NYSA Indexed
[Re: Aircraft Smoking Ban]
Abstract
I would like to take this opportunity to personally thank you for voting the airline smoking ban Your continued efforts and opposition to such moves in the future is greatly appreciated by the entire tobacco industry The facts are all in Smoking on
Fields
- Box
- 5617. Miscellaneous Issue Material
- Airline Smoking Ban 88
- DOT Appropriations Bill
- Airline Smoking Ban 88
- NYSA numbers
- 0044 B1793 02C
- Type
- Letter
- Author
- Carlisle, Allen
- Lowry, J D
- Garrison, R D
- Sanford, B W
- Boman, Stan
- Lowry, J D
- Recipient
- Gramm, Phil
- Bentsen, Lloyd M
- Glenn, John H
- Kaslch, John R
- Metzenbaum
- Ford, Robert Q
- Akaka, Daniel K
- Buechner, John W
- Boren, David L
- Boren
- Nickles, Donald L
- Dole, Robert
- Nickles, Don
- Boren, David
- Bentsen, Lloyd M
- Named Person
- Akaka, Daniel K
- Boman, Stan
- Boren, David L
- Carlisle, Allen
- Carlisle, Mary A
- Durbin
- Ford, Q
- Hbzenbaum, Howard M
- Inhofe, James M
- Kimura, Wendell K
- Lawton, Chiles
- Mary
- Nickles, Donald L
- Suzuki, Norman H
- Woodson, Walter N
- Boman, Stan
- Named Organization
- Congress
- Department Of Transportation
- House And Senate
- House Budget Committees
- House Of Representatives
- National Transportation Safety Board
- Pilots Association
- Senate
- Senate Finance And The House Ways And Means Committees
- Tobacco Institute
- Transportation Safety Board
- Department Of Transportation
- Thesaurus Term
- airplane
- legislation
- smoking restriction
- Congress
- legislation
- Author (Organization)
- F. & F. Tobacco Products
Document Images
F. & F. Tobacco P 'oducts
~ ~ ~
Septet 4
~ House of Representativ~
/ashi~gton, ~ _2/ Dear Co~g~ss~ B~5t~: "
• 1987
I would like to take this opportunity to personally, thank you for voting
~gainst the airline smoking ban. Your continued efforts and opposition to
such moves in the future is greatly appreciated by the entire tobacco
industry.
The facts are all in. Smoking on airlines is already sharply restricted.
The current restrictions of separating smokers and non-smokers are satisfactory
and reasonable to the majority of all passengers. There is no evidence that
smoking on aircraft may pose a "fi~-~-hazard" in the skies. The list of facts
goes on and on.
The very real concern is the countless number of people that will eventually
be forced out of business and out of jobs. When our nations' economy is so
sluggish, what do we intend to do with the tobacco farmers, the manufacturers,
the distributors and their employees? Have the lawmakers of our country
given this any serious thought?
It would also be wise to note the tremendous ~mount of revenues generated by
the taxes already imposed on our industry. This includes federal and state
taxes right down to the state and lohal sales taxes. We both know what a
financial strain our state and federal ftlnds are presently .u~d~r. Where
can we expect these lost revenues to come from, if not from the already
over-burdened, over-taxe~ and over-b=.-nned tobacco industry?
When all is said and done, smoking fits into the category of "common ccurtesy",
as does a great deal of other areas in our society. Smokers are, generally,
courteous. Let's give them the same respect and freedoms we extend to
non-smokers. This often leads me to wonder, what will be next?
I would ask for your consideration and continued support on any future
restrictions regarding smoking and the tobacco industry.
Sincerely•
• ~,aymond Fickey
u~ner
RJFIfw
T10045-1053

