Bliley TI
[Comments Made at the Annual Meeting]
Abstract
"Comments Made at the Annual Meeting, December 14, 1984," focuses on "tobacco excise taxes and other legislative threats." Reports that excise tax legislation is highest priority for 1985 and that 28 states pose serious excise tax challenges. Stresses need to prevent congressional excise tax increase. Outlines strategy: (1)"intense lobbying by the Federal Relations Division" (2) "pull together sizable block of Congressmen" to vote against tobacco tax (3) maintain pressure on key members of Congress. Provides update of key positions and issues in Congress. Asserts major goal is to hold traditional tobacco state delegation together. Also reports a good year influencing state activities, structure and programs. Details legislative victories. Outlines four ways to support "Federal Relations and State Activities": (1) "producing documented materials" (2) "provide expert witnesses" (3) "developing coalitions" (4) "challenging anti-smokers." Describes programs from the Industry with the community. Notes attempt to influence other legislation related to smoking, namely airlines and the workplace. Anticipates legislative problems for the industry including warnings on addiction, ingredients and other tobacco manufactured products. Reports efforts to verify "the work of the anti-smoking scientist." Notes the publication group has produced "attractive, effective material" for PR use. Indicates four federal agencies to study cigarette smoke and nonsmokers.
Fields
- Notes
(indexer.indexer_email WAS INVALID IN OLD DATABASE: JL)
- Company
- TI
- Type
- SPEECH/PRESENTATION
- Region
- Indiana
- Los Angeles
- Maine
- Maryland
- Massachusetts
- Mexico
- Minnesota
- New Mexico
- New York
- Pennsylvania
- Texas
- Utah
- Atlanta
- Europe
- Far East
- Illinois
- Named Person
- Browner, A.
- Cannon, J.
- Chilcote, Samuel D., Jr. (TI President (1981-1997))Chilcote has knowledge of The Tobacco Institute's and the tobacco industry's participation in public fraud and disinformation relative to health hazards of tobacco use, in the manipulation of nicotine in tobacco products and in marketing of tobacco products to children.
- Danforth, J.
- Dole, B.
- Ford, G.
- Fowler, W.
- Henderson, D.
- Humber, T.
- Jones, L.
- Kloepfer, William J., Jr. (TI Public Affairs VP, c. 1988)Senior Vice President of Public Affairs Relations for the Tobacco Institute
- Kornegay, Horace R. (TI President and Exec. Director)VP Leaf Ops (RJR), TI Chairman (1985)
- Milway, D.
- Mozingo, Roger L. (TI Lobbyist, Sr. VP, headed up state and local lobbying)Involved in state and local level lobbying for the tobacco industry. Was a Vice President at TI, in the State Activities Division in the 1970's & 1980's, later went to RJR. Roger L. Mozingo was Vice President of State Government Relations for RJR in 1994. (Source: R. J. Reynolds Summary - RJR Liability Notebook)
- Packwood, B.
- Prendergast, W. (Dr.)
- Repace, J.
- Roger
- Ruckleshaus, B.
- Scanlor, T.
- Schwartz, S. (Dr.)
- Stevens, W.
- Taylor, P.
- Thomas, L.
- Thurmond, A.
- Vinovich, R.
- Whelan, E.
- Author
- Chilcote, Samuel D., Jr. (TI President (1981-1997))Chilcote has knowledge of The Tobacco Institute's and the tobacco industry's participation in public fraud and disinformation relative to health hazards of tobacco use, in the manipulation of nicotine in tobacco products and in marketing of tobacco products to children.
- Named Organization
- AFL's Citizen for Tax Justice
- American Cancer Society
- British Medical Journal
- Chase Econometrics
- Civil Aeronautics Board
- Congress
- Congressional Black Caucus
- Consumer Product Safety Commission
- Covington & Burling (Tobacco Industry law firm)Tobacco industry law firm. Was involved in organizing the Whitecoat Project.
