Tobacco Documents Online

.STATE SEE 1 ~I~WARD A. MTLLER. September ii, 1987 Honorable James M,Jeffords United States House of Representatives Washington, D. C. Re: Smoking ban on airplanes Dear Representative Jeffords: One of the groups I represent in Montpelier is The Tobacco Institute, which, as you know, is the trade association which represents the major cigarette manufacturers, Occasionally I am advised of pending federal issues, of importance to the industry, and,. when I feel it is appropriate, contact our senators and representative. There is a bill pending before the Senate Appropriations Committee which is of importance to the tobacco industry and to the many constituents of yours who enjoy smoking. The bill, H.R. 2890, is a House-passed bill ap- propriating money to the Department of Transportation. Prior to the bill passing the House, an amendment was offered (which passed by the barest of margins, 198-193) which would ban smoking on all flights of two hours or less. This amendment (offered by Representative Durbin of Illinois) was defeated both in subcommittee and in the full Appropriations Committee, but some clever circumvention of the normal amendment process allowed the amendment to be con- sidered by the House, which passed it. I fully realize that you were one of the minority'~hoopposed this amend- ment when it was in the House. I am writing because I understand you may yet have another oppoPtunity to vote on the bill, ~fter it returns from the Senate. My client and I hope you will continue'to oppose this amendment. To refresh your memory on this subject, my client and others are con- cerned that adoption of this.smoking ban will result in unsafe air travel, be- cause smokers will take their smoking to the privacy of lavatories, where smoking is presently prevented. Moreover, the many persons flying who wish to smoke will be legally prevented from doing so, even though the airplane cabins have long been separated into smoking and non-smoking sections. The Airline Pilots Association is so concerned about the hazards of sur- reptitious smoking that they oppose the Durgin amendment and support the current practice of restrictive smoking. TI0045-1015

Honorable James M.Jeffords United States House of Representatives September ii, 1987 page 2 A smoking ban would present serious enforcement and compliance problems. Attendants do not have the time or inclination to attend to squabbles over smok- ing or to lurk outside lavatories to detect illegal smoking. The argumeDts for the proposal are basically two-fold. First, some say aircraft smoking presents a fire hazard. However, according to the National Transportation Safety Board, since 1970, not a single airplane fire has been de- termined to be smokin~ related. What does this say about the supposed hazard? The second reason given by proponents of the no smoking rule is that the second hand smoke creates health hazards. This topic is one of some debate and controversy today. However, The National Academy of Sciences said in its report last fall that n@thing in the scientific literature shows that limited exposure to tobaccq smoke in public places causes health hazards. Moreover, since the great majority of flights into and out of Vermont are less than two hours in duration~ our travellers will be restricted while those going on longer flights.~ill be able to smoke. Does that really make sense, in terms of fairness? My client and I hope that you' will see through the "smoke-screen" and that Congress will delete the smoking ban provision from the bill prior to pas- sage. In my judgment, this amendment i~.proposed by anti-tobacco zealots whose intent is to restrict the use of a lawful product by the many 'Americans and Ver- monters who choose to use it. As a non-smoker myself~ I think the existing practice on planes is fine. Why change it and make flight attendants smoking police or referees? I'd certainly welcome your views on this subject and consideration of this important amendment. Best personal wishes. EAM/emd cc: Roger Mozingo Dennis Dyer Edward A. Miller, Jr. T1004~-1016

STATE SEP 1 1987 LAW OFFICES OF EDWARD A. 1%~LLER. JR. 9 N. M~N S~ September 9, 1987 Mr. Walter E. Houghton Director, Aviation Burlington International Airport Box i, Airport Drive South Burlington, VT 05401 Dear Mr. Houghton: One of the groups I represent and lobby for in Montpelier is The Tobacco Institute, which is the national trade association for the nation's major cigarette manufacturers. Occasionally I get involved in federal issues as well, and contact our Senators and Representative on issues of importance. As you may know, the House of Representatives in Washington passed a bill this summer which bans smoking on flights of less then two hours dura- tion. Apparently the ~ill places some requirements on airport ,operators to enforce this ban, in that fedemal funding to airports can be denied if the airport operators do not enforce the ban on airlines using their facilities. I'm enclosing what little information I have on this. I'm also enclos- ing a letter I wrote to Pat Leahy, who is on the Appropriations Committee, which will consider the bill this month. If there are any items which are of concern to you, from an operational viewpoint, you might want to contact Senator Leahy about them. If you need any more information on the bill or its requirements you can contact me or someone at The Tobacco Institute. Walter Woodson, whose phone number is 1-800-424-9876, would be happy to assist should you think it advisable. Thanks very much for your review of all t~s. Let me know if I can help . Verlt_~~ or if you have any concerns on this. / Edwar~d A. Miller, Jr. EAM/emd enclosures cc: Walter Woodson Roger Mozingo Dennis Dyer TI0045-1017