505-A W, ~lst Street -- ?'/9-4,188
BRYAN, TEXAS 77B0l
September 4, 1987
Senator Phil Gramm, U.S.S.
U. S. Senate
Washington, DC 20510
Dear Senator Gramm:
I would like to take this opportunity to address ~he issue of the ban
of smoking on airlines. I am strongly opposed to this ban. Your
efforts and opposition to such bans would he greatly appreciated by
the entire tobacco industry.
The facts are all in. Smoking on airlines is already sharply restricted.
The current restrictions of separating smokers and non-smokers.are satisfactory
and reasonable to the majority of all passengers. There is no evidence that
smoking on aircraft may pose a "fire hazard" in the skies. The list of facts
goes on and on.
The verylreal concern is the countless number of people that will eventually
be force~ out of business and out of jobs. When our nations' economy is so
sluggish~ what do we intend to do with the tobacco farmers, the manufacturers,
the distributors and their employees? Have the lawmakers of our country
given this any serious thought?
It would also be wise to note the tremendous amount of revenues generated by
the taxes already imposed on our industry. This includes federal and state
taxes right down to the state and 16cal sales taxes. We both know what a
financial strain our state and federal funds are presently under. Where
can we expect these lost revenues to come from, if not from the already
over-burdened, over-taxed and over-banned tobacco indust~l?
When all is said and done, smoking fits into the category of "common courtesy",
as does a great deal of other areas in our society. Smokers are, generally,
courteous. Let's give them the same respect and freedoms we extend to
non-smokers. This often leads me to wonder, what will ~ next?
I would ask for your consideration and continued support on any future
restrictions regarding smoking and the tobacco industry.
Sincerely
RJF/fw
T!004~-1054

F. & F. Tobacco Products
505-A W. 31st" Street" ~ 7"/9-4188
BRYAN, TEXAS "]'1'801
September4, 1987
Senator Lloyd M. Bentsen, U. S. S.
U. S. Senate
Washington, DC 20510
Dear Senator Bentsen:
I would like to take this opportunity to address th@ issue of the ban
of smoking on airlines. I am strongly opposed to this ban. Your
efforts and opposition to such bans would be greatly appreciated by
the entire tobacco industry.
The facts are all in. Smoking on airlines is already sharply restricted.
The current restrictions of separating smokers and non-smokers are satisfactory
and reasonable to the majority of al__!l passengers. There is no evidence that
smoking on aircraft may pose a "fire hazard" in the skies. The list of facts
goes on ~nd on.
The very real concern is the Gountless number of people that will eventually
be forced out of business and out of jobs. When our nations' economy is so
sluggish, what do we intend to do with the tobacco farmers, the manufacturers,
the distributors and their employees? Have the la~akers of our country
given this any serious thought?
It would~be wise to note the tremendous amount of revenues generated by
the taxes already imposed on our industry. This includes federal and state
taxes right do~n to the state and lohal s~les t~xes. We both know what a
financial strain our state and federal funds are presently under. Where
can we expect these lost revenues to come from, if not from the already
over-burdened, o~er--t~ed and over-banned tobacco industry?
When all~is said and done, smoking fits into the category of "common courtesy",
as does a great deal of other areas in our society. Smokers are, generally,
courteous. Let's give them the s~me respect and freedoms we extend to
non-smokers. This often leads me to wonder, what will be next?
I would ask for your consideration and continued support on any future
restrictions regarding smoking and the tobacco industry.
RJF/fw
T10045~055

F. & F. Tobacco Products
50~.~ W. ~lst S~et ~ 77~188
BRYAN, TEXAS 77803
Mr. Roger L. Mozinqo
Director
Tobacco Action Network
1875 I Street, NW-
Suite 800
Washington, DC 20006
h,hllh,,lh,,lh,,,lh,~,l,ll

STATE SEP 11 L~BI
September 8, 1987
Senator John H. Glenn, Jr., U.S.S.
U. S. Senate
Washington, D. C. 20510
Dear Senator Glenn,
I urge you to oppose further restrictions on Airline
Smoking bans.
As a frequent flyer, I am opposed to such measures.
I believe further smoking bans would cause significant
administration problems for the airlines and passengers
alike.
Once agaCn, I urge you to oppose the smoking hans on
the Airlines.
Sincerely,
Westerville, Ohio ~3081
Ti0045-1057

