State fails when it comes to tobacco control
It was 50 years ago on Jan. 11, 1964 that the surgeon general’s report on smoking and health said that cigarette smoking is, “a cause of lung cancer and laryngeal cancer in men, a probable cause of lung cancer in women and the most important cause of chronic bronchitis.”
Since the monumental report was released, improvements have been made both statewide and nationally to improve air quality, implement a tobacco tax, and aid in smoking cessation and tobacco prevention.
The American Lung Association has released a “State of Tobacco Control” report card on both the national and state level that awards a letter grade for each of these improvements.
“Pennsylvania does not score very high,” said Erica Usher, prevention supervisor at Fayette County Drug and Alcohol, Inc.
For the 2015 grade, Pennsylvania received an “F” for tobacco prevention, “C” for smoke free air, “F” for tobacco taxes and an “F” for access to cessation services.
The highest “grade” Pennsylvania received was a “C” for smoke free air.
The main issue connected to smoke free air was the exemptions that are made for the state’s current clean indoor air law.
The American Lung Association states, “About 70 percent of residents support extending the clean indoor air law to all restaurants, bars and casinos, according to a poll done by Franklin and Marshall College.”
One place that has made the move to offer an entirely smoke free environment is Uniontown Hospital. Starting March 1, the whole campus, which will include parking lots and outdoor locations such as sidewalks, will be entirely tobacco-free zones.
“We are making the move to a tobacco-free campus for multiple reasons, but our primary concern is always the health of our patients, their families, our staff and our community,” said Josh Krysak, coordinator of Community Relations at Uniontown Hospital. “This new policy, Stomping the Habit, which will take effect on March 1, is an extension of our no smoking policy and will have a healthful impact on our campus and hopefully provide a starting point for some to quit smoking or stop using chewing tobacco and stop this harmful habit.”
Pennsylvania scored even lower with an “F” when it comes to tobacco taxes.
A bill to increase the state tax on cigarettes and to establish an additional tax on other tobacco products was introduced to both the Senate and House, but died on the floor.
While a state tax increase on tobacco products was not approved, the city of Philadelphia was able to establish a local cigarette tax of $2 per pack, which would mean a combined cigarette tax of $3.60 per pack.
The state also received an “F” for both tobacco prevention and access to cessation services, two areas that Usher feels strongly about.
“The highest grade Pennsylvania got was a C. With tobacco prevention we are getting an F. It has nothing to do with the quality of the program we offer, there is just not enough of it,” she said.
According to Usher, one of the biggest problems for organizations such as Fayette County Drug and Alcohol Commission, Inc., is not receiving the total amount of money allocated to them as part of the Tobacco Master Settlement agreement (MSA).
The National Association of Attorney Generals Tobacco Project oversees the state’s implantation and defense of the agreement that was settled in 1998 against the four major tobacco companies (Philip Morris Inc., R.J. Reynolds, Brown & Williamson and Lorillard) for health care costs and other damages that were imposed on states due to cigarette smoking.
According to the American Lung Association, this past September the state of Pennsylvania failed to display burden of proof in showing that it was diligent in enforcing some of rules and regulations established by the MSA during 2003. Because of this, money that was allocated as part of the settlement was cut in half from $14.2 million to about $7 million which impacted some cessation programs.
“A certain percentage was to be geared toward tobacco prevention. Unfortunately, we like to ‘Rob Peter to pay Paul’ in Pennsylvania and that is where some of the money comes from,” said Usher. “Prevention is something that isn’t well funded. This is money that was specifically funded for that, and less then that is being used.”