It's time. The arguments against a comprehensive statewide smoking ban are hollow. Public health demands enactment.
an Editorial from www.jsonline.com Posted: Feb. 11, 2009
The state Legislature has shamefully dithered, and 37 Wisconsin communities now have some variation of a smoking ban. So, of course, bars and restaurants there have all boarded up their windows and gone bust.
Oh, right. They haven't.
In fact, some communities that were going to siphon off all the smokers' business after Madison went smoke free in 2005 have opted to copy their neighbor instead. That would be Monona, Middleton and Fitchburg.
This would seem to indicate that, far from reaping rewards from Madison's ban, these communities and their businesses saw some benefit from going smokeless.
State Sen. Fred Risser (D-Madison), among others, notes the trend as he readies another smoking ban bill. Rep. Jon Richards (D-Milwaukee), chairman of the health and health care committee, will introduce the Assembly version. They will introduce their bill at the end of the month.
Both houses should approve a comprehensive statewide ban. The governor has said he favors one.
One obstacle last year was Senate Majority Leader Russ Decker (D-Weston), who didn't let the bill come to the floor. The Senate's Democratic caucus should make it clear to their leader that being the obstacle again will be unacceptable.
It's time.
No doubt, the same resistance will surface from the tavern industry. Don't be distracted. This is not about the right of business owners to run their businesses as they please. It's about the right of employees to enjoy a safe work environment - not having to choose between a livelihood and health. And we should no more allow business owners to inflict smoke on employees and patrons than we would allow them to expose folks to asbestos or other harmful substances.
The bill, Risser and Richards say, will not allow exemptions and will impose a short transition period. This is as it should be.
The goal here should be public health, and there's scant room for compromise there.
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Monday, February 9, 2009
Illegal to serve your youth, yep ESPECIALLY your own child!
This message was received by Julia Sherman, WI Clearinghouse
Colleagues: I have been receiving numerous inquiries abut SB 30 and the changes that would occur if enacted.
In brief, SB 30 would allow make it illegal to serve alcohol to anyone younger than age 18 even if with a parent. Practically speaking, it establishes age 18 as the age at which parents could start purchasing alcohol for children on bars and taverns.
I realize many underage drinking prevention advocates are conflicted by this proposal. For some, this proposal eliminates the insanity of a parent legally purchasing alcohol for very young children. While for others it raises concerns about creating a toehold in Wisconsin for those who wish to roll back the 21 minimum legal drinking age (MLDA) such as the Amethyst Initiative.
I spoke to Justin Sargent, Senator Robson’s aide working on this bill, last week. He was unaware of the Amethyst Initiative, a national effort to reopen the minimum legal drinking age debate, and said that it was Senator Robson’s hope this bill would help change the drinking culture of Wisconsin.
State sanctioning of alcohol use at age 18 alcohol will impact the attitudes of older teens. Legal access for 18 year old teens has the potential to provide more opportunities for younger teens to obtain alcohol, both troubling possibilities.
The evidence in support of an age 21 MLDA is overwhelming:
States that lowered the minimum legal drinking age [between 1970 and 1976] experienced a 15% to 20% increase in alcohol related teen car crashes.[i]
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimates that the 21 minimum legal drinking age saves 1,000 lives each year on the highways. [ii]
When the MLDA is 21 underage youth drink less and continue to drink less into their early 20’s.[iii]
Medical research completed after the enactment of the age 21 MLDA support its importance. Medical research shows that brain development continues into the early 20’s. In addition, there is some question whether damage resulting from early alcohol use is reversible, testing of detoxified and comparable abstaining teens showed a significant reduction in the cognitive and analytical ability.[iv]
This bill is currently awaiting action in the Senate Committee on Children and Families and Workforce Development, chair
[i] 21 Turns 21, Driven, MADD 2004.
[ii] 21 Turns 21, Driven, MADD 2004.
[iii] O’Malley, PM , Wagenaar, A, Effects of minimum drinking age laws on alcohol use, related behaviors and traffic crash involvement among American youth: 1976-1987. Journal Studies of Alcohol, 1991.
4. National Academies of Science, Institute of Medicine, Reducing Underage Drinking: A Collective Responsibility. Richard J. Bonnie and Ellen O’Connell, editors. Washington, D.C.
Colleagues: I have been receiving numerous inquiries abut SB 30 and the changes that would occur if enacted.
