02/11/2015 01:30 PM Senate HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB1 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | SB 1 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES STANDING COMMITTEE
February 11, 2015
1:32 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Bert Stedman, Chair
Senator Cathy Giessel, Vice Chair
Senator Pete Kelly
Senator Bill Stoltze
Senator Johnny Ellis
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE FOR SENATE BILL NO. 1
"An Act prohibiting smoking in certain places; relating to
education on the smoking prohibition; and providing for an
effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: SB 1
SHORT TITLE: REGULATION OF SMOKING
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) MICCICHE
01/21/15 (S) PREFILE RELEASED 1/9/15
01/21/15 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/21/15 (S) HSS, STA, FIN
01/30/15 (S) SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE INTRODUCED-REFERRALS
01/30/15 (S) HSS, STA, FIN
02/11/15 (S) HSS AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
WITNESS REGISTER
SENATOR PETER MICCICHE
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of SB 1.
CHUCK KOPP, Staff
Senator Peter Micciche
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented information related to SB 1 on
behalf of the sponsor.
GUY BUTLER, Chief Medical Officer
Division of Public Health
Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented information on SB 1.
JILL LEWIS, Deputy Director
Division of Public Health
Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented information on SB 1.
JERRY TIMMONS, Representing himself
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Shared his story about lung cancer from
second-hand smoke and testified in support of SB 1.
KATHIE WASSERMAN, Executive Director
Alaska Municipal League
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against SB 1.
MELISSA WANAMAKER, Development Director
American Heart Association
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 1.
KRISTIN LUBY, Business Development Director
American Heart Association
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 1.
JACK DUCKWORTH, Representing himself
Ketchikan, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 1.
JAMIE MORGAN, Government Regulations
American Heart Association
Sacramento, CA
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 1.
JACKSON BLACKWELL, Student
Soldotna, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 1.
MEGAN SILTA, Student
Soldotna, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 1.
CHRYSTAL SCHOENROCK, Bar Owner
4Lands Bar
Nikiski, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to SB 1.
MELISSA MUDD, Representing herself
Palmer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 1.
GUY CARROLL, Representing himself
Palmer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to SB 1.
AUDREY A. BROWN, Representing herself
Delta Junction, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 1.
DEAN GUSTAFSON, Representing himself
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 1.
CARMEN LUNDE, Director
Kodiak Alaska Cabaret, Hotel, Restaurant, and Retailers
Association (CHARR)
Kodiak, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to SB 1.
ISAAC HOWELL, Vape shop owner
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to SB 1.
PATTY GINSBURG, Representing herself
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 1.
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:32:30 PM
CHAIR BERT STEDMAN called the Senate Health and Social Services
Standing Committee meeting to order at 1:32 p.m. Present at the
call to order were Senators Ellis, Stoltz, Kelly, Giessel, and
Chair Stedman.
SB 1-REGULATION OF SMOKING
1:34:35 PM
CHAIR STEDMAN announced the consideration of SSSB 1 regarding
the regulation of smoking. It is the first hearing on the bill.
SENATOR PETER MICCICHE, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor of SB
1, introduced the bill. He said he hoped to save lives and
reduce health care costs with SB 1. He read from the following
sponsor statement:
SSSB 1 seeks to safeguard working Alaskans and their
children from the adverse health effects of secondhand
smoke by providing a statewide smoke-free workplace
law for businesses and public places. As a
conservative Alaskan, I actively support a philosophy
that works to limit and reduce the role of government
in our daily lives. I believe Thomas Jefferson got it
right when he said, "Legitimate powers of government
extend to such acts only as are injurious to others."
In this case, I believe that both the right to breathe
smoke-free air and the significant, documented public
health risks of secondhand smoke exposure compel us to
view the protection of Alaska's labor force and their
families as an appropriate governmental
responsibility.
Similar comparisons include the government role in
establishing speed limits, seat belt laws, motor
vehicle design safety improvements, electrical codes,
pipeline safety laws and agency responsibilities
ensuring industrial employee safety regulations. There
are places in our society where regulation is simply
the right thing to do and that is largely why we are
here today. As judicial philosopher Zechariah Chafee
said in the Harvard Law Review in 1919, "Your right to
swing your arm ends just where the other man's nose
begins."
SSSB 1 helps to protect the rights of Alaskans who
choose not to smoke. Current law prohibits smoking in
the workplace in many areas of the state, as well as
in healthcare facilities, schools, childcare
facilities and public meeting rooms in government
buildings. Over one-half of the population of Alaska,
including those in Bethel, Anchorage, Juneau, Barrow,
Dillingham, Haines, Skagway, Petersburg, Klawock,
Nome, Unalaska, and Palmer, are currently living under
smoke-free laws similar to SSSB 1. These laws are
well-established and strongly supported by citizens
and businesses. For Alaskans residing in the remaining
areas of the state, SSSB 1 offers a uniformly applied
safeguard from secondhand smoke that is currently not
available.
