HOME
NEWS
SECONDHAND SMOKE
WORKPLACE EXPOSURE
LET'S CLEAR
THE AIR
TOBACCO'S TACTICS
SMOKE-FREE
DOES NOT HARM BUSINESS
GETTING INVOLVED
COMMUNITY SUPPORT
LETTERS
SMOKE-FREE DINING
MORE INFORMATION
ABOUT
US
|
|
Tobacco's Tactics
Make
no mistake, tobacco interests are active in our community.
They will oppose changes to our regulation or try to weaken,
rather than strengthen it.
|
Here is the "alternative regulation" proposed by the Bar and
Video Lottery Association. It is a classic example of the tactics we predicted below. (Sorry; it's the best copy we have.) Here is our document highlighting the changes with interpretation and commentary.
|
|
Many
of the things we list as the benefits of going smoke-free, like people
quitting smoking altogether or fewer teens starting smoking, the
tobacco companies list as detrimental to their business. These
tobacco industry originated claims typically surface during a
smoke-free debate:
"Smoking is a fundamental right, and I won't allow anyone to take away my rights. What will they take away next?" There is no constitutional right to smoke. The
truth is that smoking in public is not, and never was a right.
Smoke-free regulations seek to protect people from the harmful actions of
others, just like drunk driving and many other laws. Not having to
allow other people to hurt you and yours IS a fundamental right.
"A Smoke-free regulation will put me out of business." The
truth is that studies around the world have shown that going smoke-free does not harm business. In fact, many businesses see an increase in
revenue. Think about it: 80 percent of the population does not smoke.
Does marketing your business to a 20 percent share who may well drive
other potential customers away make sense? Watch Straight-Talk about Smoke-Free Laws, a 6-minute video by restaurateurs
for restaurateurs on the issue of smoke-free policy.
"It's my business. Why can I just put up a sign? People don't have to come in if they don't want to."
This approach (commonly called Red Light, Green Light) sounds
good on paper, but in practice it is so weak that it fails to protect
anybody, especially workers.
"Secondhand smoke doesn't really hurt people. Those studies are junk science." There are people who say that we didn't land on the moon, too. We choose to believe the CDC, the US Surgeon General, the World Health Organization, the American Cancer Society,
and other authoritative health experts too numerous to list. The
science is sound, it is conclusive, and it gets better every day.
"A smoke-free regulation can't be enforced." The
truth is that smoke-free regulations are generally self-enforcing. This
is not to say that enforcement is never required, but it neither
impossible, nor especially costly.
These are just a few of the well known tactics we can anticipate. Here are some links for more info:
|
|
|
