Literature DB >> 11387532

Tobacco lobby political influence on US state legislatures in the 1990s.

M S Givel1, S A Glantz.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Throughout the 1990s the tobacco lobby was a potent political force in US state legislatures advancing its pro-tobacco agenda.
OBJECTIVE: To describe the market and political motivations of the tobacco lobby and the strategies they use to achieve these goals in US state legislatures.
DESIGN: This study is a content analysis and summary overview of recently released historical tobacco industry documents; tobacco related government documents; and recent state tobacco control policy reports.
RESULTS: In the 1990s, the tobacco lobby engaged in a comprehensive and aggressive political effort in state legislatures to sell tobacco with the least hindrance using lobbying, the media, public relations, front groups, industry allies, and contributions to legislators. These efforts included campaigns to neutralise clean indoor air legislation, minimise tax increases, and preserve the industry's freedom to advertise and sell tobacco. The tobacco lobby succeeded in increasing the number of states that enacted state pre-emption of stricter local tobacco control laws and prevented the passage of many state tobacco control policies. Public health advocates were able to prevent pre-emption and other pro-tobacco policies from being enacted in several states.
CONCLUSIONS: The tobacco lobby is a powerful presence in state legislatures. Because of the poor public image of the tobacco lobby, it seeks to wield this power quietly and behind the scenes. State and local health advocates, who often have high public credibility, can use this fact against the tobacco lobby by focusing public attention on the tobacco lobby's political influence and policy goals and expose links between the tobacco lobby and its legislative supporters.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11387532      PMCID: PMC1747563          DOI: 10.1136/tc.10.2.124

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Tob Control        ISSN: 0964-4563            Impact factor:   7.552


  24 in total

1.  Reactions of adult and teenaged smokers to the Massachusetts tobacco tax.

Authors:  L Biener; R H Aseltine; B Cohen; M Anderka
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1998-09       Impact factor: 9.308

2.  Political realities of statewide smoking legislation: the passage of California's Assembly Bill 13.

Authors:  H R Macdonald; S A Glantz
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 7.552

3.  Preemption in tobacco control. Review of an emerging public health problem.

Authors:  M Siegel; J Carol; J Jordan; R Hobart; S Schoenmarklin; F DuMelle; P Fisher
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1997-09-10       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  The relationship of cigarette prices and no-smoking bylaws to the prevalence of smoking in Canada.

Authors:  T Stephens; L L Pederson; J J Koval; C Kim
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 9.308

5.  Cancer converts tobacco lobbyist: Victor L. Crawford goes on the record. Interview by Andrew A. Skolnick.

Authors:  V L Crawford
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1995-07-19       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  State tobacco lobbyists and organizations in the United States: crossed lines.

Authors:  A O Goldstein; N S Bearman
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1996-08       Impact factor: 9.308

7.  The defeat of Philip Morris' 'California Uniform Tobacco Control Act'.

Authors:  H Macdonald; S Aguinaga; S A Glantz
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1997-12       Impact factor: 9.308

8.  California's tobacco tax initiative: the development and passage of Proposition 99.

Authors:  M P Traynor; S A Glantz
Journal:  J Health Polit Policy Law       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 2.265

9.  Are tobacco industry campaign contributions influencing state legislative behavior?

Authors:  F Monardi; S A Glantz
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 9.308

10.  Tobacco industry campaign contributions are affecting tobacco control policymaking in California.

Authors:  S A Glantz; M E Begay
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1994-10-19       Impact factor: 56.272

View more
  56 in total

1.  A comparison of US and Norwegian regulation of coumarin in tobacco products.

Authors:  M Givel
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 7.552

2.  Development of a model of the tobacco industry's interference with tobacco control programmes.

Authors:  W M K Trochim; F A Stillman; P I Clark; C L Schmitt
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 7.552

3.  Local smoke-free ordinances are passing in tobacco-growing states.

Authors:  Sarah Sullivan; Stanton A Glantz
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2010-09-23       Impact factor: 9.308

Review 4.  "A phony way to show sincerity, as we all well know": tobacco industry lobbying against tobacco control in Hong Kong.

Authors:  J Knight; S Chapman
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 7.552

5.  The creation of industry front groups: the tobacco industry and "get government off our back".

Authors:  Dorie E Apollonio; Lisa A Bero
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2007-01-31       Impact factor: 9.308

6.  Attitudes and beliefs about secondhand smoke and smoke-free policies in four countries: findings from the International Tobacco Control Four Country Survey.

Authors:  Andrew Hyland; Cheryl Higbee; Ron Borland; Mark Travers; Gerard Hastings; Geoffrey T Fong; K Michael Cummings
Journal:  Nicotine Tob Res       Date:  2009-05-19       Impact factor: 4.244

7.  Tobacco-control policies in tobacco-growing states: where tobacco was king.

Authors:  Amanda Fallin; Stanton A Glantz
Journal:  Milbank Q       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 4.911

8.  Economic and political influence on tobacco tax rates: a nationwide analysis of 31 years of state data.

Authors:  Shelley D Golden; Kurt M Ribisl; Krista M Perreira
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2013-12-12       Impact factor: 9.308

9.  Hedging their bets: tobacco and gambling industries work against smoke-free policies.

Authors:  L L Mandel; S A Glantz
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 7.552

10.  Public health foundations and the tobacco industry: lessons from Minnesota.

Authors:  J K Ibrahim; T H Tsoukalas; S A Glantz
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 7.552

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.