to evaluate bills giving the FDA that authority. regulate tobacco products. Read tobacco products.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report FY2017
    Corporate Information 048 Corporate Governance 058 History of the JT Group Japan Tobacco Inc. Annual Report FY2017 062 Regulation and Other Relevant Laws Year ended December 31, 2017 065 Litigation 066 Members of the Board, Audit Investment Operations & Analysis and Supervisory Board Members, leading and Executive Officers to sustainable 018 Industry Overview 067 Members of the JTI growth. 018 Tobacco Business Executive Committee 021 Pharmaceutical Business 067 Corporate Data 021 Processed Food Business 068 Investor Relations Activity 022 Review of Operations 069 Shareholder Information 022 International Tobacco Business 028 Japanese Domestic Tobacco Business 032 Global Tobacco Strategy 034 Pharmaceutical Business 038 Processed Food Business 040 Risk Factors Management 044 JT Group and Sustainability 046 Environmental, Social and 001 Performance Indicators Governance Initiatives 002 At a Glance 004 Consolidated Five-Year Financial Summary 006 Message from the Chairman and CEO Financial Information 008 CEO Business Review 010 Highlights (JT Group’s 2017) 071 Message from CFO 012 Management Principle, Strategic 072 Financial Review Framework and Resource Allocation 080 Consolidated Financial Statements 014 Business Plan 2018 086 Notes to Consolidated 015 Role and Target of Each Business Financial Statements 016 Performance Measures 139 Independent Auditor’s report 140 Glossary of Terms Management Performance Indicators Adjusted Operating Profit Dividend per Share 585.3 14 0 (JPY BN) (JPY) - 0.3% +7. 7 % Year-on-Year Change Year-on-Year Change - 0.6% Factsheets available at: Year-on-Year Change at Constant Exchange Rates https://www.jt.com/investors/results/annual_report/ Unless the context indicates otherwise, references in this Annual Report to ‘we’, ‘us’, In addition, these forward-looking statements are necessarily dependent upon ‘our’, ‘Japan Tobacco’, ‘JT Group’ or ‘JT’ are to Japan Tobacco Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Oklahoma State Fire Marshal Fire Safe Cigarette Registry by Manufacturer As of 1/15/2021 (Certification Required Every Three (3) Years)
    Oklahoma State Fire Marshal Fire Safe Cigarette Registry by Manufacturer as of 1/15/2021 (Certification required every three (3) years) British American Tobacco Brand Style Flavor Filter/Non Package Certification Date Dunhill International Red Red Filter Box September 2020 Dunhill International Blue Blue Filter Box September 2020 Dunhill International Green Green Menthol Filter Box September 2020 Dunhill fine Cut White White Filter Box September 2020 Dunhill Fine Cut Black Black Filter Box September 2020 State Express 555 Gold Filter Box September 2020 Cheyenne International LLC Brand Style Flavor Filter/Non Package Certification Date Aura Robust Red King Red Filter Box April 2019 Aura Radiant Gold King Gold Filter Box April 2019 Aura Sky Blue King Blue Filter Box April 2019 Aura Menthol Glen King Green Menthol Filter Box April 2019 Cheyenne Non-Filter King Brown Non-Filter Box October 2020 Cheyenne Gold King Gold Filter Box October 2020 Cheyenne Menthol King Green Menthol Filter Box October 2020 Cheyenne Red King Red Filter Box October 2020 Cheyenne Silver King Silver Filter Box Ocrober 2020 Cheyenne Menthol Silver King Silver Menthol Filter Box October 2020 Cheyenne Gold 100's Gold Filter Box October 2020 Cheyenne Menthol 100's Green Menthol Filter Box October 2020 Cheyenne Red 100's Red Filter Box October 2020 Cheyenne Silver 100's Silver Filter Box October 2020 Cheyenne Menthol Silver 100's Silver Menthol Filter Box October 2020 Decade Red King Red Filter Box October 2020 Decade Silver King Silver Filter Box October 2020 Decade Menthol
    [Show full text]
  • Honoring Community Volunteers by LIZ PREMO and Making It a Better Place for Their Service
    INSIDE: POLITICAL VIEWS 26,000 COPIES Please Deliver Before FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 2006 Vol. 32 | No. 43 | 2 Sections |40 Pages Water worries Cyan North Hampton considers acquiring Aquarion Magenta BY SCOTT E. KINNEY Yellow ATLANTIC NEWS STAFF WRITER NORTH HAMPTON | The date is set. On Tuesday, Nov. 14, at North Hampton School, residents will come together to deliberate Black on the possible takeover of the assets of Aquarion Water Co., while Senior Vice President of Aquarion, Larry Bingaman, says the company is not for sale. As part of a special town meeting, the voting portion will follow on Dec. 19. The vote is only to determine if voters want to explore the feasibility of assuming the assets of Aquarion within North Hampton’s borders. If the article receives the necessary two-thirds approval, a warrant article with a dollar amount would then go before voters at the town’s annual town meeting in March. The meeting is a result of a petition by Henry Fuller, resident and Water Commission chair- man. The petition was signed by more than 450 North Hampton residents. Aquarion Water Co. currently provides water for more than 8,000 customers living in Hampton, North Hampton and Rye. Roughly 70 percent of the households in North Hampton are served by the water company. Bingaman said it’s not as simple as just taking control of the system in a single town. WATER Continued on 18A• Honoring community volunteers BY LIZ PREMO and making it a better place for their service. the organization was hailed ATLANTIC NEWS STAFF WRITER in which to live.