- CSG
- EPA
- FAA
- Federal Aviation Administration
- Federal Relations Division
- Ford Vending Company
- Georgetown University
- League of United Latin American Citizens
- Medicare
- NASBE
- National Black Caucus of State Legislature
- National Cancer Institute
- National Chamber Foundation
- National Conference of State Legislature
- NCSL
- NGA
- Office of Smoking and Health
- Save Our Security
- TIPAC
- Tobacco Action Network
- Tobacco Observer
- Urban League
- Vietnam Veterans of America
- Ways and Means Committee
- Women in Farm Economics
- Subject
- Additives
- Airlines
- Federal Level
- Government Agencies
- industry response
- industry sponsored research
- Industry Strategies
- lobbying
- public relations
- secondhand smoke
- State Level
- Taxes
- workplace
- addiction
Document Images
CONFIDENTIAL:
MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION
COHI~NTS MADE AT THE
ANNUAL MEETING
December 13 1984
' der tnCON~IDh'NTIAL
duced as requ~ed by the
SAMUEL D. CHILCOTE, JR o ~0 State ot MjnnesOt~ et C1o94~8565
Cou~t File No.:
One year ago I stated that the past year was more eventful than
the twenty years before it...combined. The year was difficult,
rewarding and demanding.
1984 was milch tougher than 1983 and 1985 will be tougher yet.
This morning we will take a brief look at the past 12 months and a
look forward to the next year.
The directcrs of our four divisions will report to you on their
results in 1984...despite the fact that it was a difficult year, their
reports contain some good news.
(Reports by Mr. Kornegay -- for Dave Henderson, Mr. Mozingo,
Mr. Kloepfer and Mr. Milway follow.)
For us, 19U4 is history and while we are proud of our accomplish-
ments, we are focused on what lies ahead.
Excise tax legislation is our highest priority as we enter 1985.
While Congress':~ attention is f~cused on the budget deficit, it is
doubtful there ~lill be much action on proposals to earmark cigarette
and alcohol excises for Medicare. The concept, however, is gaining
ground and represents a continued threat.
At the sta,ie level, we believe 28 states will pose serious excise
tax challenges [n the next year. These states are looking at the
federal sunset -~ith mouths watering.
Our plan o~ attack includes the following:
Intense lo~bying by the Federal Relations Division in order to
maintain close contact with the members of the two revenue-
writing committees.
We remain ~opeful that we can pull together a sizeable bloc of
Congressmen who will vote against any tax bill which includes the
mention of the word "tobacco."
Our state lobbyist and representatives are helping by providing
constituent pressure on key Members of Congress.
In January, Congressman Wyche Fowler, a Member of Ways & Means,
will be the keynote speaker at a seminar on tax policy at one of
his home district universities. He will be surrounded by a panel
_ _ TIMN0061487
PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENITAL
Produced as required by the Court's March ~ 1998 Order hi
S~te of Minnesot~ et ~. ~ Phi~p Morri~ et al.
CONFIDENTIAL:
Court File No.: C~9~8565 MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION
of economis~.s...all of whom oppose excises. He, too, will oppose
excises publicly and in front of local voters. The seminar will
receive publicity and Congressman Fowler will be firmly on the
record.
Other Members, carefully chosen by our federal lobbying team,
will be approached in the same manner.
We expect to have the results of our third major study demon-
strating the eco~omic impact of tobacco before the end of the first
quarter. This study, conducted by Chase Econometrics, will be invalu-
able to our lobbyists and communicators as they make our case against
taxes and other ~egislation.
While we believe our lobbyists are and must be our strongest line
of defense, they are not our only line of defense. We have estab-
lished a broad coalition against excises. Each of these partnerships
requires on-going attention...they can and must lead to yet more
coalitions.
The value o~ coalitions was crystal clear in ~984 on the self-
extinguishing cigarette legislation. In ~985 we expect to focus
particularly on ~ublic employees, minorities, women's groups, veterans
and industries w~th commercial ties to tobacco.
We are not put of the woods on the self-extinguishing issue.
Although the state legislation was subsided, the federal bill which
passed last summer was removed much of the pressure in Washington, yet
the federal study...authorized by the legislation is quite slowly get-
ting under way.
