Tobacco Documents Online

H i I l ( STATEMENT OF W. A. WICKHAM, GENERAL & LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL MICHIGAN STATE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE TO GOVERNOR'S CITIZEN PANEL ON SMOKING & HEALTH WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 8, 1980 MR. BARKER AND PANEL MEMBERS - YOUR LETTER, MR. BARKER, OF SEPTEMBER 26, 1980 WAS RECEIVED BY THE STATE CHAMBER ON FRIDAY, OCTOBER 3, (mailed on October 2) REQUESTING TESTIMONY "ON A VARIETY OF ECONOMIC, LEGAL AND EDUCATIONAL ISSUES RELATED TO "SMOKING", IN FIVE•MINUTES OF ALLOTED TIME. YOUR NOTICE DID NOT SET OUT ANY AREAS OF RECOMMENDATIONS THAT THE PANEL HAS UNDER CONSIDERATION. FROM MY REVIEW OF PRELIMINARY MATERIALS PROVIDED BY MR. FONG, AND DISCUSSIONS WITH A PANEL MEMBER, THE STATE CHAMBER HAS A SERIOUS CONCERN WHICH I WILL OUTLINE WITHIN THE FIVE MINUTES ALLOCATED. THE MICHIGAN STATE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE UNDERSTANDS, AS PART OF YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE GOVERNOR, YOU ARE CONSIDERING PROPOSALS TO "PROTECT NON-SMOKERS FROM SMOKERS IN PUBLIC PLACES AND PLACES OF EMPLOYMENT". IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE PANEL WILL CONSIDER THE INCLUSION OF A DRAFT OF A LEGISLATIVE BILL AS AN "ILLUSTRATION" OF THE TYPE OF LEGISLATION THE PANEL WOULD RECOMMEND BE ENACTED BY THE MICHIGAN LEGISLATURE. THE PURPOSE, AS PREVIOUSLY STATED, IS TO BE ACCOMPLISHED BY ADDING A NEWPART TO OUR NEW PUBLIC HEALTH CODE, RELATING TO "INDOOR AIR". THE STATE CHAMBER HAS TRADITIONALLY MAINTAINED THAT THERE IS AN IMPORTANT AND WIDE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN "PUBLIC AREAS AND PRIVATE AREAS," INCLUDING PRIVATE AREAS OF EMPLOYMENT NOT AVAILABLE TO OR USED BY THE PUBLIC IN CARRYING OUT THE EMPLOYERS BUSINESS PURPOSE. IN THESE FIRST OR "PUBLIC" AREAS WE HAVE CONCURRED IN THE ENACTED LEGISLATION, RELATING TO SMOKING CONTROL IN RESTAURANTS, HOSPITALS, NURSING HOMES, TRANSPORTATION, AND ELEVATORS, AS BEING REASONABLE. -207-

I , , AT THE SAME TIME, WE HAVE STEADFASTLY ~1AINTAINED THAT OTHER PLACES OF PRIVATE EMPLOYMENT BE SUBJECT TO REASONABLE WORK SAFETY AND HEALTH RULES, AS PROVIDED UNDER THE MICHIGAN OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ACT. WE WILL STRONGLY RESIST ANY RECOMMENDATIONS FOR LEGISLATION THAT WOULD, IN ONE BROAD DEFINITION OF "PUBLIC" INCLUDE ALL PLACES OF WORK. PARTICULARLY, IF SUCH "PLACES OF WORK" ARE TO BE MADE THE SUBJECT OF SEPARATE RULES, AND REQUIREMENTS OUTSIDE OF THE ESTABLISHED APPLICABLE HEALTH AND SAFETY RULES, AND THEIR CURRENT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESSES OF ENFORCEMENT. FURTHER, WE WILL STRONGLY OPPOSE LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS THAT IMPOSE NEW AND UNNECESSARY COSTS ON EMPLOYERS TO MEET SEGREGATED REQUIREMENTS IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY RELIABLE DOCUMENTED PROOF OF EMPLOYEE HARM OR BENEFIT - OTHER THAN TO SATISFY THE APPARENT MOVEMENT TO BAN ALL SMOKING IN ANY PLACE. EMPLOYEES ARE CURRENTLY PROTECTED BY MIOSHA HEALTH AND SAFETY RULES, INCLUDING AIR STANDARDS. FURTHER, MANY BUSINESS PRACTICES AND POLICIES ARE ESTABLISHED, AND MANY TIMES, DICTATED, BY COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENTS. THEREFORE, IF THE PANEL IS CONCERNED WITH ALLEGED EXPOSURES OF NON-SMOKERS IN THE WORK PLACE, THEN SUCH RECOMMENDATIONS SHOULD BE ADDRESSED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH TO BE CONSIDERED UNDER MIOSHA RULES, AND NOT CREATE A WHOLE NEW SECTION OF BUREAUCRATS, TO ADMINISTER AND ENFORCE A SO-CALLED INDOOR AIR ACT. YOUR PANEL MUST CONSIDER THAT THE STATE OF MICHIGAN IS TRULY a I i I I i d I I E EXPERIENCING WHAT THE MAJORITY OF MICHIGAN EMPLOYERS HAVE KNOWN FOR A LONG L TIME REDUCTION OF REVENUES. . . SO THE STATE LIKE BUSINESS MUST NOT BE SADDLED WITH NEW, UNNECESSARY EXPENSES, NOTHWITHSTANDING A PRESUMED NOBLE ~ PURPOSE, WHEN A MECHANISM IS ALREADY IN PLACE. FURTHER, ALL SUCH LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS SHOULD NOT ADD NEW CIVIL ACTIONS L SOLELY AGAINST EMPLOYERS, WITH COSTS AND ATTORNEY FEES PERMITTED TO BE C11 ~ AWARDED ONLY TO THE COMPLAINANTS. THERE IS TOO MUCH LITIGATION TODAY, BOTH "o' ~ BY AGENCIES AND"PRIVATE GROUPS. IT IS THIS SORT OF PROPOSED LEGISLATION THAT C~l1" ADDS FURTHER OBSTACLES TO THE ABILITY OF PRIVATE, JOB PROVIDING, TAX PAYING -208- 1 L

