Philip Morris
Fields
- Author
- Kivlen, D.
- Area
- SLAVITT,JOSHUA/OFFICE
- Type
- LETT, LETTER
- Site
- N340
- Named Organization
- American Cancer Society
- American Lung Assn
- Californians for Nonsmokers Rights
- TI, Tobacco Inst
- Request
- Stmn/R1-037
- Stmn/R1-102
- Document File
- 2025684071/2025684856/Americans for Non Smokers
- 2025684072/2025684855/Americans for Non Smokers
- Master ID
- 2025684073/4854
- 2025684073
- 2025684074
- 2025684075-4854 Legislative Approaches to A Smoke Free Society
- 2025684085-4138 A Study of Public Attitudes Toward Cigarette Smoking and the Tobacco Industry in 780000
- 2025684139-4144 Proposition P: Anatomy of A Nonsmokers' Rights Ordinance. The Basics of Beating the Tobacco Industry
- 2025684145-4152 California City and County Smoking Ordinances
- 2025684153-4154 States Placing Limitations Nonsmoking in Public Places. States with Laws Addressing Smoking in the Workplace
- 2025684155-4230 Bibliography on Involuntary Smoking
- 2025684231-4232
- 2025684233-4234 Tobacco Smoke and the Nonsmoker
- 2025684235-4241 Testimony of James L. Repace in the Matter on Senate Bill 1440, the Nonsmokers' Rights Act of 850000. Before the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Civil Service, Post Office and General Services, Committee on Governmental Affairs Washington, D.C. 850930
- 2025684242-4248 Testimony of Joseph A. Califano, Jr. Before the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Civil Service, Post Office and General Services
- 2025684249-4255 Testimony of Alfred Munzer, M.D. On Behalf of the Coalition on Smoking or Health and Its Member Organizations the American Lung Association the American Heart Association the American Cancer Society on the Nonsmokers' Rights Act of 850000 Before the Subcommittee on Civil Service, Post Office and General Services Committee on Government Affairs U.S. Senate 850930
- 2025684256-4262 Written Testimony of Stanton A. Glantz, Ph.D. Submitted to the Subcommittee on Civil Service, Post Office, and General Services Committee on Governmental Affairs United States Senate for Hearing on S.1440 the Non-Smokers Rights Act of 850000 850930
- 2025684263-4278 Statement of the Honorable Bill Ross Commissioner Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation S-1440, on the Non-Smokers Rights Act of 850000 Before the United States Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs Washington, D.C. 850930
- 2025684279-4297 Clean Your Room A Compendium on Air Pollution
- 2025684298-4308 Indoor Pollutants
- 2025684309-4310
- 2025684311-4312 Celebrities Who Have Supported Nonsmokers' Rights
- 2025684313 Known Causes of Residential Fires National Figures for 810000
- 2025684314 Known Causes of Residential Fires California Figures for 810000
- 2025684315-4320 Tobacco Industry Conglomerates - Status Report on Diversification in the Tobacco Industry 840000 Representative Products
- 2025684321-4326 Written Testimony of Professor Marvin M. Kristein. Ph.D. Departments of Economics and Community and Preventive Medicine State University of New York at Stony Brook, New York Subcommittee on Civil Service, Post Office, and General Services Committee on Governmental Affairs United States Senate Hearing on S. 1440, to Restrict Smoking to Designated Areas in All U.S. Government Buildings 850930
- 2025684327-4349 How Much Can Business Expect to Profit From Smoking Cessation?
- 2025684350-4353 Wanted: Smoking Policies for the Work Place. Company Activities in Smoking Control
- 2025684354-4367 A Smokefree Workplace An Employers' Guide to Nonsmoking Policies
- 2025684368 California Poll Majority Would Restrict Smoking
- 2025684369-4372 Strong Sentiment to Restrict Smoking in Public Places
- 2025684373
- 2025684374-4375
- 2025684376 Summary of Results of the 830400 Survey by the Gallup Organization 'survey of Attitudes Towards Smoking'
- 2025684377 840000 Gallup Monthly Report on Eating Out
- 2025684378-4383 the Prevention Index 850000 A Report Card on the Nation's Health Summary Report
- 2025684384-4386 People of Michigan Say 'yes' - They Do Want to Limit Smoking in Public Places
- 2025684387-4389 Public Support for A State Law Restricting Smoking in Public Places
- 2025684390-4391
- 2025684392-4429 Michigan Survey 8
- 2025684430-4436 Testimony of Harry Perlstadt, Ph.D, M.P.H., Chairperson Michigan Coalition on Smoking or Health Before the Michigan House Public Health Committee Sub-Committee on H. B. 4500
- 2025684437 Summary of 800000 Minnesota Poll
- 2025684438 Good Idea Defies Smoke Screen
- 2025684439 Thy Neighbor's Lungs
- 2025684440 Smoking Your Wife to Death
- 2025684441 Oh, to Breathe in Nassau County...
