Philip Morris
Environmental Tobacco Smoke Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Health and the Environment of the Committee on Energy and Commerce House of Representatives One Hundred Third Congress First Session
Fields
- Area
- BORELLI,TOM/SEC'Y FILES
- Type
- TRAN, TRANSCRIPT
- BIBL, BIBLIOGRAPHY
- CHAR, CHART, GRAPH, TABLE, MAPS
- FOOT, FOOTNOTES
- REPT, REPORT, OTHER
- BIBL, BIBLIOGRAPHY
- Attachment
- 2046594754/2046594981
- Request
- Stmn/R1-048
- Stmn/R1-059
- Stmn/R1-072
- Stmn/R1-059
- Named Organization
- Advocacy Inst
- Agriculture Comm
- Air + Radiation
- Am J Epidemiol
- Am J Public Health
- Ama, Ama
- Amed, American Medical Association
- American Academy of Pediatrics
- American Cancer Society
- American Heart Assn
- American Lung Assn
- American Public Health Assn
- April 1990 Antismoking Conference
- Arbys Fast Food Restaurant
- Ash, Action on Smoking & Health
- Ashrae, American Society of Heating, Refrigerating + Air-Conditioning Engineers
- Associated Press
- Board of Trustees of the American Medica
- Br J Cancer
- Br Med J
- Bradford Hill
- British Journal of Cancer
- Brownson Stockwell
- Bureau of Natl Affairs
- Bw, Brown & Williamson
- C+P Telephone
- Ca
- Cab
- Californians for Nonsmokers Rights
- Chung Hua Yu Fang I Hsueh Tsa Chin 1989
- Cipollone
- Coalition on Smoking or Health
- Comm on Energy + Commerce
- Comm on Substance Abuse
- Commerce Comm
- Congress
- Consumers Union
- Council on Indoor Air Research
- Court Appeals
- Cpsc, Consumer Products Safety Commission
- Dept of Energy Natl Lab
- District Court
- Epa Science Advisory Board
- Epa Working Group
- Epa, Environmental Protection Agency
- FDA, Food and Drug Administration
- Federal Government
- Flat Earth Society
- Foia
- Ford Motor
- Franklin Inst
- Gasp
- General Accounting Office
- General Services Administration
- Group Against Smoke Pollution
- Health Policy Center
- Hhs, Dept of Health and Human Services
- House
- House Building Commission
- Icf
- Indoor Air Division
- Indoor Air Quality + Total Human Exposur
- Interagency Comm on Indoor Air Quality
- Intl Agency for Research on Cancer
- Intl Society of Regulatory Toxicology +
- Jama
- Kenneth G Brown
- La Times
- Life of Va Insurance
- Little Caesars Pizza
- Mcgill
- Nas, Natl Academy of Sciences
- Natl Clearinghouse for Smoking + Health
- Natl Research Council
- NCI, Natl Cancer Inst
- Nelson Inst of Environmental Medicine
- New England Journal
- New England Journal of Medicine
- NIH, Natl Inst of Health
- Niosh, Natl Inst for Occupational Safety & Health
- Ny Times
- OSHA, Occupational Safety & Health Administration
- Oversight + Investigations Subcomm
- Public Works Comm
- Radiation Advisory Comm
- Republican Women for Choice in Dc
- Risk Assessment Council
- RJR Nabisco
- RJR, R.J.Reynolds
- Rules Comm
- Sab Executive Comm
- Sab Panel
- Science Advisory Board
- Science Comm
- Scientific Advisory Board
- Sgc, Surgeon General's (Advisory) Comm
- Smoking Policy Inst
- Society for Epidemiologic Research
- Subcomm on Health + the Environment
- Subcomm on Technology Environment + Avia
- TI, Tobacco Inst
- Ucsd
- Ukrops Grocery Stores
- Univ of Ca Los Angeles
- Univ of Ca San Francisco
- Univ of Nm
- US
- US Centers for Disease Control
- US Court Appeals
- US Merit Systems Protection Board
- US Public Health Service
- US Senate
- US Supreme Court
- Va Employment Commission
- Va Group to Alleviate Smoking in Public
- Wa Post
- Wa Star
- Wa Times
- Wall Street Journal
- White House
- Who, World Health Org
- World Conference on Lung Health
- Yale Univ
- 20 20
- 7th Day Adventists
- 7th World Conference on Tobacco + Health
- 9th Judicial Circuit
- Academy of Toxicology Sciences
- Agriculture Comm
- Document File
- 2046594743/2046595091/Missing
- Named Person
- Adkins, C.
