Literature DB >> 9431289

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

H Macdonald1, S Aguinaga, S A Glantz.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This paper describes the strategies used by Philip Morris and other tobacco companies to promote a California initiative (Proposition 188) preempting local control of tobacco and those used by public health groups to defeat the initiative.
METHODS: Interviews with key informants were conducted, and the written record was reviewed.
RESULTS: Tobacco companies nearly succeeded in passing Proposition 188 by presenting it as a pro-health measure that would prevent children from obtaining cigarettes and provide protection against secondhand smoke. Public health groups defeated it by highlighting tobacco industry backing. A private charitable foundation also played an innovative role by financing a non-partisan public education campaign.
CONCLUSIONS: Public health forces must be alert to sophisticated efforts by the tobacco industry to enact preemptive state legislation by making it look like tobacco control legislation. The coalition structure that emerged in the "No on 188" campaign represents an effective model for future tobacco control activities. The new role of charitable foundations defined in the Proposition 188 campaign can be used in other public health issues.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9431289      PMCID: PMC1381242          DOI: 10.2105/ajph.87.12.1989

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Public Health        ISSN: 0090-0036            Impact factor:   9.308


  22 in total

1.  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

2.  The ledger of tobacco control.

Authors:  S A Glantz
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1996-09-18       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Proposition P: anatomy of a nonsmokers' rights ordinance.

Authors:  P Hanauer
Journal:  N Y State J Med       Date:  1985-07

4.  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

5.  The status of local smoking regulations in North Carolina following a state preemption bill.

Authors:  E Conlisk; M Siegel; E Lengerich; W Mac Kenzie; S Malek; M Eriksen
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1995-03-08       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  Judge rules diversion of antismoking money illegal, victory for California Tobacco Control Program.

Authors:  A A Skolnick
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1995-02-22       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  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

8.  Epidemiology of failed tobacco control legislation.

Authors:  S Moore; S M Wolfe; D Lindes; C E Douglas
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1994-10-19       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  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

10.  Tobacco industry smokers' rights publications: a content analysis.

Authors:  M T Cardador; A R Hazan; S A Glantz
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1995-09       Impact factor: 9.308

View more
  17 in total

Review 1.  The passage and initial implementation of Oregon's Measure 44.

Authors:  L K Goldman; S A Glantz
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 7.552

2.  The new battleground: California's experience with smoke-free bars.

Authors:  S Magzamen; S A Glantz
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 9.308

Review 3.  Boards of Health as venues for clean indoor air policy making.

Authors:  Joanna V Dearlove; Stanton A Glantz
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 9.308

4.  Print media coverage of California's smokefree bar law.

Authors:  S Magzamen; A Charlesworth; S A Glantz
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 7.552

5.  Local enactment of tobacco control policies in Massachusetts.

Authors:  William J Bartosch; Gregory C Pope
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 9.308

Review 6.  A review of model public health laws.

Authors:  DeKeely Hartsfield; Anthony D Moulton; Karen L McKie
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2007-04-05       Impact factor: 9.308

7.  Looking Back and Ahead: The Food and Drug Administration's Regulation of the Tobacco Industry and Next-Generation Products.

Authors:  M Jacob
Journal:  Adv Dent Res       Date:  2019-10

8.  When tobacco targets direct democracy.

Authors:  Elizabeth Laposata; Allison P Kennedy; Stanton A Glantz
Journal:  J Health Polit Policy Law       Date:  2014-03-06       Impact factor: 2.265

9.  Tobacco control advocates must demand high-quality media campaigns: the California experience.

Authors:  E D Balbach; S A Glantz
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  1998       Impact factor: 7.552

10.  Smokefree environments in Latin America: on the road to real change?

Authors:  Ernesto M Sebrié; Verónica Schoj; Stanton A Glantz
Journal:  Prev Control       Date:  2008-01-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.