September 8, 1987
Honorable John R. Kaslch, M.C.
U. S. House of Representatives
Washington, D. C. 20515
Dear Honorable Mr. Kaslch,
I urge you to oppose further restrictions on Airline
Smoking bans.
As a frequent flyer, I am opposed to such measures.
I believe further smoking bans would cause significant
administration problems for the airlines and passengers
alike,
Once again, I urge you to oppose the smoking bans on
the airlines.
Sincerely, 13
.... /~ ˘,...//
878 Thlrlwall C~u.r~t
Westerville, OH ~3081
T!0045-1058

September 8, 1987
Senator Howard M. HB~zenbaum, U.S.S.
U. S. Senate
Washington, DC 20510
Dear Senator Metzenbaum,
I urge you to oppose further restrictions on Airline
Smoking bans.
As a frequent flyer, I am opposed to such measures.
I believe further smoking bans would cause significant
administration problems for the airlines and passengers
alike.
Once again, I urge you to oppose the smoking bans on
the airlines.
Sincerely,
Westerville, OH 43081
T!0045-1059

September 3, 1987
WASHINGTON, D.C. 205|0
Mr. Robert Q. Ford
350 42nd Avenue
St. Petersburg Beach, Florida
33706
Dear Robert:
Thanks for letting me know of your opposition to an increase in
cigarette excise taxes. I read your comments with interest, and I
appreclate having your thoughts on this matter.
On May 6th of this year, the Senate passed the bud@et resolution which
I proposed for 1988. That measure had one major a~m: to eliminate
the deficit by 1991. Although our spending plan proposed a modest
revenue increase, it made no specific assumptions as to how these
revenues should be raised. While the Senate ind House Budget
Committees are responsible for proposing the level of revenues to be
generated each year, the specific revenue options are the
responsibility of the Senate Finance and the House Ways and Means
Committees.
Since that time, the House and Senate have enacted a compromise budget
resolution. It does not go as far as the package that I proposed to
eliminate the deficit over the next four years. Nevertheless, it does
represent a responsible mix of savings derived from domestic spending
reductions, from restraint in military expenditures, and from revenues
to be used for deficit reduction. The deficit under this plan would
fall by $37 billion in 1988, with total savings through 1990 equaling
$151 billion. This final budget resolution recognizes the fact that
the federal deficit is a product of spending and revenue choices
which, in my view, must be tackled if we are going to be successful in
our efforts to eliminate Federal deficits.
When the President presented his FY 1988 budget to Congress on January
5th, more than half of the savings proposed came from additional
revenues. That was a strong indication to me that even the
Administration believes the deficit cannot be erased through spending
cuts alone. For the last six years, revenue shortfalls have played a
major role in our runaway deficits. For example, changes in tax
policy since 1981 will translate into revenue losses next year of a
full $137 billion. In addition, net interest costs for having to
borrow to cover those losses will add an additional $54 billion to the
1988 budget deficit. Stated another way, without the tax cuts we have
experienced since 1981, instead of a deficit of $171 billion, we could
have a surplus of $20 billion. This reinforces my belief that an
increase in revenues is needed to help reduce the deficit.
Although I am firmly convinced that greater revenues are needed to
better control our deficit position, I am mindful of your concerns
with specific reference to cigarette excise taxes.
TI00454060

'Mr. Robert
September
Page 2
Q. Ford
3, 1987
With kind
LC/Sbs
regards, I am
Most sincerely
LAWTON CHI LES
T!0045-1061

WALTER N. WOODSON
Communications Manager
State Activities
THE TOBACCO INSTITUTE
202/457-~814 800/424-9876
1875 I Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20006
TI0045-1062