    [Show full text]
  • Potential Alternate Smoldering Ignition Sources: Literature Review with Analysis ______
    NIST TECHNICAL NOTE 1710 ________________________________ Potential Alternate Smoldering Ignition Sources: Literature Review with Analysis ________________________________ Amanda P. Robbins Richard G. Gann This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.TN.1710 NIST TECHNICAL NOTE 1710 _________________________________ Potential Alternate Smoldering Ignition Sources: Literature Review with Analysis _________________________________ Amanda P. Robbins BRANZ Ltd Porirua, 5240, New Zealand Richard G. Gann Fire Research Division Engineering Laboratory Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8664 This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.TN.1710 October 2011 U.S. Department of Commerce Rebecca M. Blank, Acting Secretary National Institute of Standards and Technology Patrick D. Gallagher, Under Secretary of Commerce for Standards and Technology and Director National Institute of Standards and Technology Technical Note 1710 Natl. Inst. Stand. Technol. Tech. Note 1710, 108 pages (October 2011) This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.TN.1710 ABSTRACT Existing and proposed U.S. flammability standards for soft furnishings such as mattresses and upholstered furniture specify a “standard” cigarette as the ignition source in smoldering resistance performance tests. With the introduction of reduced ignition propensity cigarettes into the marketplace, the specific conventional cigarette that has been widely used in testing for ignition resistance is no longer in production. A standard reference cigarette, SRM 1196, has been developed as a short-term replacement. However, to support furnishings manufacturers and testing organizations in product design and evaluation, and to assist regulators in the compliance evaluation process, a feasible and preferably non-agricultural ignition source with long-term availability is desirable.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix 14.3 Tobacco Litigation Case Summaries
    Appendix 14.3 Tobacco Litigation Case Summaries Case Against Legacy Foundation 3 Light Cigarette Cases 3 Canadian Class Actions 3 Individual Cases 4 Secondhand Smoke Cases 5 Cigarette-Fire Cases 6 Smokeless Tobacco Cases 7 References 8 1 The Health Consequences of Smoking —50 Years of Progress Tobacco Litigation Case Summaries Case Against Legacy Foundation misled consumers by marketing light cigarettes as hav­ ing less tar and nicotine than other cigarette brands, even In 2001, the Lorillard Tobacco Company (Lorillard) though actual exposure levels are the same. Those who launched a series of attacks claiming that the truth® cam­ smoked (and continue to smoke) light cigarettes reason­ paign had violated the provisions of the Master Settlement ably believed that they were being exposed to less tar and Agreement (MSA), which prohibited the American Legacy nicotine and are entitled to refunds. Furthermore, under Foundation (Legacy) from engaging in “vilification” or state unfair and deceptive business statutes, consumers “personal attacks.” After receiving notice of Lorillard’s often are entitled to monetary relief in the amount of intent to sue under the MSA, Legacy moved first, seeking a three times the amount they spent. declaratory judgment in the Delaware courts that it could Courts across the country have split on whether not be sued under the MSA since it was not a party to the these cases may proceed as class actions. In Estate of agreement and, in the alternative, that its ads violated no Michelle Schwarz v. Philip Morris, Inc., 348 OR. 442, 235 legal requirements. Lorillard quickly filed a second suit P.3d 668 (2010), where a woman switched to light ciga­ against Legacy and also filed suit against the National rettes rather than quitting and subsequently died of lung Association of Attorneys General and the attorney general cancer, the jury returned a verdict of $168,000 in com­ of Delaware, contending that they were responsible for pensatory damages and $150 million in punitive damages.
