Legislature(2017 - 2018)GRUENBERG 120
01/22/2018 01:00 PM House JUDICIARY
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB63 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | SB 63 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE
January 22, 2018
1:04 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Matt Claman, Chair
Representative Zach Fansler, Vice Chair
Representative Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins
Representative Gabrielle LeDoux
Representative David Eastman
Representative Chuck Kopp
Representative Lora Reinbold
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Charisse Millett (alternate)
Representative Louise Stutes (alternate)
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 63(FIN)
"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 63
SHORT TITLE: REGULATION OF SMOKING
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) MICCICHE
02/17/17 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/17/17 (S) HSS, FIN
03/01/17 (S) HSS AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
03/01/17 (S) Moved SB 63 Out of Committee
03/01/17 (S) MINUTE(HSS)
03/03/17 (S) HSS RPT 5DP
03/03/17 (S) DP: WILSON, BEGICH, VON IMHOF, GIESSEL,
MICCICHE
03/13/17 (S) FIN AT 9:00 AM SENATE FINANCE 532
03/13/17 (S) Heard & Held
03/13/17 (S) MINUTE(FIN)
03/20/17 (S) FIN AT 9:00 AM SENATE FINANCE 532
03/20/17 (S) Moved CSSB 63(FIN) Out of Committee
03/20/17 (S) MINUTE(FIN)
03/21/17 (S) FIN RPT CS 6DP 1NR SAME TITLE
03/21/17 (S) DP: HOFFMAN, MACKINNON, BISHOP, VON
IMHOF, OLSON, MICCICHE
03/21/17 (S) NR: DUNLEAVY
03/27/17 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
03/27/17 (S) VERSION: CSSB 63(FIN)
03/29/17 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/29/17 (H) CRA, JUD
04/13/17 (H) CRA AT 8:00 AM BARNES 124
04/13/17 (H) Heard & Held
04/13/17 (H) MINUTE(CRA)
04/18/17 (H) CRA AT 8:00 AM BARNES 124
04/18/17 (H) Heard & Held
04/18/17 (H) MINUTE(CRA)
04/25/17 (H) CRA AT 8:00 AM BARNES 124
04/25/17 (H) Heard & Held
04/25/17 (H) MINUTE(CRA)
04/27/17 (H) CRA AT 8:00 AM BARNES 124
04/27/17 (H) Moved HCS CSSB 63(CRA) Out of Committee
04/27/17 (H) MINUTE(CRA)
04/28/17 (H) CRA RPT HCS(CRA) 3DP 3NR 1AM
04/28/17 (H) DP: TALERICO, DRUMMOND, PARISH
04/28/17 (H) NR: WESTLAKE, SADDLER, RAUSCHER
04/28/17 (H) AM: FANSLER
01/22/18 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
WITNESS REGISTER
SENATOR PETER MICCICHE
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing of HCSCCSB 63(CRA),
presented the legislation as prime sponsor.
RACHEL HANKE, Staff
Senator Peter Micciche
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing of HCSCCSB 63(CRA),
offered a sectional analysis.
EMILY NEENON, Government Relations Director
American Cancer Society, Cancer Action Network
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing of HCS CSSB 64(CRA),
testified.
PATTY OWEN
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing of HCS SB 63(CRA),
offered support for the legislation.
JAYNE ANDREEN
Alaska Public Health Association
Douglas, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing of HCS SB 63(CRA),
offered support for the legislation.
CARMEN LUNDE
Kodiak, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing of HCS SB 63(CRA,
testified in opposition to the legislation.
BETTY MacTAVISH
Kodiak, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing of HCS SB 63(CRA),
testified.
GABRIELE LARRY
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing of HCS SB 63(CRA),
testified.
STEVEN GREENHUT, Western Region Director
R Street Institute
Sacramento, California
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing of HCS SB 63(CRA),
testified regarding vaping.
GREGORY CONLEY, President
American Vaping Association
Medford, New Jersey
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing of HCS SB 63(CRA),
testified regarding vaping.
JEFF STIRE, Senior Fellow
Consumer Choice Center
Washington, D.C.
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing of HCS SB 63(CRA),
testified regarding vaping.
JOSHUA SILAS
Soldotna, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing of HCS SB 63(CRA),
testified regarding vaping.
