Tobacco Documents Online

c I. CONFIDENTIAL: MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION Public Smoking: The Problem (SDC Introduction) A. Fourteen years ago, Surgeon General Jesse Steinfeld launched the campaign to ban smoking in public places, claiming that "evidence is accumulating that the nonsmoker may have untoward effects from the pollution his smoking neighbor forces upon him." B. A decade later -- in 1981 -- 225 anti-smokers from throughout the U.S. gathered in New York City to develop a°Blueprint for Action" against smokers. Almost 25 percent of their recommendations directly address the public smoking issue. The remainder, of course, affect it. Let me give you some examples: o Work for voluntary segregation of smokers. o Limit workplace and public smoking by law. o Promote litigation, including workplace suits. o Resiuire all government grantees and contrac- tors to protect nonsmokers. o Create tax initiatives to develop smoke-free work areas. o Promote use of the terms, "involuntary" and "forced" smoking rather than "passive." o Publicize smoking as a form of indoor air pollution. TIMN 0014554 s

CONFIDENTIAL: MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION o Promote research on environmental tobacco smoke. o Increase the excise tax to discourage ambient smoke. C. Most of these suggestions should sound familiar. Anti-smokers at the federal, state and local levels are promoting these and other measures in their attempt to drive smokers out of the public and into the closet. D. Public smoking issue is rapidly becoming an extension of the primary issue -- in the media's eye as well as in the public's eye. E. Health, of course, is the underlying reason for all attempts to restrict the smoker's right to smoke in public. 1. Our ninth Roper survey last year showed a dramatic increase in the number of respondents who believe it is probably hazardous to be around people who are smoking. 2 TIMN 0014555

CONFIDENTIAL: MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION 2. In 1974, fewer than half the respondents believed this. Today, nearly 7 in 10 agree. And for the first time, a majority of smokers believe that ambient smoke is hazardous. A decade ago, only 30 percent of smokers believed this. 3. If this trend -- toward increasing public accep- tance that ambient cigarette smoke is dangerous -® continues, in just eight years we will find that the percentage who accept public smoking as a probable hazard- will> equall the percentage who accept primary smoking as a hazard. 4. Although health remains the most salient of the issues addressed by nonsmokers, the Roper results continued to report an increase in the number of people who said they found it annoying to be around smokers. Two-thirds of nonsmokers said they were annoyed. In 1970, only one-third reported annoyance. 5. Even smokers now are reporting annoyance about being around other smokers -- one in ten. TIMN 0014556 3

CONFIDENTIAL: MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION 6. F. A just-completed survey of journalists shows similar results: (here report results of Tarrance media gatekeeper survey). REDACTED G. Meanwhile, proposals to restrict smoking in public places continue to increase. What began in the states in Arizona in 1973 has spread across the country -- most recently to the local and federal levels. H. You've heard the numbers. Our industry has faced more than 1,200 smoking restriction bills in the last 15 years, with a better than 90 percent success rate. TIMN 0014557 4

CONFIDENTIAL: MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION I. In 1984, we faced more than 100 bills in 28 states; four were enacted. In 1985, our state activities division has ranked smoking restriction legislation as a top priority in 32 states; number two priority in 8 others. At the local level, we can expect to face restriction proposals in more than 100 cities and counties, including: o all of Florida o most of California o Boston o Detroit o New York City o Philadelphia o Memphis o Dallas o Northern and Tidewater Virginia o Seattle ~. The anti-smokers' new target, of course, is the workplace. Five states and 86 local jurisdictions now require private sector employers to adopt smoking restrictions in the workplace. Two-thirds of these localities are in California. Although no state enacted workplace smoking restrictions in 1984, 15 considered them. 5 TIMN 0014558

CONFIDENTIAL: MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION IC. At the local level, workplace proposals were introduced in 50 cities and counties; 15 were approved, 21 are pending. L. We have 17 professional field staff battling these proposals. They are assisted by lobbyists in each state capital and in local jurisdictions as appro- priate. Our volunteer Tobacco Action Network now• numbers about 85,000; of these, about 12,000 have been identified as activists who can be relied upon to act when the call for help goes out. M. But we are badly outnumbered by the voluntary health organizations, who can call upon more than 3 million members or volunteers nationwide. 1. The American Cancer Society reports some 3,128 local chapters -- one in every county in the country. One of every 100 Americans is an active ACS volunteer, they claim. 2. The American Heart Association maintains local chapters in 3,000 communities. 3. The Lung Association has 141 state and regional chapters. 6 TIMN 0014559

CONFIDENTIAL: MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION That's more than 6,000 staffed offices or units supporting smoking restriction legislation across the country. And I'm not including the grass roots organizations such as GASP which form to work on specific pieces of legislation. N. Eighty-five thousand-plus versus six million. If we assume that 15 percent of that six million can be described as "activist," as is true with our TAN volunteers, we are outnumbered 900,000 to 12,000 in terms of individuals who are willing to act when called upon. That's a ratio of 75-to®1. 0. And those numbers don't even take into account the fact that those 75 individuals boast a far greater credibility with legislators and the general public than our one. P. Public opinion is increasingly on the anti-smokers' side as well. Our 1984 Roper survey found increasing support for separate sections for smokers in public places, especially in eating and work places. A decade ago, about half the public favored separate smoking and nonsmoking sections in restaurants. Today, 90 percent do. In 1974, 50 percent approved of workplace restrictions. Today, 75 percent approve. 7 TIMN 0014560

CONFIDENT:[AL: MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION Q. That's formidable opposition. And there's more. R. The problem is no longer restricted to the state and local levels. The federal government, too, is in on the act. For example: 1. The Office on Smoking and Health has $500,000 to conduct a literature review on health effects of public smoking. We should see the results of this study later this year. 2. The same department plans to devote its annual Surgeon General's report for 1985 to synergestic effects of tobacco smoke in the workplace. S. Not to be outdone, the National Cancer Institute is spending another $500,000 on passive smoking research. 4. Air quality studies are occupying several federal agencies. Among them: TIMN 0014561 $

CONFIDENTIAL: MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION a. The Environmental Protection Agency, which '.ls working with the National Academy of Sciences on a$75,040 passive smoking study, also is using $2 million appropriated by Congress for studies of indoor air quality. b. EPA, of course, is home to James Repace, whose claim that 500 nonsmokers may be dying each year from exposure to cigarette smoke, recently was validated by one department within the agency. c. The National Academy of Sciences may be doing yet another air quality study -- this time for the Department of Transportation. Legislation signed by President Reagan in 1984 authorizes a study of air quality in aircraft cabins. d. Also last year, the Reagan Administration reactivated an Interagency Committee on Indoor Air, which now is coordinating research among a variety of federal agencies. With the wide publicity given James Repace's recent claims, we can expect cigarette smoke to be given close scrutiny in much of this researc:h. TIMN 0014562 s

CONFIDENTIAL: MINNESOTA TOBACCO LITIGATION e. There's been talk of Congressional hearings on this issue, too. Last time, in 1978, was in the House Agriculture Committee, with Rep. Walter Jones of North Carolina, who was friendly toward the industry. This time, we may be facing Rep. Henry Waxman's Subcommittee on Health and the Environment. 5. Last year, as you know, we fought long and hard to persuade the Civil Aeronautics Board that there was no reason to further restrict smoking on board commercial aircraft. We won that battle. The CAB went out of business at the end of 1984. But most of its consumer protection regulations, including smoking, transferred to the Department of Transportation. We can be sure that, once the shakedown is complete at transportation, anti- smokers will be back trying to accomplish what they failed to do at the CAB. S. What do these health claims, the heightened public sentiment for smoking restrictions, increasing non- smoker annoyance toward smokers mean for this industry? TIMN 0014563 10