The Study Group will issue an interim report in ~985, our first
official indication on what the final report may look like. It will
signal the states whether to trust the federal government or go it
alone.
Meanwhile, the Federal Aviation Administration is taking a hard
look at airplane fires. We've already seen legislation which would
hold smokers responsible for fires involving "drunk smoking." So we
are talking abo-t more than just self-extinguishing cigarettes.
We are monitoring the Federal Fire-Safe Cigarette Study as
closely as possible. The industry has already selected its four
representatives on the study panel, and we are attempting to place
other friendly ,~embers on the panel.
The Chairm~.n of the Consumer Product Safety Commission is to
direct the entire study. Terrence Scanlon is the Administration's
nominee to fill that vacant position. He appears to be someone we can
work with.
As Bill Klc,epfer mentions, our fire prevention program is in
place from coasi~ to coast. We continue to ensure that key legislators
are aware of our positive working relationships with fire fighters.
TIMN0061488
CONFIDENTIAL:
MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION
The public smoking issue is quite a different story. We have
seen a steady parade of public smoking bills at the state level over
the past decade. We've defeated most of them. As Roger reported over
this past year ~e've seen a trend towards local ordinances aimed
primarily at the workplace. We've also seen an increase in voluntary
restrictions in businesses, public agencies, associations and even
unions.
Workplace ~estrictions is not the only trend that concerns us.
The CAB gave se~'ious consideration to prohibiting smoking on most
flights.
They did not enact new rules, however, the CAB hearings were the
red flag that signaled far greater federal interest in cigarette smoke
and the nonsmok¢~r.
Entering I~85, four separate federal agencies plans to study
cigarette smoke and nonsmokers. The EPA is ready to proceed with a
$75,000 study o;! passive smoking...with a proposed $2 million study of
indoor air pollution; the FAA -- heir to CAB -- is studying cabin air
quality; the National Cancer Institute and the Office of Smoking and
Health are both taking a hard look at public smoking; and, according
to our intellig<~nce, the surgeon general's next report will focus on
workplace smoking and the effects of smoke on the nonsmoker. We
expect to see ai: least one major federal bill in this area sometime in
the next two years.
In 1985, we expect to see as many as 40 states consider smoking
restrictions. ~ have identified 90 cities likely to consider such
ordinances.
In preparation, we are establishing and building upon our rela-
tions with the ~ederal agencies dealing in this area. In the process
of bringing in new leadership, the administration's nominee for head
of the EPA is Lee Thomas. The good news is that we understand he is a
reasonable man.
The bad news is that under Thomas will be two men in key posi-
tions who are k~own anti-smokers. Joseph Cannon, Assistant
Administrator for Air, in charge of the $75,000 study mentioned in
Mr. Milway's comments, and James Repace, who claims that cigarette
smoke in the aic kills between 500-5,000 nonsmokers annually.
One month ago, we asked prominent medical researcher, Dr. Sorell
Schwartz of Geocgetown University, to critique Repace's work. We will
use that critique in briefings with EPA officials. The EPA, under
Bill Ruckleshaus, was not afraid to sanction its own staff when they
did shoddy work. We hope that tradition continues.
We are fortunate to have Dr. Schwartz's assistance. ~One of our
greatest weaknesses is our lack of qualified medical researchers to
• help us refute the anti-smokers with legislative testimony, public
appearances and articles. Covington & Burling is actively attempting
t Intify and develop such experts. ~
_ / dt DaArO- TI1VI 0061489
CONFIDENTIAL:
MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION
Until then, we must'rely mostly on traditional arguments to
combat public smoking restrictions. We have a good variety of con-
sultants ready t~, help our lobbyists.
In 1985 we will continue to see sampling and advertising restric-
tions proposed at the state and local level. We will face enormous
studies blaming ,~igarette smoking for an endless variety of diseases.
Also a continuing expansion of the anti-smoker coalition.
I can't predict whether our adversaries will push for an anti-
tobacco postage :~tamp or elimination of the cigarette discount at
military bases i~ 1985. I will guarantee that 1985 will be the anti-
smokers' most active year.