I i BUSINESS TO ENTER, EXPAND OR REMAIN IN MICHIGAN. AND IF PRIVATE BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY CANNOT PAY TAXES, GOVERNMENT, INCLUDING THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH CAN'T FUNCTION, AS THE SOLE SUPPORT OF GOVERNMENT IS FROM "TAXES" GENERATED BY BUSINESS, INDUSTRY AND INVESTMENTS ...AND MICHIGAN CAN'T PRINT MONEY, AS YET, AS IS DONE IN WASHINGTON TO MEET THEIR BUDGET. THE MICHIGAN STATE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE IS NOT TAKING THE SIDE OF 1 NON-SMOKERS VERSUS THE SMOKER, BUT ADVOCATES FOR EITHER SIDE PROPOSE WE BECAME VITALLY CONCERNED WHEN THE LEGISLATION THAT ADDS NEW BURDENS AND ~ , ~ I COSTS ON OUR OVER 6,400 BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY MEMBERS, WHEN CURRENT LAWS AND RULES COVERING THE WORK PLACE ARE OR COULD BE UTILIZED TO MEET ANY ALLEGED CONDITIONS. , I HOWEVER, IF THE DRAFT OF THE PREPARED LEGISLATION TO BE USED FOR "SUCH ILLUSTRATION" IS THE SAME AS THE DRAFT OF A PROPOSED "CLEAN INDOOR AIR" ACT, THEN YOU CAN BE ASSURED OF THE STRONG OPPOSITION OF THE STATE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, AS THIS PROPOSAL INCLUDES ALL OF THE OBJECTIONS I HAVE STATED, PLUS MANY MORE. I WOULD URGE YOU TO MAKE YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS AND LEAVE THE DRAFTING OF SUCH LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS TO THE LEGISLATIVE SERVICE BUREAU. WE TRUST SUCH RECOMMENDATIONS WILL CONSIDER THE IMPORTANT POINTS AND OBJECTIONS I HAVE STATED TO YOU IN THIS BRIEF PRESENTATION. IN CLOSING I REMIND YOU AGAIN OF THE FINAL IMPORTANT CAVEAT BY MY GOOD FRIEND DR. REIZEN, IN HIS CONCLUDING REMARKS TO YOU AT THE CONVENING OF THIS PANEL ON JUNE 19th: "ONE FINAL CAVEAT, WHEN YOU SIT AT ANY ONE OF THE MANY BOARDS, COMMISSIONS, AND COMMITTEES THAT ADVISE ME, YOU ARE REPRESENTING THE ENTIRE STATE OF MICHIGAN AND ITS PEOPLE. I ASK OF YOU WHEN YOU MAKE DECISIONS THAT YOU ASK YOURSELVES, WHAT IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE NINE PLUS MILLION PEOPLE IN THE STATE. THIS IS A- DIFFICULT TASK TO UNDERTAKE AND A CHALLENGE THAT MUST BE TREATED WITH MUCH RESPECT." -209-

I IT IS THE POSITION OF THE MICHIGAN STATE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE THAT THE "HEALTH" OF THE MICHIGAN BUSINESS COMMUNITY IS, OF NECESSITY, ALSO IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF ALL THE PEOPLE IN THIS STATE. I I I I I I i I I L L -210-