JOE DARNELL
State of Alaska Behavioral Health Tobacco Enforcement
Department of Health & Social Services
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing HCS SB 63(CRA) answered
questions.
JOSEPH YOURKOSKI
Nikiski, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing of HCS SB 63(CRA),
testified on behalf of the American Cancer Society Cancer Action
Network.
DANIEL PHUNG, Regional Representative
5 Pawns
Sacramento, California
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing of HCS SB 63(CRA),
testified.
JAMIE MORGAN, Senior Director
Advocacy and Policy Campaign
American Heart Association
Sacramento, California
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing of HCS SB 63(CRA),
testified in support of the legislation.
JAMES SQUYRES
Rural Deltana, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing of HCS SB 63(CRA),
offered opposition to the legislation.
DIANA REDWOOD
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing of HCS SB 63(CRA),
offered support for the legislation.
LARRY TAYLOR, JR.,
Ketchikan, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing of HCS SB 63(CRA),
offered support for the legislation.
KELLY LARSON
Willow, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing of HCS SB 63(CRA),
offered support for the legislation.
JENNY OLENDORFF
Palmer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing of HCS SB 63(CRA),
offered support for the legislation.
NOEL CROWLEY BELL
Palmer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing of HCS SB 63(CRA),
offered support for the legislation.
ELIZABETH RIPLEY
Mat-SU Health Foundation
Wasilla, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing of HCS SB 63(CRA),
offered support for the legislation.
BECKY STOPPA
Wasilla, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing of HCS CSSB 63(CRA),
offered support for the legislation.
SUSAN SMALLEY, Volunteer
American Cancan Society
Kenai, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing of HCS SB 63(CRA),
offered support for the legislation.
CHRYSTAL SHOENROCK, Owner
4 Lands Bar
Nikiski, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing of HCS SB 63(CRA),
testified.
JOHNA BEECH
Kenai, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing of HCS CSSB 63(CRA),
offered support for the legislation.
PAMELA HOWARD
Soldotna, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing of HCS SB 63(CRA),
offered support for the legislation.
PAMELA OLSON
Nikiski, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing of HCS SB 63(CRA),
offered support for the legislation.
BENJAMIN SCHMAUSS
Sitka, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing of HCS SB 63(CRA),
offered support for the legislation.
PENNY PALMQUIST
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing of HCS CSSB 63(CRA),
testified in support.
EDELTRAUD RODEWALD
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing of HCS CSSB 63(CRA),
testified.
GEORGE STEWART
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing of HCS SB 63(CRA),
offered support for the legislation.
WILLIAM HARRINGTON
Spenard, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing of HCS SB 63(CRA),
testified in support for the legislation.
MARG STONEKING, Executive Director
American Lung Association-Alaska
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing of HCS SB 63(CRA),
testified in support of the legislation.
KRISTIN MILLER
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing of HCS SB 63(CRA),
testified.
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:04:54 PM
CHAIR MATT CLAMAN called the House Judiciary Standing Committee
meeting to order at 1:04 p.m. Representatives Fansler,
Reinbold, Kopp, and Claman were present at the call to order.
Representatives Eastman and LeDoux arrived as the meeting was in
progress.
CHAIR CLAMAN offered the following:
Before we hear SB 63, our first and only order of
business today, I want to make a few comments about
the committee and the procedure we will follow moving
forward. John Adams, our second president, reflected
on the importance of the rule of law and stated that
"we are a government of laws, not of men." And I think
if he were alive today, Adams would undoubtedly have
said "we are a government of laws, not of men and
women."
As chair of this committee, I believe it is vital that
we show respect for all who come before this committee
to testify, including those with whom we may disagree.
Indeed, how we show respect for those with whom we
disagree is a measure of our commitment to strengthen
the very democratic institutions that are central to
an effective government. In an era of increasingly
polarized government on a national level, Alaskans
demand that we, as their legislators, be models of
civility and respect that is often lacking on the
national level. Mason's Manual Section 120 confirms
that our language should be "temperate, decorous, and
respectful."
In that context, as chair of this committee, I will
not tolerate attacks on members of the executive
branch, members of the judicial branch, or members of
the legislative branch. All three branches of
government are deserving of our respect when they
appear before this committee, just as members of the
public are deserving of our respect when they appear
before this committee.