- 2025684442 Contra Costa Packs It in
- 2025684443 Clearing the Air
- 2025684444-4445 Secondhand Smoke
- 2025684446 Tobacco Company Crusaders Try Weapon of 'courtesy'
- 2025684447 Cigarette Makers Set Greed Record
- 2025684448 Why Does Anyone in This Nation Still Smoke Cigarettes?
- 2025684449 Good Neighbor
- 2025684450-4451 Frisco Votes An Antidote to Smoking Poison
- 2025684452 News Item: San Francisco Passes Toughest Anti-Smoking Law in U.S.
- 2025684453 'thank You for Smoking'
- 2025684454
- 2025684455
- 2025684456-4457
- 2025684458
- 2025684459
- 2025684460
- 2025684461 5 Regulation of Smoking - Initiative Statute Argument in Favor of Proposition 5. Rebuttal to Argument in Favor of Proposition 5
- 2025684462-4474 Cigarette Smoke and the Nonsmoker
- 2025684475-4482 A Rebuttal to the Tobacco Industry's Paper, 'cigarette Smoke and the Nonsmoker'
- 2025684483-4486 Response to American Lung Association of Superior, California Document 'the Need for Smoking Control Legislation in Butte County: A Case Statement'
- 2025684487-4488
- 2025684489-4493 A Statement on the Health Effects of Passive Smoking
- 2025684494 Los Angeles City Public Smoking Issue Public Opinion Survey Summary of Findings
- 2025684495 Survey of Los Angeles City Voters 506 Interviews Margin of Error: Plus or Minus 5 Percent
- 2025684496
- 2025684496A Poll Shows L.A. Voters Oppose Anti-Smoking Law for Business
- 2025684497
- 2025684499-4500 Appendix: A Slanted Poll on Smoking Law
- 2025684501-4504 Michigan Tobacco and Candy Distributors and Vendors Association Michigan Statewide Survey 850429 - 850430
- 2025684505-4506 Account of Tobacco Institute Poll in Fort Collins, Colorado, 841100
- 2025684507-4509 Tobacco Institute Poll Raising Eyebrows Here
- 2025684510-4522 Development of A Comprehensive Ordinance Regulating Smoking in Enclosed Public Places and Places of Employment
- 2025684523-4532 Regulation of Smoking in Public Places and the Workplace
- 2025684533-4549 Opinion 82 - 55 Regulation of Smoking in the Workplace in the City and County of San Francisco
- 2025684550-4565 Smoking Ordinance
- 2025684566-4577
- 2025684578-4581 Addiction Mortality in the United States, 800000: Tobacco, Alcohol, and Other Substances
- 2025684582-4605 Economic Costs of Smoking: An Analysis of Data for the United States
- 2025684606-4611 Questions and Answers on Proposed Nonsmokers' Rights Legislation
- 2025684612-4631 A Quantitative Estimate of Nonsmokers' Lung Cancer Risk From Passive Smoking
- 2025684632-4633 the Oregon Indoor Clean Air Act and You An Explanation of the Law and the Rules for Its Implementation
- 2025684634-4639 Smoking in the Workplace City of San Jose Ordinance 21830
- 2025684640 Cityline Thank You for Observing San Diego's New No Smoking Ordinance
- 2025684641-4642 Thank You for Observing San Diego's No-Smoking Ordinance
- 2025684643-4645 City of Ft. Collins No-Smoking Ordinance
- 2025684646-4653 the Smoking Policy Handbook
- 2025684654-4655
- 2025684656 Equal Employment Opportunities 42 Uscs 2000e-2. Discrimination Because of Race, Color, Religion, Sex, or National Origin
- 2025684657 Compiled Laws Annotated 37.2202 Employer, Prohibited Acts
- 2025684658-4669 Model Smoking Pollution Control Ordinance
- 2025684670-4680 An Ordinance Amending the Los Angeles Municipal Code to Regulate Smoking in Public Places and Places of Employment.
