Tobacco Documents Online

11776 K STREET, NORTHWEST/WASHINGTON. D.C. 20006 ' 202/457-4800 . OUR TOLL FREE NU?i4BER IS: 800/424-9876 November 15, 1978 Jack Kelly wnCaAII: T: KERRIGAN ' Director of FieldActfvities ~ 202/457-4889 Mike Rerrig,an Preliminary report on the campaign to encourage a "No" vote on the Public Policy Questioniconcerning smoking inipublic places within the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Here follows a brief report on the abovementioned subj'ect,' the timely infornation of which was supplied~to us by Dennis Dyer. The report is designed to provide the reader with a brief background as to the formation of the committee, an identification of the techniques employed, the results to date, and an exhibit of all printed material utilized.. Further background information may be noted by referring to Bernie Robinson''s report of October 9, 19178 on this subject. We reserve our final evaluationluntil all the results have been reported anduntil Lance Torrence's firm has completed their after-election analysis. chairman. Other members of the committee included representatives from the tobacco retailers, wholeslaers and vendors, and the coin, machine operators in the state. Elmont, a local restauranteur, agreed to serve as.the committee to serve on the committee to oppose the Public Policy Q'uestion.. The committee was formed and filed with the Massachusetts Office of Campaign and Political Finance on 10/19/78. Mr. Stephen loical "tobacco family" and the restaurant industry were approachedi Formation of Committee - During September and the first week in October, members of the Throughout up-to-date solicited'. the campaign, members of the committee were kept as as possible, and'where necessary their input was W .

MJK to JDK' November 15, 1978 Page two Because of the nature of the Public Policy Question and the time remaining prior to the election, it was determined that Massachusetts would be a test to determine what type of arguments and approaches the voters might respond'to in the election. Furthermore, due to the compressed timetable and the "'test'° nature of' the campaign, it was decided~that Ringe- Russo Associates would provide the committee withia"turn-key'° operation. Ringe-Russo Associates proposed the following plan to address the Question and at the same time determine what course to take in future similar actions: Of the ten districts in which the Question would appear, nothingiwould be done in five. 'This would provide us with a control group from which to determine our effectiveness in the remaining five districts. The districts chosen for this control group where we took no action1were: 1. 25th Middlesex (ArTington) 2. 27th Middlesex (Cambridge) 3. 28th Middlesex (Cambridge) 4. 10th Hamden (Springfield)' 5. 17th Suffolk (Boston)' 2. In the remaining five districts a, variety of approaches wouldibe maide to the voters. These approaches in each of the districts were as follows: 1. 16th Essex (Lawrence) A. Two direct mail pieces to all registered voter households; 2. llth Suffolk (Boston-Brookline) A. One direct mail piece to all registered voter households; B. Poll workers at each polling place on election day; 3. . 7th Middlesex (Framingha¢n-Ashland ) A. Two direct mail pieces to all registereQvoterhouseholds;, B. Poll workers at each polling place on V i election day; W C!1 ~ O

hYJK to JDK November 15, 19'78. Page three Employed - continued) 4.6th Norfolk (Caniton-Randolph) A. Telephone bank identified supporters and undecideds; B. Direct mail follow-up to supporters and undecideds; C. One direct mail piece to a~ll registered voter households; D. Poll workers at each polling place on election day; 9th Hamden ('Springfield), A. Telephone bank identifies supporters and undecideds; B. Direct mail follow-up to supporters and undecideds; C. One direct mail piece to all registeredd voter households. Results To D'ate/Totals Total D'istricts Excluding the Boston Districts (11th Suffolk and 17th Suffolk) which have not yet reported, the totals for the remaining eight districts were as follows: ' Yes No # of Blanks Total . ,. 50,245 (50.0%) 30,474 (30.0$), 19',173' (20.0% Control District In the five districts where the committee took noiaction, the results were as follows: Yes No # of Blanks Total ' C 28,495 C51.41$) 13,0'64 (23.6%) 13,841 (25.0%) 55',4'00 (100.0111 Test Districts In four of the five districst where various techniques were employed to influence voter behavior, (in 17th Suffolk,

MJK to JDK November 15, 1978 Page four, ((Results to Date/Totals: Test Districts - continued) Boston was a test district but the results have not been reported) the totals were as follows : 10th Hamden District ('Springfield), Yes No Blank Total 34'80 2794 2299 8573 (40.6) (32.6) (2'6.,8) . • . 2'5th Middlesex District (Arlington)', Tbtals S'ummary in Percent - Yes % No $ Blank ~ Total ~ Control Districts 51.,4 2'3'.6 25.0 100 Test Districts 42.1 36.1 2'1.8' 1010 Total Districts 50.0 30.0 20.0 1010' Results To Date by District Control Districts Yes No 10,335' (44.9) # of BlanJcs Total 16,907 (3'6.1%), 10.202' (21. 8'$) 46,837 (100'.0% Blank Total 5382' 7297 23,014 (23.4) (31.7) 27th Middlesex District (Cambridge) Yes No Blank Total 790.11 3366 2314 13, 581 ('5S'.2) (2'4'.8) (',17'.0) ..;i`4"~ ..

1'IUZS~ to~~ JL11, November 15, 19'78. Page five ('Results To Date by District: Control IIistricts - continued)~ 28th Middlesex District (Cambridge) Yes No Blank Total 6597 24'2'7 1982' 11,006 (5 9' .,9 ) (2'2 .1) (18 . 0') 17th S'uffolk District (Boston) Yes No Blank Total Figures unavailable at this time. Test Districts 9th Hamden District (Springfield) Yes No Blank Total 3480 2794 2299 8'573' (40.6) (3'2. 6) ('26 . 8) 6th Norfolk District (Canton - Randolph) Yes No Blank Total « 7'10'7' 6529' 28'40 16,476 (43'.1) (39.6) '(17 . 3') 7th Middlesex District (Framingham - Ashland) Yes No, Blank Total 5133 4511 1442' 8'6 11,086 (46.3)' (40'.,7) ('13.0) 16th Essex District (Lawrence). Yes No Blank Total 4'008 (3'7.5) 30'73' (2'8.7) 3621 (33.8) 10',702' W' .

MJR to JDK November 15, 19'7'8 Page six (Results To Date by District: Test D'istricts - continued) llth Suffolk District (,Boston - Brookline) Yes No Blank Total Figures unavailable at this time. ` Exhib its Six different pieces of literature were designed by Ringe- Russo Associates, approved by Messrs. Kelly, Temko and Sirridge, andiwere utilized in the five test districts. Four different mailings were made (two to all, one to undecideds and the other to those id'entified'as against the Public Policy Q,uestionl, one of whichienclosedithe piece "Let's set the record straight." Finally, a small card (Vote No on Number 8)' was distributed at the test district polling places indicated earlier in this report As previously mentioned, a definitive analysis of the Massa- chusetts campaign is currently being undertaken by Lance Tarrence's firmi. Upon receipt of that study we will update our report onithe Ma sachusetts campaign and offer our - evaluation. However, if inithe meantime, additional infor- mation is required, kindly let me know. (see Techniques Employed) . Regards, ~ r~r f ~",JK : smb Enclosures~CC: Messrs. Dowdell, Greer, Grefe, Pepples, Stevens, Temko, Ehringhaus, Oliverio, Kloepfer, Dyer, McGlynn (with enclosures)