Anne Landman's Collection
Notes for Bill Murray Briefing 19880405
Abstract
These are notes from the Tobacco Institute for briefing Philip Morris' Chief Operating Officer Bill Murray in 1988 to explain the Tobacco Institute's approach to secondhand smoke issues. The notes are rich in strategy information. They clearly indicate the industry's effort to move the focus of the secondhand smoke issue away from smoking restrictions and health and onto ventilation, saying "A program to eventually substitute ventilation legislation for smoking restriction legislation is under consideration at The Institute...any such program would have tp be part of a larger legislative program." The paper also reveals that the industry defeated a smoking ban in hospitals by introducing an amendment that "scared the hell out of" hospital administrators: "We defeated...a bill to ban smoking in all hospitals...we killed the bill by threatening to offer an amendment to the smoking bill to require hospitals to meet various ventilation rates in operating theaters, intensive care units and other hospital areas. This amendment scared the hell out of the hospital administrators and caused a split between the anti-smokers at the hospitals and the anti-smoking doctors who were pushing for the ban."
The notes also state the potential downside to the ventilation approach, saying a problem could be posed by "potential loss of business allies [due to the] (the sometimes costly nature of improved ventilation) and the hazard that smoking restrictions will be incorporated within ventilation/indoor AQ bills." The paper also boasts that in the state of Massachusetts the Institute managed to turn a smoking restriction on public trains into a "state's rights' issue."
The paper reveals that the industry set up The Beverly Hills Restaurant Association to fight a smoking restriction passed in that city:
"Staff set up the Beverly Hills Restaurant Assn...none had existed...Changed the subject on the [city] council...moved argument to one of ventilation instead of smoking restrictions to a degree..."
The briefing also demonstrates chilling effect of Institute actions to fight the public health measure in BH:
"An extremely expensive fight for us, but can pay dividents elsewhere in Southern California and perhaps around the country..."
Fields
- Company
- Tobacco Institute
- Author
- Author not stated - may be combined authorship of Peter Sparber and Roger Mozingo of the Tobacco Institute.
- Region
- United States
- Named Organization
- Manufacturers Association
- ASHRAE (Am Society of Heating, Refrig and AC)American Society of Heating, Refrigeration and Air Conditioning
- Tobacco & Candy Vendors Association
- Beverly Hills Restaurant Association (Industry front group)Set up c. 1988 by the Tobacco Institute to clandestinely fight a local smoking restriction (TI00380927-0949, Pag. -0946).
- National Energy Management Institute (Union of sheet metal and ventilation contractors)National Energy Management Institute - sheet metal workers and the Assoc. of Union Ventilation Contractors formed NEMI to fight workplace smoking restrictions and push ventilation.
- MTA, Massachusetts Transportation Authority
- ASH, Action on Smoking and Health
- TAN (Tobacco Action Network)Organization created by the tobacco industry to galvanize "grass roots" political action from among those who work in some capacity for the tobacco industry: growers, manufacturers, retailers of cigarettes, etc.
- Group Against Smoking Pollution/Group to Alleviate Smoking Pollution? ("GASP)" (Group Against (or to Alleviate) Smoking Pollution)A not-for-profit corporation founded in 1976 as the California Group Against Smoking Pollution (GASP). Now there are several state branches of GASP around the country.
- IAPAG (Indoor Air Pollution Advisory Group (set up by the industry))Indoor Air Pollution Advisory Group - set up by Covington and Burling in 1987 to provide expert testimony regraining indoor air quality at legislative hearings. This group traveled to Austrailia, U.S., Hong Kong.
- *National Acadamy of Science (use National Academy of Sciences)
- Smokeless Tobacco Council
- Farm Bureau
- Coalition on Smoking OR Health
- Named Person
- 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)
- Sparber, Peter G. (TI Vice President)Worked on combatting legislated and voluntary workplace smoking restrictions, a Tobacco Institute program to attack the insurance industry and undermine non-smoker discounts on insurance premiums, and and a program to form a coalition to publicly portray public health adovcates as intolerant, anti-social and in need of help.
- Murray, R. William "Bill" (PM Pres. & CEO, PM Companies Inc.)President and Chief Operating Officer, Philip Morris Companies Inc., USA. Served on Board of Directors for PM from 1987-89. Vice Chairman of Philip Morris Companies in 1990. Australian.Was President and CEO in 1992; Chairman 1994.