- Akiba
- Axelrad, R.
- Baesler
- Banzhaf, J.
- Banzhaf, J.F. III
- Barnes, D.
- Barnett, P.
- Barton, J.
- Batta, G.
- Bayard, S.
- Bennett, S.
- Bilirakis, M.
- Bliley, T.J., J.R.
- Blot, W.
- Boucher, R.
- Bretthauer, E.
- Bristow, L.
- Bristow, L.R.
- Bristow, M.
- Brown, S.
- Browner, C.
- Brownson
- Bryant, J.
- Burns, D.
- Butler
- Chan
- Claussen, E.
- Clemmesen, E.
- Clinton
- Collins, C.
- Cooper, J.
- Correa
- Crapo, M.D.
- Dalager
- Daube, M.
- Daynard, R.
- Dingell, J.D.
- Donley, A.M.
- Durbin, M.A.
- Durbin, R.
- E, H.
- Emerson, R.W.
- Enstrom, J.
- Farland
- Feinstein, A.
- Fields, J.
- Fisher, R.
- Fitzgibbons, D.B.
- Flaak, R.
- Franks, G.A.
- Gao
- Garfinkel
- Garland
- Gillis
- Gillmor, P.E.
- Glantz, S.
- Gori, G.B.
- Gough, M.
- Graham, L.
- Graham, M.
- Greenwood, J.C.
- Grundmann
- Habicht, H.
- Hall, R.M.
- Hansen, J.
- Hastert, J.D.
- Helling
- Heyman, R.B.
- Hirayama, T.
- Hole
- Humble
- Ingebretson, C.
- Jones
- Kabat
- Kabat, J.
- Klug, S.
- Koo
- Kreidler, M.
- Lambert, B.M.
- Lancaster, M.
- Lautenberg, F.
- Lee
- Lehman, R.H.
- Lippmann, M.
- Lowrey
- Lowrey, A.H.
- Manton, T.J.
- Margoliesmezvinsky, M.
- Markey, E.J.
- Martin, M.J.
- Mazzoli, R.
- Mckinney
- Mcmillan, A.
- Miller, G.H.
- Mizell, M.
- Moorhead, C.J.
- Morton
- Mueller, A.
- Muir, J.
- Muren
- Nantkes
- Nelson, K.
- Novello, A.C.
- Novotny, T.E.
- Oxley, M.G.
- Pallone, F., J.R.
- Parmley, W.
- Paxon, W.
- Pershagen
- Reilly, W.
- Repace
- Repace, J.L.
- Reynolds
- Richardson, W.
- Rose, C.
- Rosenberg, W.
- Rosner, R.
- Roth, A.J.
- Rowland
- Rowland, J.R.
- Samet, J.
- Sandler
- Schaefer, D.
- Schenk, L.
- Sharp, P.R.
- Slattery
- Slattery, J.
- Spitzer, W.
- Stearns, C.
- Steenland, K.
- Stokols, J.M.
- Stolwijk, J.
- Studds, G.E.
- Sullivan
- Surgeon General
- Swendsen
- Swift, A.
- Synar, M.
- Tate, C.F.
- Tauzin, W.J.
- Towns, E.
- Trichopoulos
- Upton, F.
- Valentine, T.
- Wagener
- Wagener, J.
- Washington, C.A.
- Waxman, H.A.
- Wetstone, G.S.
- Williams, W.
- Winter, E.
- Woodard, K.D.
- Woodard, M.
- Woods, J.
- Wu
- Wyden, R.
- Xxrichard
- Akiba
- Author (Organization)
- Comm on Energy + Commerce
- Congress
- House
- Subcomm on Health + the Environment
- Va Group to Alleviate Smoking in Public
- Congress
- Master ID
- 2046594754/4981
Related Documents:- 2046594919-4922 Smoke and Mirrors How Cigarette Makers Kepp Health Question 'open' Year After Year Council for Tobacco Research Is Billed As Independent But Guided by Lawyers An Industry Insurance Policy
- 2046594969 Will OSHA Bar the Door to Workplace Smoking?