Why is a conservative willing to take on this issue?
The reason is simply to protect the rights of the non-
smoker, save lives and reduce the staggering health
costs of secondhand exposure to tobacco use. Many of
these costs are borne by government at great expense
to taxpayers. This critical public health issue is why
we are here.
The annual economic loss to Alaskans because of
secondhand smoke is estimated to be in the millions of
dollars, with an estimated 60 lives lost each year.
The number of primary smoke fatalities is much higher.
Nationally, exposure to secondhand smoke kills more
than 41,000 adult non-smokers from coronary heart
disease and lung cancer each year. This is more than
four times the DUI fatalities each year in the U.S.
While the DUI laws are rightfully stringent, the
response to stop the enormous loss of life to tobacco
smoke inhalation has been comparatively lax.
Many Alaskan families, including mine, continue to be
adversely affected. My children prematurely lost their
grandfather and I lost my father, Peter Frank
Micciche, in November of 2013. He made his choice to
smoke. This is not about smokers' choice to smoke. His
choice to smoke in our home, gave three of our four
siblings respiratory problems.
SSSB 1 does not remove the right of the smoker to
choose to smoke. Rather, it limits a smoker's ability
to adversely affect the health of Alaska's non-smoking
employees. In other words, the bill simply asks
smokers to "take it outside" in an effort to protect
Alaskan employees.
More than eight hundred Alaskan businesses and
organizations representing all regions of the state
have already signed on in support of a statewide
smoke-free workplace law. There are also several
hundred letters of opposition, with all opposing the
inclusion of electronic cigarettes. They do not oppose
the basic premise of the bill - protecting Alaskans
from secondhand smoke.
I believe that there are many well-meaning
governmental processes that are simply examples of the
lack of common sense in many of our laws. Right now we
are dealing with one called "positive train control."
We are about to spend $160 million in the state of
Alaska - billions across the U.S. - for a law that
will protect, on average, six Americans a year. At the
same time that we have something called OSHA, our
federal government through the power of the lobbyist,
has denied dealing with the effects of secondhand
smoke.
Through SSSB 1, we believe it is time to have this
discussion. I urge fellow members to join me in
protecting the health of innocent, non-smoking
Alaskans by supporting this bill.
SSSB 1 reflects my core belief in the self-evident
truth espoused in our Declaration of Independence, a
desire to conserve life, to protect our liberty to be
free of secondhand smoke related to lung and heart
disease, and enjoy the pursuit of happiness free of
this public health risk. This bill is not heavy handed
and comes with no imposing enforcement action. All
this bill does is asks smokers to "take it outside"
out of respect for their neighbor's right to breathe
clean air.
1:42:43 PM
CHUCK KOPP, Staff, Senator Peter Micciche, Alaska State
Legislature, presented information related to SB 1 on behalf of
the sponsor. He said SSSB 1 is about healthier citizens,
spending less on health care, and addressing work places and
public places. The bill offers a uniformly applied safeguard
from secondhand smoke currently not available to the public. A
2012 Dittman poll shows 82 percent of Alaskans supported a
statewide smoke-free indoor air law that includes restaurants
and bars. Over 862 resolutions of support from organizations and
business in Alaska are in members' packets, and over 1,000
supporters have been contacted so far. There is conclusive,
economic proof that smoke-free air laws do not have adverse
economic costs for restaurants and bars. He referred to the 2007
Cancer Journal for Clinicians and the ISER report from 2014 as
evidence of no adverse economic impacts.
1:44:28 PM
CHAIR STEDMAN commented about the documentation of the
presentation.
MR. KOPP provided the sources of the information.
He continued to say that SSSB 1 does not ban smoking or e-
cigarettes. It does provide a statewide smoking prohibition in
enclosed public spaces, public transportation vehicles and
facilities, places of employment, government owned or operated
places, buildings or residences used to provide paid child care,
health facilities, Alaska pioneer homes and veterans' homes,
vehicles that are places of employment, and certain marine
vessels.
Included are school grounds or public parks for children, outdoor
arena seating, and areas within certain distances from entrances,
open windows, and air intake vents of places where smoking is
prohibited.
The bill requires the Department of Department of Health and
Social Services (DHSS) Commissioner to adopt regulations for
filing, processing, and investigating reports of violations of
the smoking prohibition, which may include filing complaints and
issuing citations.
1:46:23 PM
He related DHSS's role in enforcing and implementing the
statewide smoking prohibition is to provide education and
respond to complaints.
