Tobacco Documents Online

D.A. Kimball Sioux Lane Kearney, NE. My dear Mrs. Langford, I strongly urge you to oppose the Durbin Amendment. The bill which would prohibit smoking on all airline flights of two hours or less is unnecesary and infringes on our constitutional rights as citizens of the United States. I believe smokers wil~ on thier own, use common courtesy and d~io~, without being forced by a unnecesary and unfair law. Respectful ly, D.A. Kimball /'LS,(..,/•/'--~:--."-.' ":5-¢'. T!0045-0991

1343 Rustic View Drive Manchester, MO 63011 August 26, 1987 Honorable John W. Buechner, M.C. U.S. House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515 Dear Congressman Buechner: I am writing this letter to you due to the attempts to ban smoking aboard domestic airline flights in the United Stat~s. As a resident of St. Louis, Missouri, I feel that the ban on smoking on less than two hour flights is definitely an imposement on my rights. Current smoking aboard aircraft is already sharply restricting my rights and other passengers' smoking habits during their travel. Currently, every passenger is guaranteed a non-smoking seat, even if the smoking section must be reduced or eliminated to satisfy this guarantee. The policing of a smoking ban would impose serious compliance problems and significant administrative and practical problems for the airline and passengers alike. In view of the above statements, I would appreciate your concern in keeping the current status of the smoking restrictions in place at this time. I do not feel that there are additional restrictions needed that would further violate my rights and freedom of choice. Sincerely F. J.~n~mstrong T!0045-0992

1343 Rustic View Drive Manchester, MO 63011 August 26, 1987 Senator Christopher B. Bond, U.S.S. U.S. Senate S~~ Washington, DC 20510 Dear Senator Bond: I am writing this letter to you due to the attempts to ban smoking aboard domestic airline flights in the United States. As a resident of St. Louis, Missouri, I feel that the ban on smoking on less than two hour flights is definitely an imposement on my rights. Current smoking aboard aircraft is already sharply restricting my rights and other passengers' smoking habits during their travel. Currently, every passenger is guaranteed a non-smoking seat, even if the smoking section must be reduced or eliminated to satisfy this guarantee. The policing of a smoking ban would impose serious compliance problems and significant administrative and pra~tiual problems for the airline and passengers alike. In view of the above statements, I would appreciate your concern in keeping the current status of the smoking restrictions in place at this time. I do not feel that there are additional restrictions needed that would further violate my rights and freedom of choice. Sincerely., Ti0045-0993

1343 Rustic View Drive Manchester, MO 63011 August 26, 1987 Senator John C. Danforth, U.S.S. U.S. Senate Washington, DC 20510 Dear Senator Danforth: I am writing this letter to you due to the attempts to ban smoking aboard domestic airline flights in the United States. As a resident of St. Louis, Missouri, I feel that the ban on smoking on less than two hour flights is definitely an imposement on my rights. Current smoking aboard aircraft is already sharply restricting my rights and other passengers' smoking habits during their travel. Currently, every passenger is guaranteed a non-smoking seat, even if the smoking section must be reduced or eliminated to satisfy this guarantee. The policing of a smoking ban would impose serious ~ompliance problems and significant administrative and practical problems for the airline and passengers alike. In view of the above statements, I would appreciate your concern in keeping the current status of the smoking restrictions in place at this time. I do not feel that there are additional restrictions needed that would further violate my rights and freedom of choice. Sincerely F. J.~/Armstrong T!0045-0994

Aurora, (3o]oraclo 80014 September i0, 1987 Senator Tim Wirth Washington, D.C. 20510 Dear Senator Wirth: A smoking ban on domestic flights is wrong.,. unnecessary and should be defeated. I urge you to vote against any such proposals which further impinge upon individual rights. ~ Such a ban would create impossible enforcement .problems on board the aircraft and could be potentially dangerous for all passengers and crew if violence occurred as a result of attempted enforcement. A recent 'survey by the Airline Pilots Association reports that 87% of the flying public likes the current smoking/non-smoking arrangement. Measurements of nicotine in aircraft cabins in- dicate that the small amount of cigarette smoke in the non-smoking section is so small it would take the equivalent of 224 hours, or nine days, of non- stop flying for nonsmokers to be exposed to the "nicotine equivalent" of a single cigarette. While I am not a smoker, I feel strongly that there should be no smoking ban on domestic airline flights. I am extremely weary of individual rights being threatened and/or taken away by relatively small handfuls of zealots who attempt to impose their thoughts, their opinions, their desires, their moralities on the whole of society. Please vot~ NO for any proposed smoking ban on ~irline flig~s. Sincerely, Mary B. (0'Dell) Thurber Ti0045-0995