The Institute is ready. Our tradition has been tO stay a step
ahead of the anti-smokers through our legislative and public relations
programs. We mu:~t be even more aggressive in 1985.
TIMN 0061490
-- 4 --
CONFIDENTIAL:
MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION
DAVID ~ENDERSON (delivered by Horace Korneg.ay)
In the last Congress we greeted the 1983-84 legislative cycle
with our feet planted for a legislative donnybrook. We got what we
expected and more.
As we look to the new Congress, the only change will be the major
issues.
With the passage of the Comprehensive Smoking Education Act
~(labeling), the Cigarette Safety Act (the self-extinguishing cigarette
tudy) and our action before the Civil Aeronautics Board, we should be
ble to concentrate on tobacco excise taxes and other legislative
~threats.
~ We must, hcwever, antlclpate further proposals such as addltlonal
~rnings regarding addiction, ingredients and expansions to other
~nufactured tobacco products.
~" ~ The Ci~arelte Safety Study will require constant monitoring.
~l~l~iph Vinovich has assumed that responsibility.
~ Dr. Willian~ Prendergast will proceed as our tax project leader
~ ~d will have a%l resources of The Institute at his command.
@Or~ Awaiting the completion of the organization of the 99th Congress,
tax project plan is partially implemented The new Majority
.
~ader is Bob Dole and Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee is Bob
~ckwood. Chairman of Senate Commerce Committee is expected to be
~ ~hn Danfor~h. If Senator Strom Thurmond of South Carolina exercises
~s prerogative to become Chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee
~ ~--~°~'~ would prevent Senator Goldwater from chairing that Committee, thus
~ving Goldwate~z the opportunity to chair Senate Commerce.
The possibility exists that former Republican Whip Stevens of
Alaska might challenge Danforth on the basis of Senator seniority to
become Chair of the Senate Commerce Committee.
Senator HeLms remains as Chairman of the Agriculture Committee
and Lugar Chair~ the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Only time
will tell how taese events will effect our legislation.
It is our najor goal to hold the traditional tobacco state dele-
gations together. Maintaining and expanding the solidarity of the
House members who supported the tax sunset provision is extremely
important.
We have written the 60 House members from "tobaccoland" urging
them to stand fast on the sunset provision. These members represent
districts or states in which tobacco provides the livelihood of many
of their constituents. We intend to expand the ranks of this group.
Members of the Congressional Black Caucus and other individual Members
on issues of concern to our industry as well as Members of state dele-
8atlon~ h~v~ b~n lobbied by US.
TIMN 0061491
-- ~ -
CONFIDENTIAL:
MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION
We have ask~d the 60 tobaccoland House members to pair with 60
other Members of Congress, who we have already identified, seeking
commitment to us. With that total of 120, we will seek commitments
from at least an,,ther 100 members.
If and when a vote is necessary, it is our objective to obtain a
sufficient number of 218 votes -- plus all possible additional support
to insure a victory. A similar effort will be made in the Senate.
As stated at the September Executive Committee meeting, the most
important element of the tax plan is that the entire industry speak
with one voice.
Sam Chilcote has made it clear to all Institute employees that
there is only on=~ position on excise taxation. Sam has also made it
clear tha~ any report or rumor be passed on to him without delay.
Another mat=er of great importance is the need for amendments to
the price suppor: program. Early legislative action is anticipated.
We have all made extensive efforts to determine the legislative situa-
tion in 1985.
Early efforts must be taken to amend the program for the 1985
crop. If the problems between the farm groups -- tobacco allotment
holders and the Rctual growers -- can be resolved, the tobacco legis-
lation may move 9n its own. There is agreement that the legislation
can be handled ia the House...under suspension of the rules.
Unfolding events regarding this price support legislation can
complicate our legislative task regarding excise taxes. There is
mounting suspicion and animosity between the farm groups and the
cigarette manufacturers. These fears may be allayed if Congress can
fashion amendments to the price support program that we can support.
If, however, the Agriculture Committees of the Congress were to sug-
gest cigarette taxes to finance the cost of the farm program, we might
be faced with a situation which cannot be clearly defined at this time
other than troublesome, if not dangerous.
