HawaiiPresentation

Slide1: 

Recent Trends in Smoke-Free Laws What’s Happening?; What’s Working? Peter Fisher Raising The Bar Honolulu, HI

Slide3: 

A toxic soup of more than 4,000 chemical compounds Secondhand smoke contains at least 69 carcinogens With Every Breath of Secondhand Smoke . . .

Slide4: 

What Is In Cigarette Smoke? Ammonia . . . Benzene . . . Arsenic . . Nickel . . . Lead. . . Polonium-210 . . . Carbon Monoxide . . . Formaldehyde. . . Hydrogen Cyanide . . . StyreneHydrazine . . Beryllium. . . Chromium (only hexavalent) . . . Cadmium . . . Acetaldhehyde . . . Ethyl carbamate . . . Ethylene oxide . . . Propylene oxide . . . Methyleugenol . . . Benzo(b)fluoranthene . . . Vinyl chloride . . . 1,3-Butadeine. . . Benzo(j)fluoranthene . . . Benzo(k)fluoranthene . . . Benzo(a)pyrene . . . Dibenz(a,h)anthracene . . . Dibenzo(a,l)pyrene . . . Dibenzo(a,e)pyrene . . . Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene . . . 5-Methylchrysene . . . N-Nitrosodimethylamine . . . N-Nitrosoethylmethylamine Nitrosodiethylamine . . . N-Nitrosodi-n-propylamine . . . N-Nitroso-di-n-butylamine . . . . . N-Nitrosopyrrolidine . . .N-Nitrosopiperidine . . . And thousands more . . .

More Than an Annoyance;Secondhand Smoke Causes: 

More Than an Annoyance; Secondhand Smoke Causes Cancer Heart Disease and Stroke Chronic Lung Ailments Asthma Respiratory Infections Low Birth Weight SIDS Eye and Nasal Irritation At least 38,000 U.S. deaths each year

Smoke-Free Laws Are Sweeping The Country: 

Smoke-Free Laws Are Sweeping The Country Athens, GA Austin, TX Columbus, Ohio Minneapolis, Minnesota Lincoln, Nebraska Fargo, North Dakota Copperas Cove, Texas Pueblo, Colorado Lexington, Kentucky Vermont Montana Maine Connecticut And many other states, cities and towns across the US

Slide8: 

Smoke-Free Laws Restaurants and Bars Restaurants July 2005

Slide9: 

Percent of Population Covered By Smoke-Free Restaurant Laws 2005: 33.4% 1995: 12.6% CA & UT Laws in effect

Slide10: 

Percent of Population Covered By Smoke-Free Laws (Including Bars) 2005: 25.2% 1998: 12% CA Law in effect

Coming Attractions: 

Coming Attractions Washington State (TODAY!) Hawaii New Jersey Maryland Pennsylvania Minnesota New Mexico Utah Washington, DC Philadelphia, PA Chicago, IL Omaha, NE Ohio (Ballot Init. ’06) Arizona (Ballot Init ’06) And many other cities and towns across the US

MANY ARE STILL UNPROTECTED : 

MANY ARE STILL UNPROTECTED Service workers, particularly restaurant and bar employees Blue collar workers Workers with less education Younger workers Restaurant and bar patrons

Slide14: 

Smoke-free workplace policy coverage by major occupational group (2001-2002) Current Population Survey of U.S. workers, 2001-2002

Slide15: 

Current Population Survey of U.S. workers, 2001-2002 Restaurant and Bar Workers are the Least Protected

Impact On Workers: 

Impact On Workers Restaurant and bar workers are among the least protected of the entire labor force Exposed to secondhand smoke for many hours each day Increased risk of cancer, heart disease and serious lung ailments

Would you favor or oppose a city law in Minneapolis that would prohibit smoking in most indoor public places, including workplaces, public buildings, offices, restaurants and bars?: 

Total Favor: 72% Total Oppose: 25% Darker shading equals stronger intensity Total numbers are rounded Minneapolis Survey of registered voters - May 2004 Minneapolis Voters Favor A City Law Prohibiting Smoking In All Workplaces Would you favor or oppose a city law in Minneapolis that would prohibit smoking in most indoor public places, including workplaces, public buildings, offices, restaurants and bars?