The bill allows the DHSS Commissioner to delegate to other
agencies any of the responsibilities to enforce the bill's
provisions. The bill also requires a person who is in charge of
a place where smoking is prohibited to display specific signage.
Sec. 18.35.306(c) requires the department to furnish signs to
any person who requests them.
The Division of Public Health's Tobacco Prevention and Control
Program would be responsible for developing public education
materials regarding the requirements within the law and for
educating business owners, grantees, and the public on the
specifics of the law.
1:48:36 PM
MR. KOPP explained that the bill's foundational source document
is the 2014 Surgeon General Report. Over the past 50 years, 31
Surgeon General's reports have utilized the best available
evidence to expand our understanding of the health consequences
of smoking and involuntary exposure to tobacco smoke.
He said we have all heard the staggering statistics about the
repercussions of exposure to secondhand smoke. The recent data
on public health impacts from secondhand smoke suggest a public
health emergency.
He focused on the premature deaths caused by smoking and
exposure to secondhand smoke for 1965 to 2014. There were
263,000 cases of lung cancers caused by exposure to secondhand
smoke and 2,194,000 cases of heart disease. That is over 2.5
million nonsmokers who died from secondhand smoke and over 20
million Americans total who died because of smoking. More than
100,000 babies died from sudden infant syndrome and respiratory
arrest.
He described what has been learned in the last 50 years
regarding smoking. Smoking and passive smoking causes disease in
nearly every organ. Secondhand smoke kills nearly 41,000
nonsmokers every year, which is four times the number of DUI
fatalities in 2013.
He shared the known risks that are causally linked to secondhand
smoke exposure for adults and children. Stroke is the most
recent addition from the Surgeon General's Office.
The annual number of deaths attributable to smoking and exposure
to secondhand smoke is now approaching 500,000. Exposure to
secondhand smoke has an immediate (within 30 minutes) adverse
impact on the cardiovascular system, damaging blood vessels,
making blood more likely to clot, and increasing the risks for
heart attack and stroke. There is no safe level of secondhand
exposure and it is now causally associated with a 20 percent to
30 percent increased risk for stroke.
The national cost is $5.6 billion (in 2006) for lost
productivity due to exposure to secondhand smoke. Alaska cost is
60 deaths and more than $1,000,000 per year based on estimates
of the American Cancer Society.
The evidence is sufficient to infer a causal relationship
between the implementation of a smoke-free law or policy and a
reduction in coronary events among people younger than 65 years
of age. This is a question of rights - the choice to smoke
versus the need to breathe. A clean indoor air policy does not
prohibit smoking, it only requires that those who choose to
smoke do so in a manner that does not threaten or harm others.
1:50:51 PM
MR. KOPP discussed e-cigarettes, which unlike traditional
cigarettes, are generally battery-operated and use an atomizer
to heat liquid from a cartridge until it becomes a chemical-
filled aerosol. The aerosol exhaled contains nicotine, ultra-
fine metal particles, volatile organic compounds and other
carcinogenic toxins. There are almost 470 different brands of e-
cigarettes on the market today, including 7,700 flavors. One
study found e-cigarette aerosol that contained hazardous nickel
and chromium at four times the level they appear in traditional
cigarette smoke.
He added that the primary issue with the numbers is the
profusion of brands, combined with the strong appeal to the
youth market, and a maturing science and no FDA regulation or
quality control currently. Most e-cigarettes are made in China
and some are known to have toxics in the aerosol.
1:52:30 PM
He said, according to Alaska state law, it is illegal to sell or
give any product containing nicotine to anyone under 19 years
old (AS 11.76.109). Because e-cigarette retailers do not need a
sales license endorsement to sell their products like tobacco
retailers do, there is no program of compliance checks for youth
sales in place for these retailers.
There are two proven interventions. One is a comprehensive
Tobacco Prevention and Control Program - AS 44.29.020(a)(14)(C)
establishes DHSS responsibility for a comprehensive smoking
education, tobacco use prevention, and tobacco control program.
The department's program must promote cessation among tobacco
users and educate the public about the lethal effects of
exposure to secondhand smoke. The second is smoke-free workplace
and public places laws.
He continued to say the implementation of comprehensive clean
indoor air laws has been shown to significantly reduce the
incidence of heart attacks (acute myocardial infarction or
"AMI"). Separating smokers from non-smokers, air cleaning
technologies and ventilation systems cannot effectively and
reliably protect public health. In addition to eliminating
exposure of nonsmokers to secondhand smoke, smoke-free workplace
laws also help to reduce tobacco use among smokers. Clean indoor
air laws recognize that while an individual smoker or e-
cigarette user may elect to harm themselves, they should not be
allowed to injure others while doing so. "The right of smokers
to smoke ends where their behavior affects the health and well-
being of others; furthermore, it is the smokers' responsibility
to ensure that they do not expose nonsmokers…."
1:53:45 PM
MR. KOPP turned to places that have smoke-free laws in Alaska.
Only half of Alaska's population is protected by a local law
from secondhand smoke at work. The remaining large population
boroughs do not have the legal health powers to enact local
smoke-free laws.
He summarized that Alaskans support smoke-free workplaces. He
said 82 percent agree that, "All Alaskan workers should be
protected from secondhand smoke in the workplace." Support for
smoke-free indoor workplaces includes a strong majority of
current smokers in Alaska. Alaskan support for smoke-free indoor
workplaces is high throughout all regions of the state, ranging
from 75 percent to 84 percent.
1:54:38 PM
SENATOR STOLTZE opined that total support for the bill should
include support of SB 209 from the previous year.
CHAIR STEDMAN said that would be clarified. He noted there would
be a section analysis of the bill.
SENATOR MICCICHE clarified that the letters of support are from
this year. Many of the business letters are from the last
version of the bill.
1:56:23 PM
MR. KOPP described Section 1 that creates new Article 4,
Prohibition of Smoking in Certain Places, within AS 18.35
describing where smoking is prohibited or regulated. He read the
list of prohibited places: page 1, lines 6-14 & page 2, lines 1-
3: (a) prohibits smoking in enclosed areas in public places,
including enclosed areas at an entertainment venue or sports
arena; in vehicles used for public transportation; at public
transportation facilities and depots; at a retail store or
shopping center; at places of public assembly on property owned
by the state or other unit of local government.
Page 2, lines 4-17: (b) prohibits smoking in certain enclosed
areas: office buildings, hotels, motels, restaurants, bars,
retail stores or common areas in apartment and multiple family
dwellings, a place of employment, a building or residence used
to provide paid childcare, at healthcare facilities, in a
vehicle that is a place of employment, at a public or private
educational facility; at a residence where paid adult care is
provided; at a residence in a healthcare facility, hotel, or
motel; and on a marine vessel operating as a shore-based
fisheries business under AS 43.75.
CHAIR STEDMAN requested a definition on page 2, line 11,
regarding a vehicle that is a place of employment, and line 16,
a marine vessel operating as a shore-based fisheries business.
MR. KOPP replied that a taxi and a truck are examples of a
vehicle that is a place of employment. A shore-based processor
is an example of a marine vessel operating as a shore-based
business.
He continued to explain that page 2, lines 18-31 prohibits
smoking outdoors in certain areas: at public or private schools;
state or municipal parks primarily designated as a place for
children to play; in seating areas for outdoor arenas, stadiums
and amphitheaters; within 50 feet of an entrance to a healthcare
facility, 20 feet of an entrance, open window, or heating or
ventilation system air intake vent at a place where smoking is
prohibited under this section; or within a reasonable distance
of an entrance, open window, or heating or ventilation air
intake on a marine vessel as determined by the vessel operator
in charge.
CHAIR STEDMAN asked if a skipper could designate what reasonable
means.
MR. KOPP said yes.
CHAIR STEDMAN requested information about how the enforcement of
that provision would take place and what responsibilities the
state may have.
2:00:11 PM
MR. KOPP continued the sectional analysis on page 3, lines 1-24:
(d) allows smoking at a retail tobacco or e-cigarette store
unless the owner or operator prohibits it, and defines "retail
tobacco or e-cigarette store".
Page 3, lines 25-30: (e) allows smoking in a vehicle that is a
place of employment used exclusively by one person; and on a
marine vessel when it is engaged in commercial fishing or sport
charter fishing.
Page 3, line 31 & page 4, lines 1-8: (f) allows smoking in a
private club that does not serve alcohol and is not a place of
employment, unless the club is hosting an event open to the
public; defines "private club", and; allows smoking in a private
residence that is not used for paid childcare.
Page 4, lines 9-16: (g) allows DHSS to adopt regulations
authorizing smoking in stand-alone shelters.
CHAIR STEDMAN referred to the wording "may adopt" on page 4,
line 9, and asked whether the department is, or is not, required
to adopt regulations.
MR. KOPP agreed that the language is discretionary.
MR. KOPP explained the Notice of Prohibition on page 4: lines
17-30: describes the obligations of employers, owners and
operators of places and vehicles where smoking is prohibited to
post "no smoking" signs within those places or vehicles and at
or near the entrances. This section also requires DHSS to
furnish signs upon request.
He continued with the duty of employers and building managers:
page 4, line 31 & page 5, lines 1-2: (a) an employer may not
permit an employee, customer or other person to smoke inside an
enclosed area at a place of employment.
Page 5, lines 3-5: (b) an owner, operator, or manager of a
building or other place where smoking is prohibited may not
provide ashtrays or other smoking accessories for use in that
building or place.
2:02:48 PM
MR. KOPP explained the powers and duties of the commissioner on
page 5, lines 6-16: requires the commissioner of health and
social services to administer and enforce the requirements of AS
18.35.301-18.35.399, and adopt necessary regulations to
implement these requirements; allows the commissioner to
delegate enforcement authority to another agency; and permits
peace officers to enforce the provisions of AS 18.35.301-
18.35.399.
CHAIR STEDMAN had questions about enforcement as it relates to
the commissioner and the department.
MR. KOPP said there is a tobacco compliance program in place
now.
MR. KOPP continued with public education on page 5, lines 17-26:
requires the Commissioner of Health and Social Services to
provide a program of education regarding AS 18.35.301 - 18.35.399
to employers, other affected parties and members of the public;
and that this program may be provided in combination with the
current comprehensive smoking education program established in
AS 44.29.020(a)(14) which seeks in part to "prevent youth
initiation of tobacco use, promote cessation among tobacco
users, and educate the public about the lethal effects of
exposure to secondhand smoke."
He read the sectional analysis for non-retaliation on page 5,
lines 27-31, and page 6, lines 1-3: prohibits employers from
discriminating against current or prospective employees because
the employee or applicant cooperated with or initiated
enforcement of a requirement in AS 18.35.301-18.35.399; and
similarly prohibits owners or operators of vehicles or other
places subject to AS 18.35.301 - 18.35.399 from retaliating
against customers or other members of the public due to their
cooperation with or initiation of enforcement of the
requirements in AS 18.35.301-18.35.399.
He explained conflicts with local requirement on page 6, lines
4-9: establishes a municipality may adopt and enforce local laws
with additional prohibitions on smoking or additional duties for
employers, owners, operators, and other persons related to
enforcement of such provisions.
He addressed violations and civil penalties on page 6, lines 10-
31, and page 7, lines 1-2: requires the Commissioner of Health
and Social Services to establish regulatory process for
investigating reported violations of AS 18.35.301, 18.35.306,
18.35.311, and 18.35.326; establishes that the commissioner,
upon determination that a violation has occurred, may file a
civil complaint in district court to enforce the requirements of
AS 18.35.301, 18.35.306, 18.35.311, and 18.35.326, or designate
an employee of the department to issue a citation for the
violation; establishes a maximum fine of $100 for violation of
AS 18.35.301; establishes a bail schedule for violations of AS
18.35.306 or 18.35.311 to be not more than $100 for a first
failure to comply, $200 for a second failure that occurs within
24 months of the first violation, and $500 for the third and
each consecutive failure to comply within 24 months of the
second violation; establishes a civil penalty of not more than
$1,000 for a violation of AS 18.35.326; and allows the
department to accept fine payments by mail.
2:06:11 PM
He explained citations and fines on page 7, lines 3-31, and page
8, lines 1-15: re-enacts existing law to allow a peace officer
or an employee designated by the commissioner to issue citations
for violations of the new law. A peace officer must personally
witness a violation of AS 18.35.301 to issue a citation, but
this is not the case for an employee designated by the
department to issue a citation. An employee of the department
may not arrest a person for a violation of AS 18.35.301,
18.35.306, 18.35.311, or 18.35.326. Fines for any violations
alleged in a citation are subject to the same fine schedule
described in Sec. 18.35.336. The Alaska Supreme Court will
establish bail amounts for violations of AS 18.35.301,
18.35.306, 18.35.311, and 18.35.326 that do not exceed the
maximum fines allowable under this section. Establishes
requirements for citation format, payment of citations, and
adjudication of citations.
He related the section on injunctions on page 8, lines 16-18:
re-enacts existing law to permit the commissioner or another
affected party to bring a civil action in superior court to
enjoin a violation of the law.
He highlighted definitions on page 8, lines 19-31, and page 9,
lines 1-30: Definitions are provided for business, commissioner,
department, e-cigarette, employee, employer, enclosed area,
health care facility, place of employment, public place, and
smoking.
He concluded that Section 2 repeals existing statues regulating
smoking in public facilities. Section 3 amends the uncodifled
law and clarifies that the new provisions of this bill apply to
violations or failures to comply that occur on or after the
effective date of Section 1 of the bill. Section 4 amends the
uncodified law by adding a new section that permits the
Department of Health and Social Services to adopt regulations to
implement Section 1 of the bill. Regulations take effect under
AS 44.62 (Administrative Procedure Act) cannot take effect
before the effective date of Section 1 of the bill. Section 5
provides that Section 4 of the bill takes effect immediately
under AS 01.10.070(c). Section 6 provides that, with the
exception of Section 5, the rest of the bill will be effective
on October 1, 2015.