Part of that respect includes respecting the chair in
managing this committee in an efficient and fair
manner fully consistent with the Uniform Rules and
Mason's Manual. Mason's Manual Section 1 gives the
chair authority to manage the affairs of the committee
in an efficient and orderly manner to allow us to
address the issues before us.
I am confident that, moving forward, all members of
this committee will be able to participate in our
hearings in a fair and respectful manner.
SB 63-REGULATION OF SMOKING
1:07:15 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN announced that the first order of business would be
HOUSE CS FOR CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 63(CRA), "An Act prohibiting
smoking in certain places; relating to education on the smoking
prohibition; and providing for an effective date."
1:07:52 PM
SENATOR PETER MICCICHE, Alaska State Legislature, advised that
HCS CCSB 63(CRA) is referred to as the "Take It Outside Act,"
and related that more people in Alaska die annually from the
effects of tobacco than of suicide, motor vehicle crashes,
homicide, and chronic liver disease, all combined. This is not
a sugar tax, he said, this legislation is about protecting
Alaska's employees from the effects of smoke in the workplace,
and it is not about limiting a smoker's ability to make their
own choices in consuming tobacco and tobacco products. He noted
that he ran this legislation through his internal check as to
whether it protects Alaskans' freedoms and liberties, but he
also had to relate that check to the effects on public safety
and health and the costs of tobacco-related illnesses in this
state. He noted that he thinks of this legislation in similar
roles such as, establishing speed limits, regulating driving
under the influence, and those types of laws. The financial
burden of caring for those that fall victim of tobacco-related
illness due to secondhand smoke costs the State of Alaska tens
of millions of dollars annually. When pondering the fact that
over one-half of the population in Alaska is currently protected
with similar local ordinances, such as in Bethel, Anchorage,
Juneau, Barrow, Dillingham, Haines, Skagway, Petersburg, and
more, there is also the fact that one-half of the state does not
have the statutory ability or the ordinance powers of health
powers to protect themselves. He reminded the committee that
this legislation does not prohibit outdoor smoking, except where
it affects others, such as in building entrances and exits or
air intakes. This legislation does not legislate the employment
of smokers and non-smokers, but rather, local governments will
retain its ability for more restrictive local provisions than
under the statewide law. It also does not remove the right of a
smoker to smoke, but it limits the smokers' ability to adversely
affect the health of Alaska's non-smoking employees. The intent
of the bill is simply to "take it outside of the workplace," to
protect those who may not have a choice as to where they are
employed.
1:10:52 PM
RACHEL HANKE, Staff, Senator Peter Micciche, Alaska State
Legislature, paraphrased the sectional analysis, as follows:
Section 1
Provides a statement of legislative intent which is
that nothing in this Act will waive the state's
immunity from liability provided for in state law, nor
to alter applicable law relating to possible liability
of manufacturers, dispensers, or others as a result of
smoking or using tobacco or e-cigarettes within an
enclosed area.
Section 2
Adds a new article to AS 18.35 that
places, including specified enclosed areas and at or
near specified outdoor areas;
prohibitions for retail tobacco and ecigarette stores,
for enclosed, marked, and vented transit areas, for
private residences, for specified vehicles and
vessels, for stand-alone shelters and for licensed
marijuana establishments;
prohibitions and fines;
owners or managers from permitting smoking or
supplying smoking accessories in place where it is
prohibited;
of health and social services or the commissioner's
designee to administer and enforce the requirements
under the Act and to provide public education about
the requirements;
or operator of a vehicle from retaliating for
initiating or cooperating with enforcement of the Act;
additional smoking restrictions and duties;
Sections 3 - 4
AS 18.35.340(a) & (b) - amends cross-references to
conform to the new and repealed
provisions.
Section 5
AS 18.35.340(c) - amends cross-references and provides
new fines for violations in which the commissioner has
filed a civil complaint.
Section 6-7
AS 18.35.341(a) & (b) - amends cross-references to
conform to the new and repealed provisions.
Section 8
AS 18.35.341(c) - amends cross-references and provides
individuals found guilty of a violation as defined in
Title 11 are subject to new fines.
Section 9-12
AS 18.35.341(d), 35.342, 35.343 & 35.350 - Amend
cross-references to conform to the new and repealed
provisions.
Section 13
AS 18.35.399 - Defines terms used in the Act.
Section 14
Repeals specified provisions related to smoking in AS
18.35.