Post-Implementation SupportResidents Overwhelmingly Favor Indoor Smoke-Free Policies: 

Post-Implementation Support Residents Overwhelmingly Favor Indoor Smoke-Free Policies % Strongly or Somewhat Favor Survey of registered voters - May May – June, 2005

Slide20: 

Voter Support for the Smoke-Free Workplace Law New York City Survey of registered voters - March 2004 New York Yankees New York Knicks David Letterman Coney Island Hot Dog A deli cornbeef sandwich Krispy Kreme donuts Donald Trump George Steinbrenner 75% of New Yorkers Support The City’s Smoke-Free Law The Law is Even More Popular Than a Variety of New York Institutions Favorable Rating

Voters Think Restaurants and Bars are Healthier, More Enjoyable, and Have No Inclination To Change The Law: 

% strongly/somewhat agree Restaurants and bars are healthier for customers and employees now that they are smoke-free There has been a lot of talk about changing the new law, but we should give the law a chance to work before trying to weaken it 85 82 People should not get too worked up about this law. It is not too much to ask for smokers to step outside a restaurant or bar when they want a cigarette 75 It’s really nice to go out and enjoy New York’s restaurants and bars without smelling like smoke when you get home 77 The media is blowing this out of proportion. There will always be a small group of people who complain about the smoke-free law, but overall the new law is working fine 70 Voters Think Restaurants and Bars are Healthier, More Enjoyable, and Have No Inclination To Change The Law New York Statewide survey of registered voters - September 2003

Near Universal Approval ofCalifornia’s Smoke-free Workplace Law (2004): 

Near Universal Approval of California’s Smoke-free Workplace Law (2004) Note: “New resident” defined as Californians who moved to the state after the 1995 law went into effect. “Approval” includes “strong” approval and “somewhat” approval. Source: The 2004 Survey of California Adults on Secondhand Smoke conducted by Field Research Corporation. Prepared by: California Department of Health Services, Tobacco Control Section, January 2005.

Delaware Smoke-free Law Clears The Air: 

B E F O R E A F T E R B E F O R E A F T E R Carcinogen (PPAH) Levels Drop 95% Fine Particle Air Pollution (RSP) Levels Drop 90% Indoor air quality test conduced Nov. 15, 2002 and Jan. 24, 2003 to assess levels of air pollution before and after DE Clean Indoor Air Law went into effect. One casino, 5 restaurants with bars, one taproom and one pool hall were tested ng/m3 Micrograms/m3 24-hour NAAQS for PM 2.5 Delaware Smoke-free Law Clears The Air James Repace Delaware Study, 2003

Slide26: 

Andrew Hyland 7 City Air Monitoring Study (April 2004) Roswell Park Cancer Institute

Slide27: 

Smoke-Free Law Improves Respiratory Health of Bartenders Percent of San Francisco Bartenders Reporting Respiratory Symptoms Bartenders’ Respiratory Health After Establishment of Smoke-Free Bars and Taverns Journal of the American Medical Association – December 1998 Before Smoke-Free Law After Smoke-Free Law Within two months of bars going smoke-free, complaints of respiratory problems among the sample of bartenders dropped by almost 60%.

Slide28: 

Success In New York City –– The city and state’s combined comprehensive approach of excise tax increases, smoke-free workplace laws and assistance for smokers who want to quit drastically reduced smoking. –– The number of adult smokers in NYC declined by 15 percent in just two years – that’s 188,000 fewer smokers.

Percent of hospitality establishments where smoking was observed, before and after July 24, 2003Observational Study – Time 1: June 26 – July 23; Time 2: August 15 – 30: 

Percent of hospitality establishments where smoking was observed, before and after July 24, 2003 Observational Study – Time 1: June 26 – July 23; Time 2: August 15 – 30

Slide31: 

2003 study offered a comprehensive view of all available studies on the economic impact of smoke-free workplace laws The study concluded that: “All of the best designed studies report no impact or a positive impact of smoke-free restaurant and bar laws on sales or employment. Policymakers can act to protect workers and patrons from the toxins in secondhand smoke confident in rejecting industry claims that there will be an adverse economic impact.” Scollo M, et al, Review of the quality of studies on the economic effects of smoke-free policies on the hospitality industry, Tobacco Control (2003); 12:13-20.