SENATOR STOLTZE noted DEC is the implementer and enforcer of the
smoking statutes. He said he is opposed to giving DHSS
enforcement power of a toxic pollutant.
2:09:59 PM
SENATOR MICCICHE added Mr. Timmons to public testimony.
2:10:28 PM
JAY BUTLER, Chief Medical Officer, Division of Public Health,
Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS), introduced
himself and Deputy Director Jill Lewis.
MR. BUTLER noted an increase in the body of information related
to the health effects of secondhand smoke. Some of the outcomes
most highly related to secondhand smoke are sudden infant death
syndrome, respiratory infection, middle ear infections, and
asthma attacks in children, and lung cancer, stroke, and
coronary artery disease in adults. There has been significant
progress in reducing the rates of tobacco smoking in Alaska.
Nationally, there have been downward trends in lung cancer
rates. However, exposure of secondhand smoke continues to occur,
especially in some job situations. He added that a national
sample found that 40 percent of children have metabolites of
nicotine in their bloodstream as a marker of exposure to
secondhand smoke. It is an issue that is important to employee
health, child health, and the reduction of health care costs.
CHAIR STEDMAN asked about e-cigarettes.
MR. BUTLER replied that e-cigarettes is an area where more
information is needed. There is a great deal of uncertainty and
it should not be assumed that they are safe. He opined that they
should be addressed in the same manner as cigarettes.
REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE asked which is the greater concern,
obesity or tobacco health problems.
MR. BUTLER said it a close battle. Tobacco is easier to address
and to translate into reduced health care costs and better
health.
SENATOR KELLY asked which is worse, secondhand smoke or obesity.
MR. BUTLER said that is a hard question to answer. Regarding
secondhand smoke and obesity, he opined that obesity is the
greater health risk.
2:16:05 PM
CHAIR STEDMAN asked about enforcement of the regulations.
JILL LEWIS, Deputy Director, Division of Public Health,
Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS), said
enforcement would be handled by the Division of Behavior Health,
which currently enforces retail tobacco sales to minors. The
division envisions that enforcement would consist of a series of
letters, notices, and warnings that would minimize the cost of
investigations and the need for sanctions. This method has been
successful in other jurisdictions with similar laws.
CHAIR STEDMAN pointed out that the state is trying to shrink
departments due to budgetary constraints. He wondered if this
responsibility is an expansion of the division.
MS. LEWIS said it was passive enforcement and could be absorbed
by the division.
CHAIR STEDMAN asked how enforcement would work.
MS. LEWIS explained that there would be an 800 number for people
to call to make a complaint, followed by a letter of warning
from the Tobacco Enforcement Team, and then a warning and
continuing escalation, if necessary. At the same time, the
division has the role of education with grantees throughout the
state working on reducing tobacco use.
CHAIR STEDMAN asked if the division wants the additional duties
or would they be better done by another department.
MS. LEWIS replied that enforcement is not a core function of the
division, but it could be absorbed.
2:20:32 PM
SENATOR GIESSEL referred to page 7 of the bill where it mentions
a peace officer citation if the infraction happens in the
officer's presence. She assumed that law enforcement is also
involved.
MS. LEWIS said it is involved. Under the division's more passive
type of enforcement, if a citation is needed, a law enforcement
officer would act on the division's behalf. The division's
Tobacco Enforcement Team currently has a close partnership with
local law enforcement.
SENATOR STOLTZE asked if the bill is specific to tobacco.
MR. BUTLER said it is, but he recommended that it address
marijuana, also. He noted the uncertainty with enforcement is
more complicated with e-cigarettes.
2:22:59 PM
SENATOR KELLY asked about the wording, "Nothing in this section
prohibits smoking at a private club that does not serve
alcoholic beverages ..." on page 4, line 3.
SENATOR MICCICHE explained that the bill attempts to match
Anchorage's ordinance.
MR. KOPP clarified that the key word is "serving" alcohol
because that would involve an employee being in the building.
The intent is to protect the employee.
SENATOR KELLY thought "alcohol" could be removed because
"serving" is the operating word. He suggested "a private club
that does not serve beverages."
He asked what the current provisions are for communities that
have already adopted a policy or could adopt one on their own.
SENATOR MICCICHE explained that many communities do not have the
power to regulate smoking. The previous version of the bill had
an opt-out provision for those who could.
CHAIR STEDMAN noted that several communities have ordinances on
their books. He asked why the state is dictating to
municipalities.
SENATOR MICCICHE clarified that many areas of the state, such as
unincorporated communities, do not have the power to regulate
smoking and the bill protects them. Half the population in the
state falls into this category.
CHAIR STEDMAN requested information on the classes of
communities this would affect.
2:27:49 PM
SENATOR GIESSEL asked if the bill would prohibit smoking in
American Legion Clubs, which serve alcohol. She asked if Senator
Micciche has consulted any of those clubs.
