Abstract
OBJECTIVE—To prepare a history of the passage and early implementation of Ballot Measure 44, "An Act to Support the Oregon Health Plan", and tobacco control policymaking in Oregon. Measure 44 raised cigarette taxes in Oregon by US$0.30 per pack, and dedicated 10% of the revenues to tobacco control. METHODS—Data were gathered from interviews with members of the Committee to Support the Oregon Health Plan, Measure 44's campaign committee, as well as with state and local officials, and tobacco control advocates. Additional information was obtained from public documents, internal memoranda, and news reports. RESULTS—Although the tobacco industry outspent Measure 44's supporters 7 to 1, the initiative passed with 56% of the vote. Even before the election, tobacco control advocates were working to develop an implementation plan for the tobacco control programme. They mounted a successful lobbying campaign to see that the legislature did not divert tobacco control funds to other uses. They also stopped industry efforts to limit the scope of the programme. The one shortcoming of the tobacco control forces was not getting involved in planning the initiative early enough to influence the amount of money that was devoted to tobacco control. Although public health groups provided 37% of the money it cost to pass Measure 44, only 10% of revenues were devoted to tobacco control. CONCLUSIONS—Proactive planning and aggressive implementation can secure passage of tobacco control initiatives and see that the associated implementing legislation follows good public health practice. Keywords: advocacy; legislation; implementation; tobacco tax
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (159.3 KB).
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Aguinaga Bialous S., Glantz S. A. Arizona's tobacco control initiative illustrates the need for continuing oversight by tobacco control advocates. Tob Control. 1999 Summer;8(2):141–151. doi: 10.1136/tc.8.2.141. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Balbach E. D., Glantz S. A. Tobacco control advocates must demand high-quality media campaigns: the California experience. Tob Control. 1998 Winter;7(4):397–408. doi: 10.1136/tc.7.4.397. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Begay M. E., Glantz S. A. Question 1 tobacco education expenditures in Massachusetts, USA. Tob Control. 1997 Autumn;6(3):213–218. doi: 10.1136/tc.6.3.213. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Glantz S. A., Begay M. E. Tobacco industry campaign contributions are affecting tobacco control policymaking in California. JAMA. 1994 Oct 19;272(15):1176–1182. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Glantz S. A. Preventing tobacco use--the youth access trap. Am J Public Health. 1996 Feb;86(2):156–158. doi: 10.2105/ajph.86.2.156. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Heiser P. F., Begay M. E. The campaign to raise the tobacco tax in Massachusetts. Am J Public Health. 1997 Jun;87(6):968–973. doi: 10.2105/ajph.87.6.968. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Heiser P. F., Begay M. E. The campaign to raise the tobacco tax in Massachusetts. Am J Public Health. 1997 Jun;87(6):968–973. doi: 10.2105/ajph.87.6.968. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Koh H. K. An analysis of the successful 1992 Massachusetts tobacco tax initiative. Tob Control. 1996 Autumn;5(3):220–225. doi: 10.1136/tc.5.3.220. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Macdonald H., Aguinaga S., Glantz S. A. The defeat of Philip Morris' 'California Uniform Tobacco Control Act'. Am J Public Health. 1997 Dec;87(12):1989–1996. doi: 10.2105/ajph.87.12.1989. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Monardi F., Glantz S. A. Are tobacco industry campaign contributions influencing state legislative behavior? Am J Public Health. 1998 Jun;88(6):918–923. doi: 10.2105/ajph.88.6.918. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Moore J. M. Designing an effective statewide tobacco control program--Oregon. Cancer. 1998 Dec 15;83(12 Suppl ROBERT):2733–2735. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0142(19981215)83:12a+<2733::aid-cncr14>3.0.co;2-e. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- North R. Getting key players to work together and defending against diversion--Oregon. Cancer. 1998 Dec 15;83(12 Suppl ROBERT):2713–2716. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0142(19981215)83:12a+<2713::aid-cncr10>3.3.co;2-j. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Pierce-Lavin C., Geller A. C. Creating statewide tobacco control programs after passage of a tobacco tax: executive summary. Cancer. 1998 Dec 15;83(12 Suppl ROBERT):2659–2665. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0142(19981215)83:12a+<2659::aid-cncr1>3.0.co;2-e. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Traynor M. P., Begay M. E., Glantz S. A. New tobacco industry strategy to prevent local tobacco control. JAMA. 1993 Jul 28;270(4):479–486. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Traynor M. P., Glantz S. A. California's tobacco tax initiative: the development and passage of Proposition 99. J Health Polit Policy Law. 1996 Fall;21(3):543–585. doi: 10.1215/03616878-21-3-543. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]