    [Show full text]
  • Smoking-Related Fires and the Impact of the Fire Standard Compliant Legislation in the States
    University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School 12-2014 Smoking-Related Fires and the Impact of the Fire Standard Compliant Legislation in the States Christopher Adam Shults University of Tennessee - Knoxville, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss Recommended Citation Shults, Christopher Adam, "Smoking-Related Fires and the Impact of the Fire Standard Compliant Legislation in the States. " PhD diss., University of Tennessee, 2014. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss/3167 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a dissertation written by Christopher Adam Shults entitled "Smoking- Related Fires and the Impact of the Fire Standard Compliant Legislation in the States." I have examined the final electronic copy of this dissertation for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, with a major in Political Science. David H. Folz, Major Professor We have read this dissertation and recommend its acceptance: David J. Houston, Patricia F. Freeland, David J. Icove Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R. Hodges Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official studentecor r ds.) Smoking-Related Fires and the Impact of the Fire Standard Compliant Legislation in the States A Dissertation Presented for the Doctor of Philosophy Degree The University of Tennessee, Knoxville Christopher Adam Shults December 2014 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First, I would like to thank my wife Sarah, whose love and support have been a constant source of strength and inspiration throughout this whole process.
    [Show full text]
  • Association Between Fire-Safe Cigarette Legislation and Residential Fire Deaths in the United States Rebecca K Yau* and Stephen W Marshall
    Yau and Marshall Injury Epidemiology 2014, 1:10 http://www.injepijournal.com/content/1/1/10 ORIGINAL CONTRIBUTION Open Access Association between fire-safe cigarette legislation and residential fire deaths in the United States Rebecca K Yau* and Stephen W Marshall Abstract Background: Cigarettes and other tobacco-related smoking products have traditionally been a major ignition source for residential fire deaths. In the United States, all 50 states and the District of Columbia have passed laws requiring that cigarettes self-extinguish if they are not being smoked (so-called fire-safe cigarette laws). The purpose of this study was to quantify the association between state-level implementation of fire-safe cigarette legislation and the rate of residential fire death. Methods: Poisson regression was used to analyze state-years data. Main intervention: Implementation dates for fire-safe cigarette legislation in each state. Outcome: Residential fire mortality rate. Results: Implementation of fire-safe cigarette legislation was associated with a 19% reduction in overall residential fire mortality rates, adjusted for demographic differences between states (rate ratio = 0.81, 95% confidence interval: 0.79, 0.84). This is approximately similar to the estimated proportion of residential fire deaths in which smoking materials are an ignition source (23%). Legislation implementation was associated with a protective effect for every age, sex, race, and ethnicity strata that we examined. State-specific residential fire mortality death rates decreased (defined as a drop of at least 5%) in 32 states after fire-safe cigarette legislation was implemented. In 12 states there was either less than a 5% decrease or an increase, and seven states had insufficient deaths to evaluate state-level changes.
    [Show full text]
  • Rising from the Ashes: Big Tobacco’S Growing Political Clout in New York
    RISING FROM THE ASHES: BIG TOBACCO’S GROWING POLITICAL CLOUT IN NEW YORK FEBRUARY, 2014 A POLICY PAPER BY THE NEW YORK PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH GROUP 107 Washington Avenue, 2nd Floor • Albany, NY 12210-2270 • 518-436-0876 • Fax 518-432-6178 Offices In: Albany, Buffalo, Ithaca, Long Island, New Paltz, New York City, Rochester & Syracuse NEW YORK PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH GROUP FUND, INC. Recycled paper Acknowledgements The New York Public Interest Research Group (NYPIRG) is a nonpartisan, not-for-profit organization whose mission is to affect policy reforms while training New Yorkers to be citizen advocates. NYPIRG's full-time staff works with citizens, produces studies on a wide array of topics, coordinates state campaigns, engages in public education efforts and lobbies public officials. © 2014, NYPIRG You can download the report by going to the NYPIRG website: www.nypirg.org 107 Washington Avenue, 2nd Floor • Albany, NY 12210-2270 • 518-436-0876 • Fax 518-432-6178 Offices In: Albany, Buffalo, Ithaca, Long Island, New Paltz, New York City, Rochester & Syracuse NEW YORK PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH GROUP FUND, INC. Recycled paper RISING FROM THE ASHES: BIG TOBACCO’S GROWING CLOUT IN NEW YORK STATE SUMMARY The report’s key findings included: The tobacco industry spent as much in the first six months of 2013 as it had in 2011 and 2012 combined, spending over $7 million on lobbying during that period. By far and away, Altria (formerly known as Philip Morris) was the biggest spender. Altria spent over $4 million lobbying and over $300,000 in campaign donations. In addition to its lobbying in New York City, the tobacco industry was involved in local health initiatives in the cities of Binghamton and Buffalo as well as the counties of Albany, Columbia, Madison and Suffolk.
    [Show full text]