---

STA~E ,SEP 1 '~' 1987 TI00454019

September 15, 19~7 Senator Jeff Bingaman, U.S.S. U. S. Senate Washington, DC 20510 Dear Senator Bingaman~ I a~ w~iting you to voice my objection to a smoking ban on flights of two hours or less. I strongly ~rge you to oppose further restrictions. In 1987, the Airl~ine Pilots Association conducted a poll of airline passengers. They found that 87% believe that the current practice of separating smoking and non-smoking passengers is a reasonable policy and shows ~espeet for each individual's rights. The passage of the Durbin Amendment in the House is in opposition to the way airline passengers fe~l. Congressman Lujan has shown his support by voting against the airline smoking ban. I believe your priority should be focused on airline safety. I think £t is v~ry interesting that the latest reports show that the amount of aigarette smoke in the non-smoking section is so s~all that it woul~ takg the equivalent of nine days of non-stop flying for non-smokers to be exposed to the nicotine equivalent of a single cigarette. Thank you for ~ou~ support by voting against the airline smoking ~an. Sincerely, Ann Sample 6201 Kiowa Ave. No E. Albuquerque, ~M 8~110 bee: Roger L. Mozingo National TAN Direeto~ T!0045-1020

• September 15, 1987 Senator Pete V. Domeni~i, U.S.S. U. S. Senate Washington, DC 20510 I am writing you to voice my objection to a smoking ban on flights of two hours or less. I strongly urge you to oppose further restrictions. In 1987, the Airline ~ilots Association c.onducted a poll of airline passengers. They found that 8~% believe that the ~urrent ~raetice of separating smoking and n~n-smoking passengers is a reasonable poli~y and shows respect for each individual's ~ights. The passage ~f the Du~bin Amendment in th~ House is in opposition to ~the way airlin~ passe~ge~s feel. ~ongressman Lujan has ~hown. hi~ support by voting against the airline smoking ban. I believe your priority should be focused on airline safety. I think it is very interesting that the- latest ~epo~ts show that the amount of ~igarette smoke in the non-smoking section is so small that it would take th~ equivalent of nine days of non-sto~ flying fo~ non-smokers to be exposed to the nicotine equivalent of a single cigarette. Thank yo~ for your support by voting against the airline smoking ban. Sineer~y, 620~ Kio~a Ave. Albuquerque, N.~(. 811~0 Roger L. Mozingo National TAN Director TI0045-1021

September 15, 7987 Hon. Manuel Lujan, Jr., M.C. U.So House of Repre.sentatives Washington, DC 20515 Dear @ongressman Lujan: I am writing you to thank you for your support against airline smoking bans and urge you to continue to oppose such moves. In 7987, the Airline Pilots Association conducted a poll of airline passengers. They found that 87% believe that the current p~aeti~e of separating smoking and non-smoking passengers, is a reasonable policy and shows respect for each individual's rights. The passage of the Durbin Amendment in the House is in apposition to the way airline passengers feel. We should be much more concerned with airline safety. Again, thank yo~ for ~our s~pport in voting against the airline smoking ban. Sincerely, Ann Sample 6201 Kiowa Ave. N.E. Albuquerque, NM 87110 Roger L. Mozingo National TAN Di~eetor

September 2, 1987 Senator Pete Wilson., U.S.S. U.S. Senate Washington, D,C. 20510 Dear Senator Wilson: As a long-time supporter and constituant, I hope you will give serious thought to opposing any additional federal legislation that would further restrict or ban cigarette smoking on commercial airlines. I am a nonsmoker and frequent flyer who believes the airlines do a good job of accomodating ~eir patrons without mandating smoking restrictions. Indeed, with the recent rash of airline crashes and safety proSlems, these are the concerns of t~ose of us who fly the sometimes "not-so-friendly" s~ys. Beyond the ~ealth issue claimed 5y the antl-smokers, I believe t~is is a 5usiness and personal rights issue whic~ government should stay away from. It is my hop4 this approach is in step with your viewpoints -- I ~elieve it is w~th your constituants. Sincerely, Ronald L. Sa%dana 5600 Paseo de La RamBla Yorba Linda, CA 92686 Ti004~-1023

September 2, I~87 Senator Alan M. Cranston, U.S.S. U.S. Senate Washington, D.C. 20510 Dear Senator Cranston: It has been my pleasure to support your past election efforts and as a long-time constituant supporter, I hope you will consider seriously my thoughts a~ainst supporting any legislation that will further regulate smokin~ aboard commer- cial aircraft. As a nonsmoker and frequent flyer, my concern is with the declining air-safety records of our airlines, overburdened traffic-control systems, sub-standard equipment, etc. While I encourage and applaud your effoTts in the safety area, I believe airlines do accomodate nonsmokers and smokers very well and beyond this point it becomes a personal rights and 5usiness rights issue that government, with its spend-now, pay later policies, should stay away from. Thank you for considering thi~ position and please keep up the good work. Sincerely, Ronald L. Sal/~ana 5600 Paseo de La Rambla Yorba L~nda, CA 92686 T!0045-1024