- 2025684681-4686 Ordinance Number 0-15865 An Ordinance Amending Chapter IV, Article 5, Division 1 of the San Diego Municipal Code by Amending Sections 45.0101, 45.0102, 45,0103, 45.0104, 45. 0105, 45.0107 and 45.0108 Relating to Regulation of Smoking in Public Places and Places of Employment
- 2025684687-4689 Ordinance No. 298-83 (Health Regulations) Amending Part II, Chapter V, of the San Francisco Municipal Code (Health Code) by Adding Article 19 Thereto, Regulating Smoking in the Office Workplace
- 2025684690-4702 Ordinance No. 85-005 An Ordinance Amending Chapter 37 of the Sacramento City Code Relating to Smoking
- 2025684703-4704 Ordinance No. 85-016 An Ordinance Amending Chapter 37, Section 37.22, of the Sacramento City Code Relating to Smoking
- 2025684705-4709 Ordinance No. 3476 Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Chapter 9.14 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Prohibit Smoking in Elevators, Public Restrooms, and Indoor Service Lines and Regulating Smoking in the Workplace
- 2025684710-4716 Ordinance No. 16.84 An Ordinance of the City of Mountain View Repealing Section 21.46 of the Mountain View City Code, and Adding Article II to Chapter 21, Relating to the Protection of One's Right to Fresh Air Through the Prohibition and Regulation of Smoking in Certain Places
- 2025684717-4720 Proposed Ordinance Regarding Smoking in the Workplace
- 2025684721 San Francisco Anti-Smoking Law A Success
- 2025684722 Sf Controls Are Working Smokers Survive Their New Habit
- 2025684723 A Month with Smoking Law: Problems Resolved Smoothly
- 2025684724-4726 County Close to Being Smoke-Free
- 2025684727
- 2025684728-4731 No Smoking Ordinance, Implementation and Enforcement.
- 2025684732-4733
- 2025684734-4734A
- 2025684735 No Smoking Ordinance Information
- 2025684736-4738 Non-Smoking Ordinance
- 2025684739-4739A Smoking Ordinance - Status Report on Implementation of Enforcement and Effectiveness
- 2025684740-4751 the San Francisco Experience with Regulation of Smoking in the Workplace: the First Twelve Months
- 2025684752-4753
- 2025684754
- 2025684755-4757
- 2025684758-4761 Contact List for Information Regarding the Experience of California Cities Relative to Enforcement of Existing Smoking Regulation Ordinances
- 2025684762-4763
- 2025684764-4773 Testimony of Robert D. Tollison on the 'non-Smokers Rights Act of 850000' S. 1440 Before U.S. Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs Subcommittee on Civil Service, Post Office and General Services
- 2025684774-4815 Economic Impact of Instituting Smoking Prohibitions in U.S. Government Buildings
- 2025684816-4819 Pleasant Hill City Council Considers Model Smoking Law
- 2025684820 L.A. Councilman to Propose Anti-Smoking Ordinance
- 2025684821 L.A.'s Gravy Train Does the City Council Care How Tawdry It Looks?
- 2025684822 City Panel Studies No-Smoking Proposal
- 2025684823 Watered Down No-Smoking Law Gets Preliminary Ok. No-Smoking Ordinance Endorsed
- 2025684824 L.A. Council Acts to Limit Smoking at Places of Work 10-1 Vote for Measure
- 2025684825-4826 Council Adopts Tough Law on Smoking on Job
- 2025684827-4828 Conflicts Mostly Solved Few Fired Up Over L.A. Smoking Law
- 2025684829 L.A. Council Acts to Ease Curbs on Smoking at Work Victory for Businesses
- 2025684830 Tobacco Firms Act to Snuff Out Smoking Law View Weakening of L.A. Plan As Just A First Step
- 2025684831 No-Smoking Law Opponent Hosting Council at Resort. Council: Desert Retreat
- 2025684832-4833 L.A. Strengthens Draft Ordinance to Curb Smoking Penalty for Retaliation. Orange County Revives Anti-Smoking Ordinance
- 2025684834 Council Puts Some Muscle Back in L.A. Smoking Law
- 2025684835 L.A. Approves Strict on-Job Smoking Law Smoking: Law Approved, Goes to Bradley
- 2025684836 Bradley to Sign No-Smoking Ordinance, Press Aide Says
- 2025684837 the Region Law's Opposition Doused
- 2025684838 Clock Running for No-Smoking Plans
- 2025684839-4841 Smoking on the Job No More Ifs, Ands, Butts - It's Law
- 2025684842-4843 A Month with Smoking Law: Problems Resolved Smoothly
- 2025684844 Jonesville County Health Coalition Announces Introduction of Jonesville Smoking Law
- 2025684845-4847 Medical Association Head Endorses Nonsmokers' Rights Plan
- 2025684848-4854 Michael Schildberger Show Radio 310 Melbourne Australia Friday, 850726 9:10 A.M.