We will be watching Congressional response to coalition and other
adversaries' efforts to harass the industry. Observed activities are:
advertising, air quality standards, agitation for smoking restrictions
in federal properties and aboard public transportation under the
federal jurisdiction, codification of CAB regulations, import regula-
tions pertaining to raw materials, education programs and research,
product liabili[y and risk assessment.
We have attempted to anticipate the needs for the next Congress
as we look forwe.rd to the restaffing of the federal division. As the
new session begins in ~985 we hope to have fully staffed our division
so that we will have adequate lobbying capabilities.
In the lasi: Congress, we distributed $~98,532 from our TIPAC
account to 253 [[embers of Congress. During the same Congress, ~48
Members received $208,000 of honoraria. We have focused on Members of
the tax-writing committees in ~his program have hosted 18 Members of
TIMN
0061492
Uced as re-u~ - - CON~ - 6 -
• ,u.. ~'~8565 -~ ~'~"
CONFIDENTIAL:
MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION
the Ways and Mea.~s and Finance Committee in these sessions, which
helps to spread ~nderstanding of the problems of our industry and
create a more rezeptive climate on the Hill.
Our support activities to key Members of the Congress is all
important. We can earn goodwill with contributions toward new
Members' campaign debt retirement and incumbents' war chests for the
next campaign.
ND CONTIDENTIkL
_ .. ,~e u~ed by the , .. ph' 'v Mort~, ~"
TIMN 0061493
ROGgR L. I~I~C1.;~1'8~o1~.1"~9~8 ~rde,,_ MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION
o~3 et M. at
We remain very much aware of the charge from our Policy Committee
just over a year ago. The effort that has gone into our State
Activities Structure and Programs has produced a good year at the
state level...
we have been les~ successful at the local level.
At the state level:
Fifty-one eKcise hike measures were considered. Five were
adopted. Oar success records exceeds 90%. The biggest disap-
pointments came in Texas (a 2# hike by next year) and in Maine
(an 8~ hike). Both hikes were tremendously influenced by public-
ity surrounding the federal sunset.
One hundred three smoking restriction measures were introduced.
Four were implemented. Success reeord...nearly 97%.
Fifteen "self-extinguishing" bills were dealt with. None were
adopted.
Five adult sampling measure8 were introduced. None adopted.
We faced 184 proposals on taxes, restrictions, self-extinguishing
and sampliDg. Nine measures were adopted.
I think yoL will agree that's a pretty solid batting average.
Ironically, our success at the state level has led to an increased
number of anti-[,obaeco measures considered at the local level. This
has become one of our toughest challenges:
Six excise increases were adopted locally...about one-third of
those considered. The recent 39 jump in Cook County, Illinois,
represents our worst local setback.
Two-thirds of the 150 local smoking restriction measures con-
sidered were not adopted. Our major loss came in Los Angeles.
Nine adult sampling measures were up locally. Two were adopted,
and I believe we stand a chance at modifying the ban in Boston.
Our progre:~s is the result of good work by good people who have
responded well ~:o our new structure.
As reported a year ago, we reduced our staff by 20 positions and
closed 12 offices nationwide. Today we have a staff of 36 and 9
regional supper: offices. The staff is divided with 26 positions in
the field and I0 at Headquarters.
The thrust of our reorganization has been to decentralize and in
turn regionalize our operation.
To accomplish our miesion we put more responsibility, and thus
accountability, into the hands of our Regional Vice Presidents. We
- s - TIMN 0061494
CONFIDENTIAL:
MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION
are convinced our structure is on track. Our legislative planning is
closer to the sc:-~ne and we've established better coordination between
our field staff and lobbyists.
At Headquarters, we've organized our effort into clearly defined
programs so as to remove any doubt about our objectives and how we
manage our time and spend our money.
We are divided into four key areas: legislative; legislative
support; communications and administration.
Our LEGISLA'?IVE PROGRAM is the nucleus. This effort determines
our success or f}~i'iu~e at the state and local level. Our lobbyists
are the key in tllis program. We retain 80 lobbyists at the' state
level and additional counsel at the local--level when required.