- 2046594972-4973 Special Report on Involuntary Smoking Legal Liability for Permitting Smoking
- 2046594974 Donald L. Helling, Et Al., Petitioners V. William Mckinney on Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
- 2046594981
- Litigation
- Stmn/Produced
- Characteristic
- MARG, MARGINALIA
- PARE, PARENT
- Site
- N329
- Date Loaded
- 23 May 1999
- Brand
- Camel
- Marlboro
- UCSF Legacy ID
- dds81f00
Document Images
ENVIRONMENTAL TOBACCO SMOKE
;
E
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOTAMTTEE ON
HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON
ENERGY AND COMMERCE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED THIRD CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
JULY 21, 1993
Serial No. 103-51
3
11
Printed for the use of the Committee on Energy and Commerce
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
74814CC WASHINGTON : 1993
For sale by the U.S. Government Printing Office
Superintendent of Documents. Congressional Sales Office, Washington, DC 20402
ISBN 0-16-043355-X .
I
COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE
JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan, Chairman
HENRY A. WAXMAN, California CARLOS J. MOORHEAD, California
PHILIP R. SHARP, Indiana THOMAS J. BLILEY, JR., Virginia
EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts JACK FIELDS, Texas
AL SWIFT, Washington MICHAEL G. OXLEY, Ohio
CARDISS COLLINS, Illinois MICHAEL BILIRAKIS, Florida
MIKE SYNAR, Oklahoma DAN SCHAEFER, Colorado
W.J. 'BILLY" TAUZIN, Louisiana JOE BARTON, Texas
RON WYDEN, Oregon ALEX MCMILLAN, North Carolina
RALPH M. HALL, Texas J. DENNIS HASTERT, Illinois
BILL RICHARDSON, New Mexico FRED UPTON, Michigan
JIM SLATTERY, Kansas CLIFF STEARNS, Florida
JOHN BRYANT, Texas BILL PAXON, New York
RICK BOUCHER, Virginia PAUL E. GILLMOR, Ohio
JIM COOPER, Tennessee SCOTT KLUG, Wisconsin
J. ROY ROWLAND, Georgia GARY A. FRANKS, Connecticut
THOMAS J. MANTON, New York JAMES C. GREENWOOD, Pennsylvania
EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York MICHAEL D. CRAPO, Idaho
GERRY E. STUDDS, Massachusetts
RICHARD H. LEHMAN, California
FRANK PALLONE, JR., New Jersey
CRAIG A. WASHINGTON, Texas
LYNN SCHENK, California
SHERROD BROWN, Ohio
MIKE KREIDLER, Washington
MARJORIE MARGOLIES-MEZVINSKY,
Pennsylvania
BLANCHE M. LAMBERT, Arkansas
AtaN J. RoTH, Staff Director and Chief Counsel
DENNIS B. FITZGIBBONS, Deputy StaJ}'Director
MARGARET A. DURBUN, Minority Chief Counsel and Staff Director
SUBcoMMITTEE oN HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT
HENRY A. WAXMAN, California, Chairman
MIKE SYNAR, Oklahoma THOMAS J. BLILEY, JR., Virginia
RON WYDEN, Oregon
RALPH M. HALL, Texas
BILL RICHARDSON, New Mexico
JOHN BRYANT, Texas
J. ROY ROWLAND, Georgia
EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York
GERRY E. STUDDS, Massachusetts
JIM SLATTERY, Kansas
JIM COOPER, Tennessee
FRANK PALLONE, JR., New Jersey
CRAIG A. WASHINGTON, Texas
SHERROD BROWN, Ohio
MIKE KREIDLER, Washington
JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan
(Ex Officio)
MICHAEL BILIRAKIS, Florida
ALEX McMILLAN, North Carolina
J. DENNIS HASTERT, Illinois
FRED UPTON, Michigan
BILL PAXON, New York
SCOTT KLUG, Wisconsin
GARY A. FRANKS, Connecticut
JAMES C. GREENWOOD, Pennsylvania
CARLOS J. MOORHEAD, California
(Ex Officio)
KAREN NELSON, Staff Director
GREGORY S. WETSTONE, Counsel
PHU.i n' BAxNETr, Counsel
CHARLES INGEBRETSON, Minority Counsel
.t
.
0
(II)
2
many American children who cannot do the things that other chil-
dren do-go to a McDonald's, attend a baseball game, or even par-
ticipate in a family vacation-without fear of encountering tobacco
smoke, suffering serious health repercussions, and maybe ending
up in a hospital These impacts are entirely preventable, and the
Environmental Protection Agency and others are fighting back.
