Tobacco Documents Online

Issue Brief -- H.R. 5041 Counter-Advertising The most recent effort to severely regulate and effectively ban tobacco advertising and promotion is H.R. 5041. This bill includes a section that would authorize the Secretary of Health and Human Services to establish a new Center on Tobacco and Health. The primary responsibilities of the Center would be to serve as a clearinghouse of information on the claimed health risks associated with tobacco use for a variety of audiences, including state and local governments, filmmakers, the media and the general public. Among other things, the Center would "prepare public service announcements (PSAs) and prepare paid advertising campaigns to discourage the use of tobacco by youth and other population groups at risk of using tobacco products." This bill is similar to legislation introduced in the Senate earlier this year (S. 1883). While S. 1883 would have authorized $50 million for a national, counter-advertising campaign, H.R. 5041 does not indicate a specific sum for this effort. N Regardless of the cost, which is sure to be a large investment, N W any counter-advertising campaign launched by the federal ~ government is unnecessary, due to the almost universal public , p ~ CA

awareness levels of anti-tobacco arguments and decreased consumption rates for both adults and young people. Ever since the first Surgeon General's report was issued more than 25 years ago, federal health officials and other policy- makers have actively warned the public about health risks allegedly associated with smoking. State and local governments, as well as anti-smoking organizations and individual activists, have joined this crusade against tobacco use by dedicating their efforts toward reducing the number of people who smoke. The anti-tobacco lobby also has turned its attention to youth smoking in recent years, developing outreach programs and educational campaigns designed to teach children about the health effects associated with smoking. Kids Against Tobacco, sponsored by the American Medical Association, is but one example. Other examples include the many anti-tobacco programs designed for schools. The National School Boards Association surveyed public school districts in 1988 and found that 75 percent have anti-smoking education programs at the elementary level, 81 percent at the middle school level and 78 percent at the high school level. N ~ Another program specifically designed for children is the "Smoke- w Free Class of 2000 Project." Sponsored by the American Cancer ~ N ~ 2 ~ ~

Society, the American Heart Association and the American Lung Association, the 12-year awareness and education program targeted children in the first grade in 1988 and continues through their graduation in the year 2000. This targeted approach to children has been quite successful. Youth smoking has significantly declined in the last 15 years. Since 1976, the smoking rate of high school seniors decreased to 18.7 percent, down from 28.8 percent. Consumption rates for adults also have gone down. According to the Surgeon General's 1989 report, adult smoking rates in America have decreased from 40 percent in 1965 to 29 percent today. Some 41 million people gave up smoking between 1965 and 1985, nine out of 10 without outside help. Five years ago, an HHS survey showed that not only had the American public heard that smoking posed a health threat, but 95 percent believed that cigarette smoking increased the risk of lung cancer. Messages about other health hazards linked to smoking also were received -- 92 percent believed it increased the risk of emphysema and 91 percent believed it increased the risk of heart disease. Most Americans also believe that second- hand smoke is harmful to nonsmokers. Also of great importance is the finding that tobacco advertising 3

does not "cause" youth smoking, as some critics argue. In fact, most studies indicate that the initiation of smoking by young people is predominately influenced by peer pressure and family members. A study of youth smoking patterns in five countries supports this. The same study also found that more 15 year-olds smoked in countries like Norway, where a smoking ban was implemented in 1975, than in countries where tobacco advertising restrictions were less restrictive. Another study of advertising and tobacco consumption rates in 16 countries found that advertising bans have not been followed by significant changes in tobacco consumption. It is clear that on-going anti-smoking campaigns have successfully reached their target audiences. Therefore, additional efforts provided for in H.R. 5041 are superfluous, fail to achieve the intended goal and are a poor investment of taxpayers' dollars. In an era of deficit spending and tight fiscal restraints, it is unnecessary to spend money on new programs when others are accomplishing the same objective. 4