During the i)ast year we strengthened our lobbying effort in ~5
states. We have now identified potential back-up counsel in all 50
states:
In 1984, 19~5 and beyond it will always be essential that we have
in place th~ strongest possible lobbying corps. The credibility
and ability of our lobbyists in many instances is more important
than the "m~rits" of the issue itself.
Our own field staff works closely with our lobbyists to refine
our legislative ~lanning. This fall, our Regional Vice Presidents
planned and condacted five regional lobbyists' meetings. A number of
member company e3ployees attended those meetings.
Our 30-s~ate Corporate. ~ampai~n Contribution program is increas-
ingly important to our overall leEislatlve effort. Members of Revenue
and Health Committees have been the target of contributions. The pro-
gram has proven beneficial and will be even more important in the
future.
Next year we will conduct a limited Honoraria ProEram, focusing
principally in the 20 states where corporate contributions are not
permitted. This program should assist tremendously and help us estab-
lish a "tobacco presence" in all states.
Our LEGISLATIVE SUPPORT PROGRAM is the oil that makes the divi-
sion run.
The Tobaccc Action Network (TAN) has become something of a dino-
saur. While bringing the program into better focus, it is, and
will remair., an important part of our legislative support pro-
gram.
We've put ,~uch effort into identifying the real TAN activists...
folks like Lance Jones, who are willing to walk the extra mile
for their industry. We have identified more than ]2,000 such
activists, and are targeting most of our effort toward them.
Grass Root~: support iS and will remain vital to our support
as requ~ed b NFIDENTIAL TIMN 0061495
State °~ M/nnes°t~the C°urt's l~farch ~ ~99S Ordex~
CONFIDENTIAL:
MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION
Just last week the St. Joseph County, Indiana, County Council
rejected an extremely broad restriction measure affecting, among other
locations, the workplace and restaurants.
The hard wo=k of our Regional Vice Presidents, our lobbyists and
some of our actiJe volunteers resulted in the victory.
TAN activist Gordon Ford (Ford Vending Company), his wife and son
were instrumental in generating dozens of phone calls and letters to
the County Council and led a flyer distribution program that got our
message out to thousands of others.
AdditionallF, renewed efforts to bring new allies to the fight
are paying off. While we usually muster fairly good "family" support
from manufacturers' employees, vendors, distributors and the agricul-
tural community, we have endeavored to enlist more and better support
from non-tobacco allies:
In the defeat of the annual Grannis' smoking restriction legisla-
tion in New York, we had the active support of Restaurant Associ-
ations, Chambers of Commerce, Unions, Bowling Alley Proprietors,
Hotel/Motel Groups and a host of others.
When our legislative support effort delivers such a wide variety
of allies, we make our lobbyist/field staff job a good deal easier.
Political/legislative organizations serving the states are becom-
ing increasingly important to us.
With the help of company staff, our division is assuming an
increasing role in the activities of key legislative groups: the
NCSL, CSG, NGA and others are constantly coming up with legislative
ideas...and model bills which affect our industry.
Another goml has been to improve resource development...develop-
ment of materials for use by our lobbyists and field staff. These
materials are b~ing tailored to the 8tares we know will be top prior-
ity next year.
We work with PR to make more frequent and better use of advertis-
ing campaigns a~d other programs designed to get our message out.
A year ago, our COMMUNICATIONS PROGRAM was in shambles. Today, I
can personally !Joint to this effort 'with pride and tell you that we
have made good progress:
A new "Iss,~e Book" has been developed for use by the field and
lobbyists.
Our "State.ine" and Stateline "Special Report" series have shown
marked imp~rovement and the information flow to and from the
field, lobbyists and CO~ID~D.LeS.
I~.~WILEGED AND CONHDEN'[~A~
1~ro~lueed ~ requked by the Court's M~ch 7,1998 Order in
St~e ot Minnesot~ et al. ~ Philip Morti~ et a~
Court File No.: C1-9~8565 .....
- TIMN0061496