SENATOR MICCICHE said he has. Some veterans enjoy the smoking;
some are against smoking. Many are supportive, but don't want to
be public about it. Younger soldiers are avoiding clubs because
they are not smoke free and they don't want to bring their
families into that environment.
SENATOR STOLTZE asked if VFW patrons can have a segregated
smoking area.
SENATOR MICCICHE said they cannot; they can have a separate
smoking shelter that may be heated.
2:30:13 PM
SENATOR KELLY said OSHA from DCCED enforces air quality in the
workplace. He wondered if smoking exceeds air quality standards
in the workplace and why OSHA couldn't enforce this law.
SENATOR MICCICHE replied that he has not measured air quality as
it relates to smoking. In Anchorage DHSS is responsible for
enforcing the smoke-free ordinances. He pointed out that at the
federal level there is opposition to this bill. It has been
difficult to classify tobacco smoke so that state or federal
OSHA would regulate it. He opined that tobacco smoke far exceeds
many other dangerous materials.
SENATOR KELLY was under the impression that secondhand smoke
dangers are overrated. He wanted to know the true facts.
CHAIR STEDMAN requested the sponsor to provide research on
secondhand smoke.
SENATOR MICCICHE said he would be happy to.
SENATOR KELLY said the junk science is what he doesn't want.
2:34:50 PM
SENATOR STOLTZE commented on the statement about corporate
funding of the opposition. He maintained that he has only seen
state-finance advertising campaigns. He requested an accounting
of promotional efforts.
SENATOR MICCICHE responded to questions from previous speakers.
He said smoking is defined on page 9, paragraph (11) as "smoking
means using an e-cigarette or other oral smoking device or
inhaling, exhaling, burning, or carrying a lighted or heated
cigar, cigarette, pipe or tobacco or plant product intended for
inhalation." He concluded that a person would not be able to
smoke marijuana inside.
He noted the number of citations in Anchorage is very small.
Enforcement is not heavy-handed; the bill is making a statement.
The bill has no comparison with regulating the size of a sugary
drink and it is worthy of respectful consideration.
2:37:20 PM
CHAIR STEDMAN opened public testimony.
JERRY TIMMONS, representing himself, noted he has submitted
written testimony, as well. He shared his story about lung
cancer from secondhand smoke as a non-smoker in a government
office. He testified in support of SB 1 in order to eliminate or
reduce the effects of secondhand smoke for people in the
workforce.
2:39:50 PM
KATHIE WASSERMAN, Executive Director, Alaska Municipal League,
testified against SB 1. She noted there are reasons 152
municipalities have not adopted smoking regulations. She
stressed that there is no way to have the law enforced in at
least 115 of those municipalities. She maintained that smoking
regulations should be decided by local control. She said DHSS
has difficulty dealing now with alcohol and child abuse issues
in rural communities.
2:41:48 PM
MELISSA WANAMAKER, Development Director, American Heart
Association, testified in support of SB 1. She shared statistics
about the dangers and costs smoking. She concluded that half of
Alaska is not able to make regulations regarding smoking.
KRISTIN LUBY, Business Development Director, American Heart
Association, testified in support of SB 1. She shared statistics
related to the dangers of secondhand smoke. Only half of Alaska
is covered by smoke-free workplace law.
2:44:02 PM
JACK DUCKWORTH, representing himself, testified in support of SB
1. He said that where he lives, Ketchikan, does not have smoke-
free regulations. He shared his story, as a non-smoker, of
getting cancer from secondhand smoke from his parents.
JAMIE MORGAN, Government Regulations, American Heart
Association, testified in support of SB 1. She concurred with
the other speakers from the American Heart Association.
JACKSON BLACKWELL, Student, testified in support of SB 1. He
opined that no one should have to be exposed to the hazards of
secondhand smoke, including e-cigarettes because they are not
regulated. He listed reasons why all smoking products should be
banned in public places.
2:47:50 PM
MEGAN SILTA, Student, testified in support of SB 1. She said she
believes that everyone has a right to a healthy body and lungs.
She said that students want a smoke-free environment in the work
force.
CHRYSTAL SCHOENROCK, Bar Owner, 4Lands Bar, testified in
opposition to SB 1. She said, as a small business owner, she
cannot afford to lose any business over smoking regulations. She
thinks this bill is interference by the government.
2:50:30 PM
MELISSA MUDD, representing herself, testified in support of SB
1. She maintained that the law will protect employees and
customers from the dangers of secondhand smoke, as well as save
money for taxpayers and indirect costs of smoking. She said many
Alaskans live in unincorporated or rural areas where they are
not able to adopt smoking ordinances.