Slide32: 

New York City “Since the law went into effect, business receipts for restaurants and bars have increased, employment has risen, virtually all establishments are complying with the law, and the number of new liquor licenses issued has increased—all signs that New York City bars and restaurants are prospering.” “The State of Smoke-Free New York City: A One-Year Review”, March 2004.

Slide33: 

El Paso (TX) Conclusion: “No statistically significant changes in restaurant and bar revenues occurred after the smoking ban took effect” “Impact of a Smoking Ban on Restaurant and Bar Revenues --- El Paso, Texas, 2002” MMWR Weekly February 27, 2004 / 53(07);150-152

Opposition and Arguments: 

Opposition and Arguments Restaurant and Tavern Associations Tobacco Industry Less Public; Still Lobby & Activate Grassroots Chambers of Commerce Business Owners’ Rights Free Market is Working Accomodation Ventilation Economic Loss: We have the data; they have real people

What We Need: 

What We Need Real legislative champions – will pull bill rather than compromise on a bad one Message Discipline: Stay on Our Turf – Health Real stories -- workers -- others affected by secondhand smoke -- business owners -- larger business community

Secondhand Smoke: 

Underlying Opinions and Challenges When asked directly, the public is hesitant to have government infringe on the rights of business owners (e.g., restaurant owners) They are also willing to accommodate smokers rather than appearing to be unreasonable While they perceive secondhand smoke as quite harmful to restaurant and bar employees, many believe these people could just work elsewhere if they wanted. Many appear fairly satisfied with the status quo -- generally feel separation in restaurants is adequate When put to a vote, however, they may choose self-interest Secondhand Smoke

Secondhand SmokeEffective Messages: 

First and foremost, emphasize the right to breathe clean air Continue to communicate the dangers of secondhand smoke Specific health effects Exposure to chemicals Point to vulnerables’ need for protection (without compromising policy) Highlight the support of major public health groups Raise awareness/understanding of impact on workers GOAL: Make them comfortable supporting something they already like Secondhand Smoke Effective Messages

Slide43: 

Oppose Favor Total numbers are rounded Darker shading indicates stronger intensity Would you strongly support, somewhat support, somewhat oppose, or strongly oppose a law that prohibits smoking in each of the following indoor public places… Delaware Statewide survey of registered voters - January 2002 88% 78% 88% 74% 55% 66% 60% 78% 67% 82% The Bar Challenge 75%

Slide44: 

Where there's smoke, there's many opinions Poll finds few moderates on puffing ban Wednesday, October 12, 2005 BY JUDY PEET Star-Ledger Staff George Marinich thinks cigarettes are disgusting, but that doesn't mean he thinks smoking should be prohibited in New Jersey bars. Marinich, a lifelong nonsmoker, joined the majority state residents who believe New Jersey does not need a comprehensive ban on smoking in public places, according to a Star-Ledger/Eagleton-Rutgers poll. Two-thirds of the respondents say they support a full ban on smoking in restaurants, though less than half think the same rule should apply to bars. Those polled also are split on whether smoking should be allowed in casinos. "It appears that voters see bars as a place where people should have the right to pursue their vices," poll director Murray Edelman said. "You're not going to a bar to be healthy. I don't think alcohol is healthy, either, but both drinking and smoking are legal," said Marinich, a musician from Long Valley. "When you go to a bar, it's just part of the deal." For Barbara Smith of Bergenfield, the reason smoking should be banned in restaurants and not in bars has to do with food and children. "Smoke does take away from food, but most bars don't have food. And I think that children should not be exposed to secondhand smoke, but bars don't allow children, so why not leave the bars alone?" said Smith, a nonsmoker. "Smokers are picked on a lot in America." Overall, 65 percent of those questioned say they support a ban on smoking in restaurants while 33 percent oppose. Only 46 percent of those surveyed support a smoking ban in bars, and 49 percent oppose the idea. In casinos, the only other public site mentioned in the poll, 50 percent support a ban while 44 percent oppose it.

When Asked Separately From A Restaurant Ban, A Majority Oppose Banning Smoking In Bars(Questions asked Sequentially): 

When Asked Separately From A Restaurant Ban, A Majority Oppose Banning Smoking In Bars (Questions asked Sequentially) 73 25 38 52 60% strong 17% strong . . . a law that would prohibit smoking in most indoor places, including workplaces, public buildings and restaurants, but excluding bars? And, would you support or oppose a law that would also prohibit smoking in bars?

However There Is Only A Slight Difference In Support When We Ask About An All-Inclusive Ban (Split Sample): 

However There Is Only A Slight Difference In Support When We Ask About An All-Inclusive Ban (Split Sample) 76 22 69 27 56% strong 47% strong 14% strong 16% strong . . . a law that would prohibit smoking in most indoor places, including workplaces, public buildings and restaurants, but excluding bars? . . . a law that would prohibit smoking in most indoor places, including workplaces, public buildings, restaurants and bars?

Countering the Inevitable Media Storm: 

Countering the Inevitable Media Storm Be Prepared; Have a Plan Stay Positive and Confident Don’t Believe Bad Press Restore Confidence Correct Misperceptions Demonstrate Voter Support Reassure Policy Makers Generate Positive Media Coverage

Tools: 

Tools Public Opinion – Polling Air Quality Studies Worker Studies Compliance Checks Economic Studies (later) Earned Media Paid Media Community Partners

Slide53: 

March 28, 2004 Smoke ban a hit - even outpolls Yanks Lisa L. Colangelo New York Daily News What do New Yorkers like more than the Yankees or a Coney Island hot dog? The smoking ban. Or at least that's the conclusion of a poll of 500 registered voters for the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. According to the poll, 61% of people strongly support the ban on smoking in workplaces, including bars, restaurants and offices. That's up from 55% in a similar poll conducted in August. Another 14% said they "somewhat" support the ban. "Those are amazing numbers," said Josh Isay, a spokesman for the campaign. "People should know that contrary to some press reports, this law is very popular ... it's a vocal minority that opposes the law." By comparison, 46% of respondents reported a "very favorable" view of the New York Yankees, and 39% were big fans of Coney Island hot dogs. And 70% of people said the rights of customers to be in a smoke-free restaurant or bar is more important than the right to smoke. Bob Zuckerman of the New York Nightlife Association questioned the validity of the results. "When you group bars and restaurants together, you get a much different result than if you just ask about bars," he said. "We continue to hear from members and even nonmembers that the smoking ban has hurt business and curtailed the bar business." About 80% of the women surveyed support the ban while only 19% opposed it. Meanwhile, 70% of men supported the ban and 29% opposed it. The poll had a margin of error of 4.5%.

Slide58: 

SURVEY: NON-SMOKING BARTENDERS IN SMOKY BARS SHOW RESPIRATORY DISTRESS Source: Wisconsin State Journal Date: 2005-09-19 Author: DAVID WAHLBERG, Non-smoking bartenders in Madison at bars that allowed smoking suffer more respiratory symptoms than those who work at smoke-free establishments, says a UW-Madison study being released today, a day before the City Council is expected to discuss measures that could soften a contentious smoking ban that started July 1. A survey of nearly 700 Madison bartenders, conducted in May and June, found that about half don't light up themselves. Among them, those who work in smoky bars were more likely to report five symptoms: red or irritated eyes; coughing in the morning; coughing during the rest of the day; runny nose or sneezing; and a sore or scratchy throat. "These symptoms are precursors to serious diseases like asthma, emphysema and bronchitis," said Dr. Pat Remington, associate director of cancer control and outreach at the UW Comprehensive Cancer Center. "Few people think about what it's like to work for five or eight or more hours a day in a smoky environment."

Clearing the Air in New York City: 

Clearing the Air in New York City James McBratney, president of the Staten Island Restaurant and Tavern Association. "The crystal ball that people are looking at to project economic stability is not good enough for me." October 11, 2002 New York Daily News

ASHRAE Position Document: Environmental Tobacco Smoke: 

ASHRAE Position Document: Environmental Tobacco Smoke “At present, the only means of effectively eliminating health risk associated with indoor exposure is to ban smoking activity.” “No other engineering approaches, including current and advanced dilution ventilation or air cleaning technologies, have been demonstrated or should be relied upon to control health risks from ETS exposure in spaces where smoking occurs.” http://www.ashrae.org/content/ASHRAE/ASHRAE/ArticleAltFormat/20058211239_347.pdf “Because of ASHRAE’s mission to act for the benefit of the public, it encourages elimination of smoking in the indoor environment as the optimal way to minimize ETS exposure.”

Slide71: 

Peter Fisher Vice President, State Issues Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids (202) 296-5469 X3015 pfisher@tobaccofreekids.org www.tobaccofreekids.org