In brief, SB 30 would allow make it illegal to serve alcohol to anyone younger than age 18 even if with a parent. Practically speaking, it establishes age 18 as the age at which parents could start purchasing alcohol for children on bars and taverns.
I realize many underage drinking prevention advocates are conflicted by this proposal. For some, this proposal eliminates the insanity of a parent legally purchasing alcohol for very young children. While for others it raises concerns about creating a toehold in Wisconsin for those who wish to roll back the 21 minimum legal drinking age (MLDA) such as the Amethyst Initiative.
I spoke to Justin Sargent, Senator Robson’s aide working on this bill, last week. He was unaware of the Amethyst Initiative, a national effort to reopen the minimum legal drinking age debate, and said that it was Senator Robson’s hope this bill would help change the drinking culture of Wisconsin.
State sanctioning of alcohol use at age 18 alcohol will impact the attitudes of older teens. Legal access for 18 year old teens has the potential to provide more opportunities for younger teens to obtain alcohol, both troubling possibilities.
The evidence in support of an age 21 MLDA is overwhelming:
States that lowered the minimum legal drinking age [between 1970 and 1976] experienced a 15% to 20% increase in alcohol related teen car crashes.[i]
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimates that the 21 minimum legal drinking age saves 1,000 lives each year on the highways. [ii]
When the MLDA is 21 underage youth drink less and continue to drink less into their early 20’s.[iii]
Medical research completed after the enactment of the age 21 MLDA support its importance. Medical research shows that brain development continues into the early 20’s. In addition, there is some question whether damage resulting from early alcohol use is reversible, testing of detoxified and comparable abstaining teens showed a significant reduction in the cognitive and analytical ability.[iv]
This bill is currently awaiting action in the Senate Committee on Children and Families and Workforce Development, chair
[i] 21 Turns 21, Driven, MADD 2004.
[ii] 21 Turns 21, Driven, MADD 2004.
[iii] O’Malley, PM , Wagenaar, A, Effects of minimum drinking age laws on alcohol use, related behaviors and traffic crash involvement among American youth: 1976-1987. Journal Studies of Alcohol, 1991.
4. National Academies of Science, Institute of Medicine, Reducing Underage Drinking: A Collective Responsibility. Richard J. Bonnie and Ellen O’Connell, editors. Washington, D.C.
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Minnesota's smoking ban remains popular
This info was broadcast on the Wisconsin Radio Network on Tuesday Feb 3. We are getting closer and closer to a smoke-free State!--emily
By Bob Hague
As Wisconsin lawmakers again prepare to grapple with the contentious issue of a statewide smoking ban, Minnesota's ban has been in place for nearly a year and a half.
Mike McGuire with the Minnesota chapter of the American Cancer Society says that state's Freedom to Breathe Act has been in place since October of 2007, and about 76% of state residents liked the law when it went into effect. Not that there hasn't been opposition. "We've seen a couple of amendments introduced to try to weaken the law," says McGuire. "Those amendments haven't really gone anywhere. There is a small but committed band of opponents who continue to advocate the repeal of the law."
McGuire says much of the opposition to a statewide ban in Wisconsin has a familiar ring. "Whether it's a local level ordinance or a statewide ordinance, there's always the prediction that the sky is going to fall," he says.
McGuire's advice to ban proponents in Wisconsin is to keep the focus on the health of workers who are being subjected to second hand smoke. Governor Jim Doyle once again called for a statewide ban, in his state of the state address.
By Bob Hague
As Wisconsin lawmakers again prepare to grapple with the contentious issue of a statewide smoking ban, Minnesota's ban has been in place for nearly a year and a half.
Mike McGuire with the Minnesota chapter of the American Cancer Society says that state's Freedom to Breathe Act has been in place since October of 2007, and about 76% of state residents liked the law when it went into effect. Not that there hasn't been opposition. "We've seen a couple of amendments introduced to try to weaken the law," says McGuire. "Those amendments haven't really gone anywhere. There is a small but committed band of opponents who continue to advocate the repeal of the law."
McGuire says much of the opposition to a statewide ban in Wisconsin has a familiar ring. "Whether it's a local level ordinance or a statewide ordinance, there's always the prediction that the sky is going to fall," he says.
McGuire's advice to ban proponents in Wisconsin is to keep the focus on the health of workers who are being subjected to second hand smoke. Governor Jim Doyle once again called for a statewide ban, in his state of the state address.
