OBJECTIVES: We examined the pattern of the passage of smoking laws across venues (government and private workplaces, restaurants, bars) and by strength (no law to 100% smoke-free). METHODS: We conducted transition analyses of local and state smoking restrictions passed between 1970 and 2009, with data from the Americans for Nonsmokers' Rights Ordinance Database. RESULTS: Each decade, more laws were enacted, from 18 passed in the 1970s to 3172 in the first decade of this century, when 91% of existing state laws were passed. Most laws passed took states and localities from no law to some level of smoking restriction, and most new local (77%; 5148/6648) and state (73%; 115/158) laws passed in the study period did not change strength. CONCLUSIONS: Because these laws are "sticky"-once a law has passed, strength of the law and venues covered do not change often-policymakers and advocates should focus on passing strong laws the first time, rather than settling for less comprehensive laws with the hope of improving them in the future.
OBJECTIVES: We examined the pattern of the passage of smoking laws across venues (government and private workplaces, restaurants, bars) and by strength (no law to 100% smoke-free). METHODS: We conducted transition analyses of local and state smoking restrictions passed between 1970 and 2009, with data from the Americans for Nonsmokers' Rights Ordinance Database. RESULTS: Each decade, more laws were enacted, from 18 passed in the 1970s to 3172 in the first decade of this century, when 91% of existing state laws were passed. Most laws passed took states and localities from no law to some level of smoking restriction, and most new local (77%; 5148/6648) and state (73%; 115/158) laws passed in the study period did not change strength. CONCLUSIONS: Because these laws are "sticky"-once a law has passed, strength of the law and venues covered do not change often-policymakers and advocates should focus on passing strong laws the first time, rather than settling for less comprehensive laws with the hope of improving them in the future.
Authors: Hao Tang; David W Cowling; Jon C Lloyd; Todd Rogers; Kristi L Koumjian; Colleen M Stevens; Dileep G Bal Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2003-04 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Mariaelena Gonzalez; Ashley Sanders-Jackson; Anna V Song; Kai-wen Cheng; Stanton A Glantz Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2013-03-14 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Jidong Huang; Brian A King; Stephen D Babb; Xin Xu; Cynthia Hallett; Maggie Hopkins Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2015-07-16 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Amy Y Hafez; Mariaelena Gonzalez; Margarete C Kulik; Maya Vijayaraghavan; Stanton A Glantz Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2019-09-19 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Marie-Claude Tremblay; Pierre Pluye; Genevieve Gore; Vera Granikov; Kristian B Filion; Mark J Eisenberg Journal: BMC Med Date: 2015-06-03 Impact factor: 8.775