GUY CARROLL, representing himself, testified in opposition to SB
1. He shared his attempts to quit smoking and the solution
vaping provided. He does not believe a statewide smoking ban is
necessary and business owners should have the right to decide
what works best for their customers and employees. He concluded
that vape shops should be allowed and vaping is not smoking.
2:54:07 PM
AUDREY A. BROWN, representing herself, testified in support of
SB 1 in light of all the science that shows the negative health
impacts caused by secondhand smoke and the negative economic
impacts.
DEAN GUSTAFSON, representing himself, testified in support of SB
1. He shared his family's personal story of exposure to
secondhand smoke.
2:55:56 PM
CARMEN LUNDE, Director, Kodiak Alaska Cabaret, Hotel,
Restaurant, and Retailers Association (CHARR), testified in
opposition to SB 1. She maintained that a just government should
not have the right to ban smoking on private property, tell
smokers to quit, or punish them if they don't. There are 18 non-
smoking businesses and 3 smoking businesses in Kodiak, which
gives everyone a choice. The choice to go non-smoking should be
made by the owners.
ISAAC HOWELL, Vape shop owner, testified in opposition to SB 1.
He described the high quality of products in his vape store. He
said he has no connections with big tobacco companies.
PATTY GINSBURG, representing herself, testified in support of SB
1. She shared her story as a lung cancer survivor. She
maintained that secondhand smoke causes lung cancer. She said
the bill will save lives and protect the rights of Alaskans to
breathe clean air on the job.
CHAIR STEDMAN held SSSB 1 in committee.
3:01:15 PM
There being nothing further to come before the committee,
adjourned the Senate Health and Social Services Standing
Committee at 3:01 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SSSB 1 Ver E.pdf |
SHSS 2/11/2015 1:30:00 PM |
SB 1 |
| SSSB 1 Sectional Analysis.pdf |
SHSS 2/11/2015 1:30:00 PM |
SB 1 |
| SSSB 1 Hearing Request.pdf |
SHSS 2/11/2015 1:30:00 PM |
SB 1 |
| SSSB 1 Explanation of Changes.pdf |
SHSS 2/11/2015 1:30:00 PM |
SB 1 |
| SSSB 1 Research Docs..pdf |
SHSS 2/11/2015 1:30:00 PM |
SB 1 |
| SSSB 1 E-Cigarettes.pdf |
SHSS 2/11/2015 1:30:00 PM |
SB 1 |
| SSSB 1 - AS 44.29.020 Lethal effects of SHS.pdf |
SHSS 2/11/2015 1:30:00 PM |
SB 1 |
| SSSB 1 - AK Public Opinion.pdf |
SHSS 2/11/2015 1:30:00 PM |
SB 1 |
| SSSB 1 - SoA Impacts.pdf |
SHSS 2/11/2015 1:30:00 PM |
SB 1 |
| SSSB 1 - News Coverage.pdf |
SHSS 2/11/2015 1:30:00 PM |
SB 1 |
| SB001-DCCED-ABC-02-06-2015.pdf |
SHSS 2/11/2015 1:30:00 PM |
SB 1 |
| SB001-DHSS-CDPHP-02-06-15.pdf |
SHSS 2/11/2015 1:30:00 PM |
SB 1 |
| SB001SS-ACS-TRC-02-06-15.pdf |
SHSS 2/11/2015 1:30:00 PM |
SB 1 |
| SB001SS-DOT-IASO-2-6-15.pdf |
SHSS 2/11/2015 1:30:00 PM |
SB 1 |
| SB001SS-DOT-MVO-2-6-15.pdf |
SHSS 2/11/2015 1:30:00 PM |
SB 1 |
| SB001SS-DOT-SEF-2-6-15.pdf |
SHSS 2/11/2015 1:30:00 PM |
SB 1 |
| SB001SS-DOT-TMS-2-6-15.pdf |
SHSS 2/11/2015 1:30:00 PM |
SB 1 |
| SSSB 1 - Secondhand Smoke and E-Cigs.pdf |
SHSS 2/11/2015 1:30:00 PM |
SB 1 |
| SSSB 1 - 2014 Surgeon General Report on Smoking exec summary.pdf |
SHSS 2/11/2015 1:30:00 PM |
SB 1 |
| SSSB 1 - States Map Smoke-Free.pdf |
SHSS 2/11/2015 1:30:00 PM |
SB 1 |
| SSSB 1 - Summary of Support and Opposition Letters as of 021015.PDF |
SHSS 2/11/2015 1:30:00 PM |
SB 1 |
| SSSB 1 Sponsor Statement Revised 021015.pdf |
SHSS 2/11/2015 1:30:00 PM |
SB 1 |
| 1 SSSB 1 - HSS PPT.ppt |
SHSS 2/11/2015 1:30:00 PM |
SB 1 |