"U.S. Senate Acts to Protect Kids, Save Lives by Increasing Federal Tobacco Taxes"
Statement of Matthew L. Myers, President, Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids
WASHINGTON, DC – The U.S. Senate today delivered a tremendous victory for children’s health by voting to increase federal tobacco taxes, including a 61-cent increase in the cigarette tax, to fund reauthorization and expansion of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). This legislation will create a healthier future for millions of children both by reducing tobacco use – the number one cause of preventable death in America – and by expanding health care coverage for kids. We look forward to final enactment of this legislation by Congress and its signature into law by President Obama.
Increasing tobacco taxes is a proven strategy to reduce smoking and other tobacco use, especially among children. Studies show that every 10 percent increase in the price of cigarettes reduces youth smoking by seven percent and overall cigarette consumption by about four percent. A 61-cent increase in the federal cigarette tax will prevent nearly two million kids from starting to smoke, help more than one million adult smokers quit, prevent nearly 900,000 smoking-caused deaths and produce $44 billion in long-term health care savings by reducing tobacco-caused health care costs.
To maximize the health benefits from the tobacco tax increase, we urge the Congress to adopt the Senate bill’s approach to taxing so-called "little cigars," which are the same size as cigarettes but have a brown wrapper. The Senate bill would immediately increase the tax on little cigars to $1 per pack, the same rate as for cigarettes, while the House bill would phase in the increase over six years. Allowing a disparity in tax rates would create an incentive for some cigarettes to continue to evade taxes by masquerading as little cigars and make these products more appealing to kids because of the lower prices.
Higher tobacco taxes are a win-win-win solution for the country – a health win that will reduce tobacco use and save lives, a financial win that will raise revenue to help fund the SCHIP program and reduce tobacco-caused health care costs, and a political win that is popular with voters. Polling conducted for the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids found that more than two-thirds of all voters support a significant increase in the federal cigarette tax to provide health care coverage to uninsured children. This support is evident among virtually every political and demographic subgroup of voters across the country, with large majorities of Democrats, Republicans and Independents, men and women, and urban and rural voters supporting the cigarette tax to fund children’s health care.
Tobacco use kills more than 400,000 people in the United States and costs the nation more than $96 billion in health care bills each year. Currently, 20 percent of high school students smoke and more than 1,000 kids become new regular smokers every day.
We urge Congress to finalize this important legislation without delay. It will expand health care coverage for America’s children while helping to reduce tobacco use and save lives.
More information:
Fact sheet: Benefits from a 61-cent federal cigarette tax increase: www.tobaccofreekids.org/research/factsheets/pdf/0314.pdf
Other fact sheets on federal tobacco taxes:
www.tobaccofreekids.org/research/factsheets/index.php?CategoryID=11
WASHINGTON, DC – The U.S. Senate today delivered a tremendous victory for children’s health by voting to increase federal tobacco taxes, including a 61-cent increase in the cigarette tax, to fund reauthorization and expansion of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). This legislation will create a healthier future for millions of children both by reducing tobacco use – the number one cause of preventable death in America – and by expanding health care coverage for kids. We look forward to final enactment of this legislation by Congress and its signature into law by President Obama.
Increasing tobacco taxes is a proven strategy to reduce smoking and other tobacco use, especially among children. Studies show that every 10 percent increase in the price of cigarettes reduces youth smoking by seven percent and overall cigarette consumption by about four percent. A 61-cent increase in the federal cigarette tax will prevent nearly two million kids from starting to smoke, help more than one million adult smokers quit, prevent nearly 900,000 smoking-caused deaths and produce $44 billion in long-term health care savings by reducing tobacco-caused health care costs.
To maximize the health benefits from the tobacco tax increase, we urge the Congress to adopt the Senate bill’s approach to taxing so-called "little cigars," which are the same size as cigarettes but have a brown wrapper. The Senate bill would immediately increase the tax on little cigars to $1 per pack, the same rate as for cigarettes, while the House bill would phase in the increase over six years. Allowing a disparity in tax rates would create an incentive for some cigarettes to continue to evade taxes by masquerading as little cigars and make these products more appealing to kids because of the lower prices.
Higher tobacco taxes are a win-win-win solution for the country – a health win that will reduce tobacco use and save lives, a financial win that will raise revenue to help fund the SCHIP program and reduce tobacco-caused health care costs, and a political win that is popular with voters. Polling conducted for the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids found that more than two-thirds of all voters support a significant increase in the federal cigarette tax to provide health care coverage to uninsured children. This support is evident among virtually every political and demographic subgroup of voters across the country, with large majorities of Democrats, Republicans and Independents, men and women, and urban and rural voters supporting the cigarette tax to fund children’s health care.
