|
|
||||||||
Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco 94143-0124, USA.
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.
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
E. R. Gritz, L. Sarna, C. Dresler, and C. G. Healton Building a United Front: Aligning the Agendas for Tobacco Control, Lung Cancer Research, and Policy Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., May 1, 2007; 16(5): 859 - 863. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
W. J. Bartosch and G. C. Pope Local Enactment of Tobacco Control Policies in Massachusetts Am J Public Health, June 1, 2002; 92(6): 941 - 943. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C Mekemson and S A Glantz How the tobacco industry built its relationship with Hollywood Tob. Control, March 1, 2002; 11(90001): i81 - 91. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. V. Dearlove and S. A. Glantz Boards of Health as Venues for Clean Indoor Air Policy Making Am J Public Health, February 1, 2002; 92(2): 257 - 265. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. S Givel and S. A Glantz Tobacco lobby political influence on US state legislatures in the 1990s Tob. Control, June 1, 2001; 10(2): 124 - 134. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Magzamen, A. Charlesworth, and S. A Glantz Print media coverage of California's smokefree bar law Tob. Control, June 1, 2001; 10(2): 154 - 160. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. D. Balbach, M. P. Traynor, and S. A. Glantz The Implementation of California's Tobacco Tax Initiative: The Critical Role of Outsider Strategies in Protecting Proposition 99 Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law, August 1, 2000; 25(4): 689 - 716. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. K Goldman and S. A Glantz The passage and initial implementation of Oregon's Measure 44 Tob. Control, September 1, 1999; 8(3): 311 - 322. [Abstract] [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
S. A. Bialous and S. A Glantz Arizona's tobacco control initiative illustrates the need for continuing oversight by tobacco control advocates Tob. Control, June 1, 1999; 8(2): 141 - 151. [Abstract] [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
E. D Balbach and S. A Glantz Tobacco control advocates must demand high-quality media campaigns: the California experience Tob. Control, December 1, 1998; 7(4): 397 - 408. [Abstract] [Full Text] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |