Posted on 01/18/2006 6:37:58 AM PST by SheLion
COLUMBUS — Ohio’s anti-smoking effort, funded by the tobacco settlement, has poured more than $2 million into passage and implementation of local clean indoor air laws.
But now that the Super Bowl of smoking bans is before the Ohio General Assembly — a statewide ban that would be among the strictest in the nation — the Tobacco Use Prevention and Control Foundation must sit on the sidelines, at least officially.
The 2000 law that created the foundation forbids it from lobbying or otherwise getting involved in a state ballot issue, the goal behind petitions certified by Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell and forwarded to lawmakers.
Despite the legal prohibition, foundation board members and employees have circulated petitions for the ban on their own time and the ballot issue could get a boost from the foundation’s $7 million-plus “stand” ad campaign this year warning of the dangers of secondhand smoke. That ad campaign will go forward as planned but without mentioning the ballot issue.
The foundation has funneled hundreds of thousands of dollars that came from the likes of Philip Morris and R.J. Reynolds into organizations like Tobacco-Free Ohio and the Licking County Board of Health that are actively involved in pushing the statewide ban. The foundation’s dollars, however, were earmarked for local ordinance efforts unrelated to the statewide effort.
“We cannot officially urge people to vote for this issue,” foundation Executive Director Mike Renner said.
“We can speak, and will speak, on the dangers of secondhand smoke and the value of having policies that protect innocent persons and nonsmokers from exposure to those toxins.”
He personally gathered some of the roughly 117,000 signatures certified by Mr. Blackwell to petition lawmakers to enact the statewide ban as proposed, and he plans to do so again this spring and summer to put the question directly to voters on Nov. 7.
“We have our job to do. What they do on their own time is their decision,’’ said Jacob Evans, lobbyist for the Ohio Licensed Beverage Association. The association is part of a coalition of bars, restaurants, bowling alleys, private clubs, and others fighting the ban.
The coalition hopes to beat the anti-smoking activists to the punch by persuading lawmakers to pass a ban that would provide more exemptions, and it’s challenging the validity of the petitions in the courts.
The organization is also trying to raise money for what could be its own advertising campaign this fall touting its proposed ban to voters as the more reasonable of the two.
Mr. Evans said he believes voters will be able to differentiate between political ads urging passage of a ballot issue to protect people from secondhand smoke and the foundation’s more general message about the dangers of secondhand smoke.
Susan Jagers, spokesman for the American Cancer Society of Ohio and co-chairman of the SmokeFreeOhio campaign pushing the statewide ban, said anti-smoking activists weren’t contemplating a statewide ballot issue when the 2000 legislative battle was fought.
“We didn’t want any limitations in state law on how [the tobacco settlement] money would be spent,” she said.
“We thought it should be left to the [foundation’s] board of directors to decide how to reduce youth and adult smoking in Ohio.”
Foundation spokesman Beth Schieber said it’s possible the foundation could pull its advertising as the November election approaches, as it did during the heat of the 2004 presidential election.
She said the move would not be an attempt to distance the “stand” campaign from the ballot issue, but rather an indication that television air time likely would be at its most expensive during that time.
Tobacco settlement dollars funneled through the foundation have been used by organizations to successfully seek passage of ordinances that largely prohibit smoking in indoor public places in Columbus, several of its suburbs, Summit County, and a pair of Licking County communities.
Tobacco-Free Ohio spent $371,623 in 2004 to push ordinances in urban and suburban Cleveland and the Toledo suburbs of Maumee, Sylvania, and Oregon.
No ordinances resulted.
The lack of success in suburban Toledo was credited, in part, to passage of a voter referendum that watered down Toledo’s smoking ban by exempting bars, bowling alleys, and some restaurants.
“Our grant expired more than a year ago,’’ said Tracy Sabetta, Tobacco-Free Ohio spokesman. “We weren’t involved in the [statewide] campaign at that time. Any unexpended funds were returned to the foundation.”
The foundation was created in 2000 using part of the state’s $10 billion share of the national settlement with major tobacco companies.
States had argued that the companies’ marketing practices had forced them to spend billions treating smoking-related illnesses like lung cancer and emphysema.
It remains to be seen what role, if any, the tobacco industry may play in trying to beat back the stricter statewide ban pushed by SmokeFreeOhio.
The opposition has said it will raise funds for its campaign and would not rule out accepting tobacco money.
Philip Morris USA spokesman Jennifer Golisch said the Virginia-based company has no plans to get involved.
“There are places where smoking should be prohibited, such as in elevators, places where fire hazards exist, and places where there are primarily children such as playgrounds and schools,” she said.
“But there are reasonable ways to respect the comfort and choices of both smoking and nonsmoking adults,” she said.
“We believe business owners, particularly the owners of restaurants and bars, are most familiar with how to accommodate the needs of patrons,” Ms. Golisch said.
Anti-smoking activists remain suspicious about documents from a prior court settlement that showed the industry had at least planned on working with the hospitality industry to push for preemption laws prohibiting local action on smoking bans.
“I don’t have memos,” Mr. Renner said. “I don’t have canceled checks, but there’s no doubt in my mind that the tobacco industry is supportive of the licensed beverage organization or the hospitality industry people.
“I’m certain there are discussions in which the tobacco industry’s expertise is being shared with the beverage association.”
Ping
“I’m certain there are discussions in which the tobacco industry’s expertise is being shared with the beverage association.”
And this is a problem, how? The hospitality industry is trying to save their business, and fighting an uphill battle against the heavily funded anti-smoker groups seeking to destroy their businesses.
"“But there are reasonable ways to respect the comfort and choices of both smoking and nonsmoking adults,” she said."
One of which would be to stop all public funding of treatment for smoking related illnesses in smokers. I.E., if you smoke, don't expect anyone to help pay for your treatment for the diseases you will most likely get. I'm sick of indirectly subsidizing others' decisions to destroy their health.
Smoking... don't really care. Freedom, I love it.
I hope the people of Ohio are wise enough to crush this issue like a bug. But I have my doubt. Leftists aided by reformed smokers, (nothing worse than a reformed smoker), will give this thing legs.
Ohio needs no smoking bans. Let this decision be left to the business owner and his patrons. NOT the government!
The "stand" campaign in Ohio is a series of overt lies about secondhand smoke that are not based on scientific evidence, but are designed to build support for anti-smoking legislation through lies.
I don't smoke. I don't enjoy being around people who are smoking.
I however believe that "stand" should be cut off from all public money and those funneling State money into this campaign of lies should be charged with fraud.
The longer the bans continue in the states that have passed them, the more worried the business owner's facing bans in other states become.
The loss of business and lay-offs is starting to rear it's ugly head.
"I'm sick of indirectly subsidizing others' decisions to destroy their health. "
That's a slippery slope. Are you sure you want to get on that slope? How's your weight? Do you engage in any risky activities, (things *I* consider risky, not you). Skydiving? Motorcycle riding? Drive a small car? Live in a bad neighborhood?
I don't want to subsidize YOUR risks.
EXCUSE me, but this is about smoking bans in Ohio forced upon private business owners. It isn't about how YOU feel about smokers and health care.
If you had any sense or if you have been following this issue you would KNOW that you aren't paying for smokers health care. Most smokers have their own insurance thank you. You don't have to pay for anything regarding smokers.
I think you are mixing it up with paying for illegal immigrants health care and NOT smokers.
How old are you? 14??!!
"Let us hope that Ohio comes to it's senses... "
Ohio... Taft as governor. The same state that gave us Traficant and Kucinich. Hmmmm, I'm not sure I'd count on Ohio gaining any sense!
I do love the unintended consequences of the smoking ban that the Nazis of the Summit County, Ohio council passed. These idiots put into effect a county wide ban on smoking in public places. The two biggest cities in Summit county passed laws that supercede the county law, and allow smoking in restaurants and bars. Townships can't pass such laws, so the bars and restaurants in the townships are dying. Now the council is looking at reversing their idiocy. Duh.
Let people vote with their dollars. It really does work.
So I guess I can sign you up for the Committee To Ban Anal Intercourse, then.
If not, how about a small contribution?
We meet every Thursday night at Harry's Cigar Bar and Heterosexual Lounge.
When the Tobacco Settlement money started flowing into the states, the Boards of Health formed the coalitions of Partnership for a smoke free everything. Using the smokers very own cigarette tax dollars against them.
The highly paid professional anti-smokers are being paid quite well to restrict and control people who smoke. And they say they want a smoke free everything! heh!
Throw into the mix the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation giving huge grants to any state that they can get into their pocket to further ban, control and restrict smokers, and what chance do you think the small minority has? Not much.
When they go after the smoke nazis' favorite vices, it's going to be hard not to laugh and laugh and laugh. I'm trying to figure out who's up next? Is it fat people?
But the general non-smoking public has to realize that voting yes for smoking bans isn't going to do their state economy any good. The general non-smoking public has been duped into believing that smoking bans are good.
When only 25-30% of the state smokes, we lose at the polls every time. That is why the general non-smoking public has to learn that a vote of yes against their very own business owner is like putting a nail in their coffin.
Read what the smoking bans has done to businesses across the United States:
THE REAL FACTS OF THE SMOKING BANS IMPACT ON BUSINESS'S
The Facts
How's business since smoke has cleared? (Dallas smoking ban - restaurant sales est. down 25%)
(Dallas smoking ban - restaurant sales est. down 25%)
Attention all business owners suffering from a smoking ban.
Please fill out this form and submit it for a new web page
Ban Loss
SMOKING BAN IMPACT ON CALIFORNIA RESTAURANTS
That is the real impact of the smoking ban. So if you hear of anyone saying that the smoking ban in restaurants and bars does not hurt anybody, you can quote my figures, which are based on the official reports issued by the State Board of Equalization here in California.
Yes. Sad to say, but Yes!
By Nanci Hellmich, USA TODAY
Inactive Americans are eating themselves to death at an alarming rate, their unhealthy habits fast approaching tobacco as the top underlying preventable cause of death, a government study found.
Poor diet and lack of exercise might end up killing more people than tobacco use and become the leading cause of preventable deaths in the USA by as early as next year, a new study says. (Related story: Anti-obesity public service ads may be too much to stomach)
Diet and physical inactivity accounted for 400,000 deaths in 2000, or about 16.6% of total deaths. Tobacco, with 435,000 deaths, was 18.1% of the total, says research in today's Journal of the American Medical Association.
"This is really a tragedy," says Julie Gerberding, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (news - web sites) and one of the authors of the study. "Obesity is the overt manifestation" of poor diet and sedentary lifestyle, and it's a "preventable risk factor," she says.
Smoking rates are dropping, but Americans are increasingly overweight. That's why obesity probably will overtake smoking as the leading preventable cause of death by 2005, says CDC epidemiologist Ali Mokdad, another study author. Almost 65% of Americans weigh too much, increasing their risk of heart disease, diabetes and cancer.
On Tuesday, the government announced two ways it intends to help: by running public service ads on the importance of controlling weight and by paying for new obesity research. (LOOK out!)
For the latest study, CDC researchers reviewed about 1,000 studies linking certain behaviors and death, and they came up with an equation that determines the actual risk from those behaviors. Often, more than one cause or condition contributes to a single death. The top killers are heart disease, cancer and stroke. The researchers say poor diet and inactivity are considered "modifiable" behaviors that give those killers ammunition.
Nutrition experts say Americans must take this news seriously. "Obesity and unhealthy lifestyles are now the most important public health problems of this century," says Samuel Klein, director of the Center for Human Nutrition at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis.
"It's not just the increase in premature deaths that's a problem, but also the illness, disability, suffering and economic costs that go with it," he says.
Roland Sturm, a senior economist with Rand Corp., a research think tank, says Americans have been getting healthier and living longer. But he says that if the obesity rate continues to rise, "it will reverse that trend." People now in their 40s will develop conditions such as diabetes, arthritis and back pain that will reduce their quality of life, he says.
In a study in the March issue of Health Affairs, Sturm predicts that by 2020, one in five health-care dollars spent on people ages 50 to 69 could be for medical problems related to excess weight.
"People need to get off the train of overeating, gaining weight and being sedentary," says George Blackburn, associate director of the division of nutrition at Harvard Medical School (news - web sites). "These are 400,000 avoidable, premature deaths that wouldn't occur if we didn't overeat and weren't coach potatoes."
Gerberding says she would like to see Americans take small steps to a healthier lifestyle, and those steps would "add up to a more fit body. That means eating healthy foods in healthy portion sizes and finding ways to incorporate exercise into their everyday lives."
Yahoo News
"400,000 avoidable, premature deaths." Every wonder where they pull those numbers out of?
"If you had any sense or if you have been following this issue you would KNOW that you aren't paying for smokers health care. Most smokers have their own insurance thank you. You don't have to pay for anything regarding smokers."
That gets the BS award of the day (yesterday it went to Toyota's Chairman who claimed that Toyota didn't want to be the world's largest automaker).... my health insurance plan (as most employer programs) doesn't charge differently based on smoking habits. So therefore, my premiums are used to support those people who CHOOSE to smoke and run the risk of lung cancer, emphysema, etc... And Medicare and Medicaid are forking out for treatment of smoking related illnesses, so my tax dollars go to support that choice. Any questions? Now go back to coloring, and stay between the lines this time...
I'd always vaguely wondered how the "activists" made a living! ;-)
You're impossible.
How many smokers under the age of 60 do you know that are sick, in the hospital or are dying from smoking?
If a smoker ever gets sick, it's after the retirement years. The health insurance is a scam when it comes to smoking.
And most smokers, at least the ones in Free Republic, have their own health insurance. You never have to worry about paying anything for them!
When I was working, I never ever once called off sick! And the company sure never had to use their health insurance for me! I worked with an obese guy. He was off sick several times a year. And even hospitalized for gall stones.
Any questions?
It's despicable!
They are being paid to put forth their war on the smokers and using the Tobacco Settlement money to do so. The Tobacco Settlement money is being paid 100% by people who pay taxes on cigarettes. Not Big Tobacco and NOT the government. But the smokers.
Smokers have been paying for this personal abuse for years. One would think that they would be good and fed up by now.
Have you noticed how a state wants smoke free but the state can't balance their budgets with raising cigarette taxes again and again? The lawmakers talk out of both sides of their mouths.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.