284.8 S. ~:o~ C~. September i0, 1987 Honorable Dan Schaefer U.S. House of Representatives 1317 Longworth Office Bldg. Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Dan: A smoking ban on domestic flights is ~ unnecessary and should be defeated. I urge you to vote against any such proposals which further impinge upon individual rights. Such a ban would create impossible enforcement problems on board the aircraft and could be potentially dangerous for all passengers and crew if violence occurred as a result of attempted enforcement. A recent survey by the Airline Pilots Association reports that 87% of the flying public likes the current smoking/non-smoking arrangement. Measurements of nicotine in aircraft cabins in- dicate that the small amount of cigarette smoke in the non-smoking section is so small it would take the equivalent of 224 hours, or nine days, of non- stop flying for nonsmokers to be exposed to the "nicotine equivalent" of a single cigarette. While I am not a smoker, I feel strongly that there should be no smoking ban on domestic airline flights. I am extremely weary of individual rights being threatened and/or taken away by relatively small handfuls of zealots who attempt to impose their thoughts, their opinions, their desires, their moralities on the whol~ of society. Please vote NO for any proposed smoking ban on airline flig~-6s. Sincerely, Mary B. (O'Dell) Thurber T!0045-0996

September 10, 1987 Senator William Armstrong 528 Hart Office Bldg. Washington, D.C. 20510 Dear Bill: A smoking ban on domestic flights is wron~.~ unnecessary and should he defeated. I urge you to vote against any such proposals which further impinge upon individual rights. Such a ban would crea~ impossible enforcement problems on board the aircraft and could be potentially dangerous for all passengers and crew if violence occurred as a result of attempted enforcement. A recent survey by the Airline Pilots Association reports that 87% of the flying public likes the current smoking/non-smoking arrangement. Measurements of nicotine in aircraft cabins in- dicate that the small amount of cigarette smoke in the non-smoking section is so small it would take the equivalent of 224 hours, or nine days, of non- stop flying for nonsmokers to be exposed to the "nicotine equivalent" of a single cigarette. While I am not a smoker, I feel strongly that there should be no smoking ban on domestic airline flights. I am extremely weary of individual rights being threatened and/or taken away by relatively small handfuls of zealots who attempt to impose their thoughts, their opinions, their desires, their moralities on the whole of society. Please vote N__O Eor any proposed smoking ban on airline flights. Sincerely, Mary B. (O'Dell) Thurber TI0045-.0997

4898 East Davies Place Littleton, Colorado 80122 September ii, 1987 Honorable William Armstrong U. S. Senate Washington, D. C. 20510 Dear Senator Armstrong: I am writing to express my opposing view of the proposed Durbin Amendment which would prohibit smoking on airline flights of two hours or less. Again, it seems the government is attempting to stick their noses where it doesn't belong. If the Congress is going to legislate a social issue, such as smoking, might I suggest you takeit one step further. Let's also legislate against the elderly lady wearing the cheap, nauseating perfume and the people who haven't bathed in recent history, along with the folks who have just consumed a quart of whiskey and decide to breathe all over fellow airline passengers. Smokers continue to be discriminated against as a group in nearly all phases of life. Now, another attempt to restrict the comfort of smokers is being debated. As a constituent, I must remind you, I am a smoker, but I was an American first. Unless the constitution has been changed, Americans are allowed life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. I am not happy when any liberty is restricted or taken away. I would like to know your position on this issue, please. Again, a reminder that I smoke and I vote. Thank you for your attention. Sincerely yours, Mr. & Mrs. L. E. Nelson LEN:Iak TI0045-0998

4898 East Davies Place Littleton, Colorado 80122 September II, 1987 Honorable Tim Wirth U. S. Senate Washington, D. C. 20510 Dear Senator Wirth: I am writing to express my opposing view of the proposed Durbin Amendment which would prohibit smoking on airline flights of two hours or less. Again, it seems the government is attempting to stick their noses where it doesn't belong. If the Congress is going to legislate a social issue, such as smoking, might I suggest you take it one step further. Let's also legislate against the elderly lady wearing the cheap, nauseating perfume and the people who haven't bathed in recent history, along with the folks who have just consumed a quart of whiskey and decide to breathe all over fellow airline passengers. Smokers continue to be discriminated against as a group in nearly all phases of life. Now, another attempt to restrict the comfort of smokers is being debated. As a constituent, I must remind you, I am a smoker, but I was an American first. Unless the constitution has been changed, Americans are allowed life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. am not happy when any liberty is restricted or taken away. I would like to know your position on this issue, please. Again, a reminder that I smoke and I vote. Thank you for your attention. Sincerely yours, Mr. & Mrs. L. E. Nelson LEN:Iak T!0045-0999

6900 East Wyoming Place Denver, Colorado 80224 September 9, 1987 Honorable Tim Wirth U. S. Senate Washington, D. C. 20510 Dear Senator Wirth: I would like to voice my opposition to the proposed smoking ban on airlines -- the Durbin Amendment. I know that there have been reports on surveys which show that the majority of airline passengers would be in favor of a ban. One must consider the source of these surveys -- th__~e anti-smoking faction. Si~erely yoursr. Jack~. Gibson JEG:lak TlO04~-'i 000