Tobacco Documents Online

Indicates "the California clove cigarette study bill (A2559) passed the legislature and now awaits action by the governor." Adds "the legislative findings and the moratorium on the sale of clove cigarettes were removed prior to final passage." Concludes "our latest update on the clove cigarette situation in other states is also enclosed for your information" (not included).

Discusses plans to prevent increases in excise taxes in California. Includes the following sections: 1) Political and Legislative Situation, containing legislative outlook for 1984, legislative process information, support groups including Tobacco Action Network, Retailers and Retailer Organizations, Tobacco Institute, Industry Members and Subsidiaries, Allied Industries, and Business Associations, and a historical background of cigarette taxes in California; 2) Position Papers on a Cigarette Tax Increase in California, containing reasons for opposing cigarette taxes, a "one page fact sheet for legislators," and discussion of economic impact of cigarette tax increases; 3) Legislative Strategy.

Discusses plans to prevent increases in excise taxes in Texas. Includes the following sections: 1) Political and Legislative Situation, containing legislative outlook for 1984, legislative process information, support groups including Tobacco Action Network, Retailers and Retailer Organizations, Tobacco Institute, Industry Members and Subsidiaries, Allied Industries, and Business Associations, and a historical background of cigarette taxes in California; 2) Position Papers on a Cigarette Tax Increase in California, containing reasons for opposing cigarette taxes, a "one page fact sheet for legislators," and discussion of economic impact of cigarette tax increases; 3) Legislative Strategy.

Discusses plans to prevent increases in excise taxes in Oklahoma. Includes the following sections: 1) Political and Legislative Situation, containing legislative outlook for 1984, legislative process information, support groups including Tobacco Action Network, Retailers and Retailer Organizations, Tobacco Institute, Industry Members and Subsidiaries, Allied Industries, and Business Associations, and a historical background of cigarette taxes in California; 2) Position Papers on a Cigarette Tax Increase in California, containing reasons for opposing cigarette taxes, a "one page fact sheet for legislators," and discussion of economic impact of cigarette tax increases; 3) Legislative Strategy.

Discusses strategy for defeating ACA 14, a California measure aimed at increasing the cigarette tax and earmarking revenues for education, environment, etc. Notes supporters of measure and their stated commitment to proceed with a ballot initiative process regardless of legislative outcome. Details industry endeavors to defeat the potential ballot initiative, divided into legislative, interim initiative and initiative phases. Identifies support for legislative phase (many trade associations) and the possibility of incorporating a letter-writing campaign or industry presentations. Discusses possible mobilization of consultants, minority leaders, California smokers, political leaders and nationally-known figures to assist with opposition. Emphasizes that in order to dissuade proponents from pursuing a ballot measure, the industry may have to distract and/or divide proponents with nontobacco related bills, and media coverage of "rifts within the ranks." Also suggest use of voter surveys and campaigns.

Outlines state and local "key legislative issues." Lists taxation, smoking restrictions, advertising restrictions, sampling restrictions, and "all other" issues. Outlines membership of Tobacco Action Network (TAN).

Offers a brief history of the taxes and "social cost" issue, and efforts to counter the issue, noting that "the argument that excises are regressive and unfair to low- and middle- income families was our primary message." Offers bullet-point list defining the "pros/cons" of excise taxes: most regressive of all taxes; minority, labor/liberal, tax reform and business and industry groups "can effectively lobby against proposals to increase excise taxes"; tobacco excise taxes typically receive public support; voters believe that health care costs are out of control; when the "social costs" issue is applied to tobacco use, excise taxes become harder to counter; economists have identified flaws in the "social cost theory; the identification of secondhand smoke as a Group A carcinogen is likely to escalate the problem. Identifies industry strategies to counter taxes including: op-ed pieces, economic consultants, targeted media campaigns, lobbying, grassroots efforts, coalition-building, efforts through the Tobacco Industry Labor Management Committee (TILMC), reinforcement of the position that excise taxes negatively impact the economy, promotion of allied group studies on the excise tax issue, and industry-run briefings with targeted audiences.

Updates situation regarding Nebraska cigarette tax increase. Requests, on behalf of TTC (Tobacco Tax Council), mobilization of company representatives to support petition project of Nebraska Tobacco Distributors Association, in opposition to tax increase.

Updates cigarette tax increase proposal in Nebraska noting, "Legislative Counsel for the Tobacco Tax Council indicates that this proposal will be taken very seriously despite the fact that the tax rate was increased in 1981." Requests, on behalf of Tobacco Tax Council, mobilization of TAN enrollees in Nebraska in a letter writing campaign in opposition to proposal.

Updates status of Pennsylvania House Bill 1799, which would increase the state cigarette tax, a portion of the revenues from which would be earmarked to find the Pennsylvania Cancer Control, Prevention and Research Act. Requests mobilization of Pennsylvania TAN enrollees in a letter writing campaign, phone campaign, and efforts to engage business allies in opposition to bill.

Gives background on Rhode Island House Bill 7026, a bill to increase cigarette taxes and "allow the appropriation of money for the budget." Requests mobilization of RI TAN enrollees in a letter writing campaign, telephone bank, and efforts to solicit support from business allies, in opposition to proposed bill.

