Tobacco Documents Online

Yirst, let me commend the Comml~ee for holding hearln~s on t/lls important issue. These hearln~s provide a valuable opportunity to focus public attenclon on the health hazards created hy .smoklnE on airplanes. I believe this is an issue that requires immediate action. I appre¢la¢e ihe opportuniry to appear before ~he Subcommittee to address these issues. Earlier this year the House voted to include a provision in the FY 1988 transportation appropriaCions bill to ban smoPvlng on commercial fl~Ehcs of two hours or less. Despite ~he predictions of representatives of the ~o~acco industry, last week the Senate AppropEiaUions Committee, by a 17 to 12 vote, included a s~milar provision in i~s version of ~he FY 1988 transportation appropriations bill. This action by the House and Senate reflects the s=rong public suppprt for further resurlctlons on 9mokin~ in public places. K recent Gallup Poll found tha~, amidst'moun¢in~ scien¢ific evidence ~hat cigarette smoke poses a significant heal~h threat ~o nonsmokers, the public sspports a ban on smokin~ in all public places 5y a 55% to A3%margin. .There is even ~Teater public support for a ban on smokln~ on airplanes. A survey hy the American Medical Association found ~ha= .¢wo-~hirds of the ~eneral public and four out of" five physicians believe smokin~ should not he permitted on commercial airline flights. A surprisln8 AO% of the smokin~ public also favors a ~an on smoking. These f£nd~nEs were affirmed by a survey of 33,000 airline passengers conducted 5y the American Association for Kespirato~y Care which found that 6A% of the passenEers favored a ban on smoking. In addition, i~ appears that public support for a ban on smokin~ is increasing. In 1978, a Gallup Poll found than only ~3% of the public suppor=ed a ban on smoking on commercial flights. Air Canada, the first North American airline to prohibi~ smokinE on i~s fliehts to ~he United S~ates, found that 96% of its passeneers supported =he. ban. As a result, A~r Canada has continued ~he experimental ban on these flights an~ is considerin~ ex~endin~ the ban to ocher flights. The overwhelmin~ public support for a smo~in~ ban on commercial flights is based on the Increasin~ scientific evidence that passive smoking, especially on airplanes, poses a serious heal~h risk. For example, the Surgeon General released a s~udy last year which found t/fan "second-hand smoke" increases the risk of lun~ cancer and ¢esplrauory diseases in nonsmokers by heEween I~% and 31%. T10045-1342

The health hazards due Co passive smoking are exacerbated'by the inadequate ventilation systems on commercial aircraft., The National Academy of Sciences found ~/~at separation of smokers and nonsmolcers within an airplane does not prevent exposure Co tobacco smoke for all passengers and flight a~tendancs. ~s a resuln, the National Academy of Sciences rece.~ended thac smoking be banned on all domestic airline flights. Because of the health hazards due 'co smoking on airplanes, the Joint Council of FltshC Attendants has supporced congressional efforts Co ban .smoking on all commercial flights. The National Academy of Sciences has estimated ~ha~ Ehe cabin crew working in a smoking section can be exposed Co tobacco smoke equivalent Co a nonsmoker who lives with a pack a day smoker. This broad public suppor~ is also reflected fnlegtsiation recently passed by the California General Assembly and si~ned by Governor Deukmej Jan co ban smokln~ on inurascate fllgh~s. This action, however, demonstrates the need for a comprehensive, uniform federal policy which addresses the ~ublic's c~ncern about the heal~h hazards of smoking on all airlines. ~ithou~ a federal standard, airline passengers and the aviation indusnry will be faced with a confusing se~ of restrictions as staues throughout the nat-lon cry to respond to ~he concerns of airline passengers in their sEa,as. This Committee has a s~rong record in support of legislation to improve cur aviauion system and co procec~ the health and safety of airline passengers. For example, this week the House is scheduled Uo consider the Airline Passenger Protecuion Ac~ which was approved by ~his Committee earlier this year. This legislation includes important provisions.to prouecc airline passengers. ~ believe Ehe need to protect airline passengers from the health hazards caused by passive smoking is as important as f~usurations over lost 5a~age and flight delays. The'~cientific evidence is clear; our cons¢ituencs want action. I urge you to reject the narrow appeals of the ~obacco industry and work to protect the health and safety of airline passengers and flight crews 5y suppor~in~ legisla¢ion ¢o ban smoking on flights of ~wo hours or less. T!0045-1 ;34,3