Today, EPA Administrator Carol Browner will announce a major
new policy designed to protect nonsmokers from involuntary expo-
sure to environmental tobacco smoke. The policy seeks to secure for
nonsmokers the basic right to freedom from harmful involuntary
smoking.
EPA's new recommendations will have a dramatic impact. Many
cities and States are already moving to control environmental to-
bacco smoke, as shown by recent smoking restrictions in California,
Hawaii, Vermont, North Dakota, and Utah. This trend was acceler-
ated when the EPA report was released last January. The Agency's
long awaited policy recommendations will prompt many more State
and local initiatives.
But ultimately exposure to environmental tobacco smoke is a na-
tional environmental problem, and it deserves a national solution.
That is why, to protect the public, and especially our children, I am
announcing today that I will be introducing legislation to prohibit
involuntary exposure to tobacco smoke in all buildings open to the
public. Under this legislation, smoking will be banned or restricted
to separately ventilated rooms in all public, commercial, and school
buildings.
This is a bold step, but its premise is simple. Smokers do not
have the right to jeopardize the health of nonsmokers, particularly
children. Children do have the right to leave their homes without
fearing that exposure to environmental tobacco smoke may trigger
a life-threatening asthma attack.
Incredibly, hundreds of thousands of children can avoid serious
health problems without public or private expense. These stagger-
ing figures involve staggering health care costs and lost productiv-
ity to our society. In order to save those dollars, we need only es-
tablish a rational smoking policy for public places.
People may decide on their own to smoke, that is their decision,
but for those who do not want to smoke,'they shouldn't be forced
to breathe in smoke from others and suffer all the adverse health
consequences. The legislation is founded on good science and sound
health policy. The only reason not to enact it is that the tobacco
companies will oppose it. But the special interests of the tobacco
companies are no match for the health of our children.
The Supreme Court, in the case of Helling v. McKinney, recently
ruled that exposure to prisoners of environmental tobacco smoke
can be considered an unconstitutional cruel and unusual punish-
ment. It is about time the rest of us, and especially our children,
get the same protection.
We are going to hear from our witnesses, but before we call upon
them I want to recognize members of the subcommittee for their
opening statements and call on Mr. Bliley first.
Mr. BLILEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, I am testifying today in order to report to the
subcommittee the results of my extensive investigation of the
I =
0
.
.
0
ENVIRONMENTAL TOBACCO SMOKE
0
WEDNESDAY, JULY 21, 1993
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
' COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE,
SUBCOMMITTEE ON HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:50 a.m., in room
2123, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Henry A. Waxman
(chairman) presiding.
Mr. WAXMAN. The meeting of the subcommittee will please come
to order. Guests, take their seats. I wonder if we could have the
doors in the back closed.
This morning's hearing addresses a dangerous, pervasive, and
entirely preventable form of indoor air pollution, environmental to-
bacco smoke. Not surprisingly, given tobacco's deadly record, stud-
ies show the impact of environmental tobacco smoke are pervasive
and severe, especially where children are concerned. Experts agree
that cancer is one deadly effect, and EPA estimates that environ-
mental tobacco smoke causes 3,000 cancer deaths each year among
nonsmokers. As we will hear this morning, medical experts, includ-
ing the American Medical Association, agree with those figures.
Then there is heart disease. Although EPA's recent report only
addresses respiratory problems, heart disease is the biggest killer
associated with involuntary smoking. The U.S. Surgeon Generall
has determined that more than 30,000 lives each year are lost as
a result of heart disease from environmental tobacco smoke expo-
sure.
Environmental tobacco smoke also causes respiratory ailments,
especially when children are concerned. Asthma is the most perva-
sive ETS health impact. EPA estimates that between 200,000 and
' 1 million American children suffer asthmatic attacks as a result of
environmental tobacco smoke. ETS may even cause the onset of
asthma in previously healthy children.
Passive smoke causes lower respiratory infections such as pneu-
monia and bronchitis. More than 50,000 small children are afflicted
by such serious infections each year because of ETS exposure, and
many thousands are hospitalized. Children also suffer reduced lung
function, respiratory irritation, and severe inner ear infections as
a result of exposure to environmental smoke. -
While these are staggering figures, they are not just empty sta-
tistics. There is a saddened family behind every cancer death and
a frightened child behind every asthma attack. Today we will hear
the story of two of the innocent children who suffer from exposure
to environmental smoke. We will hear first-hand what it is like for
(1)
.A
3
EPA's handling of the controversy surrounding environmental to-
bacco smoke, or ETS.