Tobacco use kills more than 400,000 people in the United States and costs the nation more than $96 billion in health care bills each year. Currently, 20 percent of high school students smoke and more than 1,000 kids become new regular smokers every day.
We urge Congress to finalize this important legislation without delay. It will expand health care coverage for America’s children while helping to reduce tobacco use and save lives.
More information:
Fact sheet: Benefits from a 61-cent federal cigarette tax increase: www.tobaccofreekids.org/research/factsheets/pdf/0314.pdf
Other fact sheets on federal tobacco taxes:
www.tobaccofreekids.org/research/factsheets/index.php?CategoryID=11
Monday, February 2, 2009
New Legislation to be Introduced to Combat Drunk Driving
Madison, WI – Recognizing that solving the problem of drunk driving in Wisconsin is going to take a multifaceted, commonsense legislative approach, Senators Jim Sullivan (D-Wauwatosa), Jeff Plale (D-South Milwaukee), and John Lehman (D-Racine) today announced a comprehensive proposal that targets drunk drivers on numerous fronts in order to protect Wisconsin citizens.
"Drinking and driving is a crime that causes damage and destroys lives, and it’s a problem that won’t go away without an aggressive legislative intervention," said Sullivan.
"For the sake of your safety, we must pass tougher sanctions for repeat drunk drivers, expand treatment options, and increase the use of ignition interlock devices before any more lives are lost." Under the proposal, thousands of repeat offenders would be in jail or prison instead of behind the wheel.
The legislation promotes prevention and includes statewide expansion of the successful Winnebago County "Safe Streets" pilot program, which directs some offenders into alcohol treatment programs. The proposal also expands the use of Ignition Interlock Devices (IID), one of the tools that government has to prevent drunk drivers from getting behind the wheel."Far too many repeat drunk drivers are getting behind the wheel and endangering Wisconsin lives. This bill targets these repeat drunk drivers by making most third offenses and all fourth offenses felonies and by improving the IID program in our state," said Plale.
"It also gives our justice system new and improved tools to protect Wisconsin families." "There is broad agreement on the importance of revisiting our laws on drinking and driving. This bill takes a comprehensive approach to meet our shared goal of making Wisconsin roadways safer and provides a good means to enact needed changes," said Lehman.
The proposed legislation would:
Last session, Senator Sullivan successfully passed legislation that provided incremental penalties for drunk drivers. This package further strengthens the tools and options available to Wisconsin’s law enforcement and court systems.
"Drinking and driving is a crime that causes damage and destroys lives, and it’s a problem that won’t go away without an aggressive legislative intervention," said Sullivan.
"For the sake of your safety, we must pass tougher sanctions for repeat drunk drivers, expand treatment options, and increase the use of ignition interlock devices before any more lives are lost." Under the proposal, thousands of repeat offenders would be in jail or prison instead of behind the wheel.
The legislation promotes prevention and includes statewide expansion of the successful Winnebago County "Safe Streets" pilot program, which directs some offenders into alcohol treatment programs. The proposal also expands the use of Ignition Interlock Devices (IID), one of the tools that government has to prevent drunk drivers from getting behind the wheel."Far too many repeat drunk drivers are getting behind the wheel and endangering Wisconsin lives. This bill targets these repeat drunk drivers by making most third offenses and all fourth offenses felonies and by improving the IID program in our state," said Plale.
"It also gives our justice system new and improved tools to protect Wisconsin families." "There is broad agreement on the importance of revisiting our laws on drinking and driving. This bill takes a comprehensive approach to meet our shared goal of making Wisconsin roadways safer and provides a good means to enact needed changes," said Lehman.
The proposed legislation would:
- Make the third OWI offense within five years a felony
- Make all fourth OWI offenses a felony
- Close the 1st offense 08 fine loophole
- Expand Winnebago County’s successful "Safe Street" pilot program
- Require the Judicial Council to develop statewide sentencing guidelines for OWI offenses
- Mandate Ignition Interlock Devices (IIDs) or immobilization if second OWI offense is .16 or above and for all third offenses
- Prohibit IID contractors from cancelling an IID contract without an order from the court and provides penalties
Last session, Senator Sullivan successfully passed legislation that provided incremental penalties for drunk drivers. This package further strengthens the tools and options available to Wisconsin’s law enforcement and court systems.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)