- Robertson, John Graham "Gray" (ACVA Atlantic Inc. Indoor Air Polution consultant)1994 Long time ventilation consultant for industry. Proposed as a consultant to comment on Federal OSHA proposal on workplace smoking. See @healthy_buildings_intl
- Type
- NOTES
- SPEECH
- Litigation
- Doj Civil
- Subject
- smoking restriction
- Ventilation (Design)
- labor union
- local ordinance
- industry front group
- industry activity
- industry influence
- industry response
- industry strategy
Document Images
Notes for Bill Murray briefing April 5, 1988
THE ISSUES
A. Public Smoking
1. Nature of challenge (Chilcote), THEN,
2. State (Mozingo)...This covered in existing text with the
following slides:
... "Why smoking restrictions?"
... "Legislative history"
... "Smoking restrictions"
... "State smoking restriction bills"
... "Local smoking restriction bills"
T10038-0927
Remarks during Sparber's presentation on the industry's program
on restrictions...use existing text
\
1. STANDARD LOBBYING AND SUPPORT OPERATION
A. Begin with SAD structure with the following slides
... SAD Program Areas J
... SAD Legislative ProgramI/
... SAD Organizational Chad
... SAD Legislative Support Program
... SAD Communications Program
Then, a look at 1988
... 1988 to date:
STATES
Bills to ban or restrict smoking proposed in 38 states
So far, 11 states have rejected such measures
Bills are pending in 27 states
LOCALITIES
Proposals in 110 localities...more than one proposal in some
localities
22 bills approved in 22 localities...most weakened before
approval
2 bills defeated
93 measures pending
INITIATIVES
... Oregon, perhaps Arkansas
... Locally, Fortuna, CA
Summary in your folders
L
T10038-0928
How do we put these resources to use?
.Go through slides and remarks on Indiana and Beverly Hills
case studies
... Beverly Hills example leads into discussion of
ventilation
,
3
T10038-0929
VENTILATION/INDOOR AIR QUALITY LEGISLATION
A program to eventually substitute ventilation legislation
for smoking restriction legislation is under consideration at
The Institute...any such program would have to be part of a
larger legislative program
Due to work by unions, Gray Robertson's media tours and other
events, the issue of ventilation/indoor air quality has, in
some places, taken off without significant Institute prodding
Aside from Beverly Hills, one of the better examples of our
ventilation work this year is in New Hampshire
... Both the NH House and Senate have passed bills that would
call on the Departments of Health and Labor to set
ventilation standards for government-owned and operated
buildings...those standards would be similar to the revised
ASHRAE specifications -
... The idea is being pushed by the state SEiU -- Service
Employees Union -- one of the key unions in the state
... We have quietly helped them with this measure, through
the assistance of our local labor counsel in New England
T10038-0930
... While the clean indoor air bill -- in itself -- does not
take the place of or prohibit smoking restrictions, it will
pay dividends in at least two important ways:
1..... It will put the state of New Hampshire on record as
understanding that "clean indoor air" requires a lot more
than simple smoking restrictions...it also increases the
lawmakers' knowledge of the "sick building syndrome" issue
2 ..... And two, it has enabled us to strengthen our
relationship with a budding and powerful ally -- the labor
community in general and the state's SEIU in particular
... This relationship in New Hampshire -- and throughout all
of New England and the Northeast -- has been further
strengthened by industry participation in key labor
gatherings this year...for example:
a ..... We were the only outside group represented at a
meeting of the heads of nine Northeastern AFL-CIO state
federations earlier this year...at that meeting, our labor
contacts gave a 30 minute presentation on the general issue
of indoor air quality and the "sick building syndrome,"
including videos...the states involved in the meeting are key
labor states: all of New England and New York, New Jersey
and Pennsylvania
S
T10038-0931
b..... At that meeting and through follow up contacts, we
offered to make similar presentations to other labor groups
in the area...PA took us up on the offer just last month. At
their 1,500-person meeting, we made presentations and had an
informational booth on the indoor air quality issue
c ..... we will make a similar briefing shortly at the
Massachusetts state federation meeting...the MA federation
has already adopted resolutions acknowledging the need to
address the broad issue of clean indoor air
Out West in Washington and Oregon, we have also made progress
with union contacts and worked the ventilation issue to our
advantage and potential advantage
.......... In Washington, for example, we defeated earlier