As you know, in the past the Oversight and Investigations Sub-
committee of this committee has conducted hearings on EPA's
abuse of Government contracting requirements. So pervasive is the
level of abuse that Chairman Dingell has characterized EPA's pat-
tern of .contract mismanagement as a cesspool. EPA's inspector
general has recently confirmed that such abuses also have taken
, place in connection with a number of EPA contracts involving ETS,
and the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee's own inves-
tigation is continuing.
In addition to various contractual improprieties, however, my
a own investigation suggests that, in its consideration of ETS, the
Agency has deliberately abused and manipulated the scientific data
in order to reach a predetermined, politically motivated result.
EPA's risk assessment on ETS released in January of this year
claims that ETS exposure is responsible for approximately 3,000
lung cancer cases per year in the United States. Analysis of the
risk assessment reveals, however, that EPA was able to reach that
conclusion only by ignori^g or discounting major studies and by de-
viating from generally accepted scientific standards.
EPA's willingness to distort the science in order to justify its
classification of ETS as a Group A or known human carcinogen
seems to stem from the Agency's determination early on to advo-
cate smoking bans and restrictions as a socially desirable goal.
EPA began promoting such policies in the mid to late 1980's os-
tensibly as part of its efforts to provide information to the public
on indoor air quality issues. The Agency then decided to develop
the ETS risk assessment to provide a scientific judgment for smok-
ing bans. The risk assessment thus was never intended to be a
neutral review and analysis of the ETS science. Rather, it was in-
tended from the start to function as a prop for the Agency's pre-
determined policy.
Not surprisingly, therefore, the process at every turn has been
characterized by both scientific and procedural irregularities. In ad-
dition to the contracting violations mentioned at the outset, those
irregularities include conflicts of interest by both Agency staff in-
volved in preparing of the risk assessment and the members of the
Science Advisory Board selected to provide a supposedly independ-
ent ent evaluation of the document.
I will not itemize each and every one of these improprieties. In-
stead, I ask unanimous consent that a memorandum providing full
_ details of the history of EPA's handling of ETS be included in the
record. The memorandum summarizes the results thus far of my
investigation into the Agency's handling of ETS and is based on
publicly available documents, extensive correspondence between
myself and former Administrator Reilly, and interviews conducted
by my staff with the responsible EPA officials.
[Testimony resumes on p. 72.1
[The memorandum follows:]
4
EPA AND ENVIRONMENTAL TOBACCO
SMOKE: SCIENCE OR POLIT3CS?
I. INTRODUCTION
With almost unprecedented fanfare, the Environmental
Protection Agency ("EPA") released at a news conference on
January 7, 1993, a risk assessment on tobacco smoke in the
air -- often referred to as environmental tobacco smoke
("ETS"). According to the EPA risk assessment, ETS is a
"Group A" or "known human" carcinogen that is responsible each
year for approximately 3,000 cases of lung cancer among
nonsmokers residing in the United States. The risk assessment
also claims that ETS is a cause of respiratory problems in
infants living in homes in which one or both parents or some
other family member smokes.
Not surprisingly, the claims contained in EPA's risk
assessment on ETS generated substantial publicity, with most
major newspapers, television news program and radio stations
devoting substantial attention to EPA's conclusions. The
publicity was, in aart, a natural and expected response to the
rather dramatic claims made in the EPA report. But EPA
officials and staff, joined by Secretary Sullivan of the
Department of Health and Human Services ("HHS"), also left no
stone unturned to ensure heavy media coverage of the report.
The EPA/HHS campaign was seeded by periodic "leaks" of drafts
0
5
- 2 -
of the report, and those leaks were followed with a heavily
promoted press conference and individual interviews.
The EPA/HHS representatives made clear at their
January press conference that they hoped that the EPA report
would lead to additional smoking restrictions by private
entities as well as by government at all levels. If the
conclusions of the report are valid, that hope is certainly
understandable. At the same time, however, if the claims made
in the report are invalid, as appears to be the case, the
likely consequence will be additional unjustified harassment
of and discrimination against smokers -- a consequence that
received little attention at the January press conference.