States that the Tobacco Institute staff are overwhelmed by the volume of "extra-legislative initiative[s]" currently up for concern. Opines that the real problem may be linked to a lack of a "thoughtful and systematic approach or the attention to detail or the organizational zest required for the workmanlike conduct of the complicated, expensive and terribly important campaigns." Offers detailed examples of how current staff have failed to achieve goals regarding countering cigarette tax initiatives. Upholds suggestion by member companies that dedicated campaign specialists should be added to the State Activities Division staff.

Updates prequalification initiative activities in the States of Arkansas, Colorado and Oregon. States that "anti-tobacco forces are not well organized" in Arkansas, and that the Tobacco Institute has retained a law firm to assist in identifying appropriate campaign management organization to fight the smoking restriction initiative. Acknowledges the strength of the Colorado tax initiative and identifies forms hired to manage that campaign. Notes that the Oregon tax initiative affects the brewing industry as well and hence, the Tobacco Institute will align its efforts with this industry. States that the TI member companies have committed to a final budget of up to $800,000.00 to defeat the Oregon initiative.

Justifies current budget recommended for Arizona and Colorado tax initiatives. States that Colorado budget depends on survey data indicating a reasonable chance of achieving a majority vote . Identifies features of the budget including funds to pursue a lawsuit "on the misuse of ASSIST funds for political purposes should evidence become available." Opines that proponents are likely to qualify the Colorado measure for the ballot, but that Arizona "is likely to be a winnable situation."

Details strategies for fighting cigarette tax increase initiative in Massachusetts, aimed at providing smoking prevention and cessation revenues. Identifies potential strategies as: focus groups to determine favorable ballot language; legal challenges; challenges to signature validity; lobbying and alliance with state AFL-CIO.

Discusses regulatory activity of state agencies in Arizona, Pennsylvania, Colorado, and Texas regarding the introduction of Premier .

Highlights contents of the 1963 California State Department of Health report entitled, "Cigarette Smoking and Health." States that report is divided into three sections: data on recent CSDPH studies, a summary of 'world opinion' on the matter, and a proposed course of action for the State. Quotes conclusion of study as 'The evidence now indicates that cigarette smoking has such a profoundly harmful effect on health that it should be abandoned.' Notes that the originator of the document is Dr. Lester Breslow, "a doctor with a long-standing anti-smoking record." Details the short and long-term proposed actions for the State and the recommended advisory committees to steer these actions.

Recounts past discussion to "change the current law in Iowa to allow sampling in packs larger than 4 cigarettes, specifically in packs of 6 or more." States that RJR primarily samples in full 20-packs, and has "no real interest in resuming sampling in Iowa." Relays suggestion that industry focus its efforts on a local preemption bill. Suggest survey of members to assess importance of restoring greater than 4-pack sampling.

Argues the "it would greatly enhance both RJRT[RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company] and RJRI [RJ Reynolds Industries] Public Affairs efforts" to furnish gratis cigarettes to "the office of each member of the North Carolina Congressional delegation, visitors to RJRI's Washington office, and on specific occasions where promotion of North Carolina products are appropriate." States that the gratis products "are intended for distribution to constituents and other visitors to the Member's office and not the Member and his staff."

Offers background, facts, impact on industry and industry position on state and local cigarette taxation. Argues that taxes increase product costs, "discriminate against smokers" in general and against "lower income population and ethnic groups" in particular, are regressive, adversely affect the economy, and influence consumer behavior.

Graph showing the number of packs of cigarettes taxed in Illinois from 1976 to 1989. Shows decrease from about 1600 million backs to 1000 million packs. Notes that Illinois has lost 233.3 Million packs of cigarettes," and indicates points in the graph where excise tax increase occurred.

Outlines plans and actions of RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company Public Affairs Department. Addresses "Key Issues" of Social Acceptability and Leaf Availability. Discusses strategies: to "strengthen industry organizations and manage them to ensure that industry elements aggressively support company policies, plans and objectives"; to "develop programs that will reinforce the smoker, his choice to smoke, and the social custom of smoking"; to "establish programs that will ensure a more aggressive smoking and health posture for the tobacco industry"; to "ensure that litigation, legislation and regulation adversely affecting tobacco are reduced"; to "develop coalitions and alliances and participate in the resolution of issues that are broader than tobacco"; and to "ensure that an economically healthy American tobacco base will" result in competitive prices and sufficient quantities of tobacco and "be an effective political force." Concludes with budgetary information.

Chart comparing the amount of tax on cigarettes in Evanston, Chicago, and Illinois. Shows that Evanston's taxes are consistently the highest. Also provides figures for the number of packs sold, and indicates points of tax increase.

Chart Comparing taxation in Illinois, Indiana, and Chicago. Also provides data on the number of packages taxed in each state, and indicates tax increases.

Talking points for Senator James "Pate" Philip. Expresses concern over infrastructure expansion for Dupage county, in that the senator may seek cigarette tax revenue to support the project. Notes Philip Morris support of Pate, and the Senate Republican members. Requests extension of invitation to Senator and his wife to a legislative leaders seminar in New York. Also requests that thanks be conveyed for assistance on issues of taxes, smoking bans and billboards.