this year a bill to ban all smoking in hospitals...not the
most serious issue in the world, but our work there was
significant...we killed the bill by threatening to offer an
amendment to the smoking ban bill to require hospitals to
meet various ventilation rates in operating theaters,
intensive care units and other hospital areas
.......... This amendment scared the hell out of the hospital
administrators and caused a split between the anti-smokers at
the hospitals and the anti-smoking doctors who were pushing
T10038-0932
for the ban
in idaho last year, a simple luncheon meeting with Gray
Robertson, our lobbyist and two key members of a committee
about to vote on a smoking restriction measure resulted in a
victory...the bill was defeated
Just last month in Oklahoma, we completed an indoor air
quality study of the House Chamber...the House has considered
a ban in the Chamber. This study, provided to the speaker
and conducted by ACVA, accomplished a couple of things for
us: (1) it made it clear to the speaker that a ban was
unnecessary, (2) it pointed out some serious indoor air
problems in the chamber (asbestos, for one), and (3) it will
heighten knowledge of general ventilation/indoor air problems
and make consideration of future smoking restriction bills
more objective
On the business side, we will conduct an indoor air quality
briefing in May before New England Chamber of Commerce
representatives in Cape Cod...similar briefing may be
conducted in other state chamber meetings this year
The ventilation approach is a long term effort that we have
used in various ways. However, it is unclear whether this
approach will in a significant number of cases turn the tide
7
T10038-0933
on smoking restriction bills...there are potential downsides
to the ventilation question...potential loss of business
allies (the sometimes costly nature of improved
ventilation) and the hazard that smoking restrictions will be
incorporated within ventilation/indoor air quality bills
Further, such bills are normally favored by union-related or
liberal advocates...those people are in relatively short
supply and with limited legislative clout in certain key
states like Texas and Colorado
... We are, however, looking at all the parts of the equation
to determine if the ventilation vs. smoking restriction idea
can be turned to our advantage legislatively...at this point,
it is but one of many legislative support programs with
potential to assist us in certain circumstances
T10038-0934
SMOASRS' RIGHTS LEGISLATION
At~h poi~have yeytJ,pys3~ed\fpr passaespecific
bi s t at ul ceq re fai trx_a,Ctme~iXt\for smo rs...neither
have we yet pushed for bills that would make it illegal to
discriminate against smokers in hiring practices...advocacy
of such bills is now receiving much attention at The
Institute
We continue, however, to attempt to defeat all restriction
bills...and when it is clear that some sort of bill is going
to be adopted, we work to ensure that smokers are allowed to
smoke in as many are'as as possible in the affected locations,
be they workplaces, restaurants or other public settings
As you are well aware, our success rate at the local level is
not up to our record of defeating state restriction measures.
We are dealing with this situation is several ways, depending
on the location and the particular political landscape. For
example:
... Pre-emption. In Florida in 1985 and in Oklahoma in 1987,
we were able to incorporate pre-emption language in those
relatively weak state smoking restriction laws.' The thinking
here is that the industry can live with the weak state
T
T10038-0935
language and at the same time avoid the costly and
time-consuming chore of dealing with several local
ordinances
`
... in past years, in Massachusetts, we have faced local
restriction activity in scores of communities, virtually
simultaneously. This year things are different...very few
localities in Massachusetts are considering restrictions.
Why? A few primary reasons...
1..... We went to the mat in Waltham, MA, beginning last
year. When we began our program, a severe measure had passed
every stage nearly unanimously except for final passage. At
that point, we obtained additional counsel, threw scientific
and other experts at the problem, and literally changed the
entire situation over the course of about eight months. The
result: no restrictions in Waltham and an obvious reluctance
on the part of the anti-smoking community to tackle us
locally in Massachusetts
2 ..... we also made a pre-emptive strike in eastern
Massachusetts...we went into selected localities before
restriction measures were being considered and briefed local
lawmakers on ETS science and indoor air quality...as a
result, we have increased lawmakers' awareness of the
relatively minor role ETS plays and thus blocked many
anti-smoking ordinances before introduction
l0
T10038-0936