The assumption that often is made is that smoking
restrictions and other comparable measures are essentially
costless. Increasingly, that assumption has been shown to be
incorrect. Whether measured in terms of the number of people
who are fired or are not hired because they smoke, by
unjustified feelings of guilt among smokers or by the erosion
of courtesy and tolerance, the campaign against smoking is not
the no-lose proposition it often is portrayed as being.
In Washington, D.C., for example, which has adopted
, workplace smoking restrictions, the consequences of the ETS
controversy are unmistakable. At all hours of the working
day, people can be seen, even in the middle of winter, huddled
near the doorways of office buildings smoking cigarettes. In
fact, some employers -- in Washington, D.C., and elsewhere --
01~
6
- 3 -
have gone so far as to require current and prospective
employees to submit to a urine test, looking for the telltale
sign of nicotine.
Over the past several years there has been
increasing concern about the politicization of science and
other problems at EPA. A two-year investigation by the
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations of the House
Energy and Commerce Committee has uncovered disturbing
evidence encompassing everything from cronyism in the award of
government contracts to
systematic bias in the collection,
review and presentation of scientific data. Instead of
evaluating scientific issues objectively and providing
balanced information to the public, EPA has been found on a
number of occasions to have manipulated or suppressed data in
a manner that has resulted in unnecessary alarm and confusion.
Mounting concern about EPA's misuse of science
prompted former EPA Administrator William Reilly to convene an
expert panel in 1991 to review EPA's handling of scientific
issues and to recommend improvements. The expert panel, which
was comprised of eminent scientists from leading institutions
across the country, issued a report in March 1992 entitled
Safeguarding the Future: Credible Science, Credible Decisions.
The report confirmed that, "[c]urrently, EPA science is of
uneven quality, and the Agency's policies and regulations are
frequently perceived as lacking a strong scientific
foundation" (p. 4).
7
- 4 -
0
The expert panel also cautioned EPA that "science
should never be adjusted to fit policy, either consciously or
unconsciously" (p. 38). Unfortunately, that is precisely what
appears to have happened in the case of the risk assessment on
ETS -- the abuse of science and the scientific process to
further a political agenda. However one views cigarettes and
smoking, EPA's misuse of science and disregard for proper
legal and scientific procedures should be cause for alarm. In
fact, EPA's handling of ETS sets a disturbing precedent for
the Agency's consideration of future controversial scientific
questions, raising questions about EPA's ability to separate
science from politics in carrying out its mission.
As the editor of EPA Watch recently observed in
response to EPA's release of the ETS report:
It's now open season on whatever contam-
inant the EPA chooses to label the killer
contaminant of the week, with the effect
that once again, Americans are going to be
stampeded into fearing a substance for
reasons which upon close ins~ection are
scientifically indefensible.-
The discussion that follows describes EPA's
activities with respect to ETS -- the procedures the Agency
has utilized and the problems that have infected the process
, from the beginning.
V EPA Blowing Its Own Smoke?, Investor's Business Daily,
January 28, 1993, p. Al.
8
- 5 -
II. THE HISTORY OF EPA'S INVOLVEMENT IN THE ETS CONTROVERSY
A. Puttino EPA's Role Into Context
In order to understand EPA's role in the ETS
controversy, one must understand how the "passive smoking"
issue emerged in the first place. According to Richard
Daynard, a well-known antismoking activist, the organized
movement to eradicate smoking has proceeded in three distinct
phases.?/ During the first phase, activists attempted to
persuade smokers to stop smoking on the ground that smoking
was bad for the smoker. Although many smokers did stop
smoking for that reason, others continued. During the second
phase, activists attempted to make smokers feel guilty about
their enjoyment of smoking. Again, however, many individuals
continued to smoke. The third and current phase, according tc
Daynard, marked a more fundamental strategic shift. In this
phase, the movement began to focus on the "development" of
"evidence" about ETS. If people can be persuaded to believe
that tobacco smoke is harmful to nonsmokers, it becomes easiex
to persuade both private entities and government authorities
to restrict or ban smoking. According to Stanton Glantz,
founder of Californians for Nonsmokers' Rights (later
christened Americans for Nonsmokers' Rights), the target of
such laws is the smoker rather than the nonsmoker. "Although
the nonsmokers' rights movement concentrates on protecting the
?/ Presentation by Richard Daynard, International Council
for Coordinating Cancer Research: Conference on Cancer
Prevention (February 1991).