Related Documents:
Document Images
C
'i1~~rnV~~ A GonII,,PRD.
%ift PnddWft
~
DON1W K
MOwoid MlIdNA -
AMpn ib'xwr. Rh,p.
Radp norw0 l. w.b W lp; MD.
Saw/m
YMM PMNSOn
So1iR0 0P OIR~CiORf
woP wo4ky
OwW iIwu: MD:
MlehoN P. HMwn iOA.
vipMft Eaaor,
Robrf iilfN
MIClqM G*Vm
P.Nr worwNr
JOM MdRteqw
PNIp R. Lw. MD:
PoJ L lonCCY
MaeU J. MbbfNM
E Rkhpb MMIt; PhD.
wRldn ROROas.! JD=
RiarM.Y ALRuOML M.D.
. L°r"n'ro".'o
MoMOwn.~Rc
wR~omif. doonwiC. Sr
Pi.wr+. vwaswrlc« cu
li@s/N'NMllow. MJD: MP.W:
. No1.a7C1'qlbFe'lMGnnVC1A'
CIOhr"H"MI
Nkon K. Jbn=
J. MIOMM MCCIO*Ay
E.MaMiwO D..cMr. bH/ro!Cw
Jarn~~s ~P: MdouRf~lln
Pa+1~1.Im.K uM.e Icoom a ao,u+0/oo
C KwwS una, ozo se
x.
wooa ~.
NlfwrRoCk
stmwr sn.hooum
M.nyn F. SIMnrm+, MD_ M1:H.
Owala a wa1Nn San hala.co
Jwe L t1.Mlft MA.'
uS. . SlApnn' Gwd. i 1V09-t073
L~ TMIy. Mm. ~
US. SNIIpqN,'G~wOi',90,-e91l3
Rir.anw~/laeb.
l~wlse~o.~ftw/e
c.~MbDwwl~i
I1'opo~11 a~e.
WNM KM6f1
I \iI\~/~.11 ~J n'/\ ~s~1VNM~1V.1 1 V/'1
" , I ~, ights
` ~ ~.~~~~..~~ k.~. ~..~~~ .
oes
2054Uhiversity Avenue; Suitie 500 Bierkeley CA 94704 (415) 841-3032
Dear -Editor/'News Directonr:
We are writing to communicate our concern that a
slanted public opinion'poll now beingiconducted may be
used'to attempt to'obtain misleading news coverage~
The poll, which concerns smoking legislati'on, is being
conducted among California residents by a firm working
from Washington, D.C. From the wording of the
questions, we believe that the-poll was constructed to
produce results slanted''against suchlegislation. We
are concerned that the poll, when completed, may be
released to news media in order to obta!in news'cov'erage
hosti'le to nonsmokers' protection legislation.
.
Our concern is heightened by two facts (see Appendix).
First, the Tobacco Institute (located in Washington,
D.C.) has successfully used this ploy in the past.
Eecondl, all public opinion polls not sponsored by the
Tobacco Institute have foundithe pu'blic overwhelmingly
in favor of smoking restrictions.
We hope that if you should receive a news release based'
on this'poll, you will insist on seeing the complete
text of'th!e questions before writiag a story, and will
examine that text carefully for evidence' of built-in
bias. We would''also hope that in researching a story
on such a poll, you would seek comment from'a
responsible group which supports smoking legislation,
such as the American Cancer Society, American Lung
Association, or Californians for Nonsmokers' Rights.
Thank you for your attention. If we can be of any
assistance to you on the'topic of nonsmokers' rights,
passive smoking, or smoking legislation, please do nott
hesitate to call me.
-
.
It
T-5
Sincerely,
Denise Kivlen
Executive Director