Section 15
Uncodified law - specifies that the changes made by
secs. 2 - 13 of the Act apply to violations or
compliance failures that occur on or after the
effective date of secs. 2 - 13 of the Act.
Section 16
Uncodified law - authorizes the Department of Health
and Social Services to adopt necessary regulations to
implement the Act. The Regulations may not take effect
before the effective date of the relevant provision
being implemented.
Section 17
Provides for an immediate effective date for sec. 16.
Section 18
Provides for an October 1, 2017 effective date for the
remainder of the Act.
1:13:21 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX offered a scenario of a sole
practitioner/owner of a restaurant or bar who runs it with zero
employees and asked whether the sole practitioner is exempt.
SENATOR MICCICHE noted that he would have to perform research
because he does not know how a bar could be run with zero
employees.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX interjected, "Run it yourself."
SENATOR MICCICHE said he would like to get back to
Representative LeDoux on that question.
1:14:15 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX offered a scenario wherein someone
requires a home healthcare provider in their residence and asked
whether the person receiving home healthcare could smoke while
the healthcare provider was in their home.
SENATOR MICCICHE responded that the original bill read that it
was essentially a non-smoking residence all of the time, but
after public testimony was considered, he amended the bill to
read that it would only be [non-smoking] while that healthcare
provider was in the home.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX surmised that the person could not smoke
in their own home.
SENATOR MICCICHE answered that the healthcare provider was an
employee of either the state or a private provider in that home,
and this bill is designed to protect working Alaskans from the
effects of second-hand smoke. He acknowledged that
Representative LeDoux brought up an excellent point and that
people had also questioned limiting smoking in bars. Except, he
pointed out, there are employees in all lines of work subjected
to the effects of second-hand smoke all over the state. It is
his belief that healthcare providers should be protected from
the effects of second-hand smoke because they attended college
and obtained a degree in order to offer a certain level of care,
and they did not sign up to be affected by second-hand smoke.
He explained that it is a temporary restriction solely while
that homecare employee is working within the residence, which is
important.
1:15:52 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX referred to Senator Micciche's opening
presentation regarding protections in some areas of Alaska, and
she said that she assumed the protections did not exist in other
areas because the communities did not want to limit smoking in
the workplace.
SENATOR MICCICHE related that there are two-parts to his answer
and clarified that the state does not have the authority because
it does not have health powers guaranteed under the constitution
or under Title 29. Secondly, he offered, this has been an
ongoing effort for many years, and far less than one-half of the
population in the state is protected, and those communities not
protected are waiting to see what happens with this legislation.
He advised that he is visited, regularly, by the few
municipalities that do not have a smoke-free workplace
[ordinances/regulations] who are largely in support. These
communities have seen progress with the bill throughout the
years, and he noted that it was passed by a conservative Senate
on three occasions. Those communities believe there will
probably be some results, so they have stopped with their local
efforts to see the result from the legislature, he advised.
1:17:16 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN referred to HCSCCSB 63(CRA), pages 2-3,
and asked how the varying distances were determined, and whether
science or personal preference drove those distances.
SENATOR MICCICHE advised that when thinking about downtown
Juneau with smoke-free workplace laws in place and Juneau
residents cannot smoke indoors. Around the state, he offered,
in some of the more densely populated area around the state, the
distance simply cannot be determined without impacting others
more so than that business itself. There is a 10-feet access
limit for non-smokers into that business, but it is limited to
where it does not impact other businesses, and that limit was
settled on throughout the years [of discussions]. The 20-feet
limit is something that would "largely, directly, sort of,"
ingest that smoke into the building itself; therefore, windows
and ventilators, and such, were given additional clearance. The
reasonable distance is probably (audio difficulties) give out
the soft footprint of this bill, and he offered that it is
purposely designed, complaint driven, and it carries light
consequences for those who may have a problem complying. He
opined that there have been three fines in the 10 years that
Anchorage enacted a similar ordinance. The reasonable distance
is probably the best application of what will keep people
protected when people have to walk through a large quantity of
tobacco smoke to get into a building, or if the business itself
is bringing that smoke into the building and impacting its
employees, he advised.
1:19:36 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN pointed to the language, "reasonable
distance determined by the owner or operator," and asked what
criteria would be used to determine what makes it a reasonable
distance or an unreasonable distance. Currently, if an
owner/operator says, "Don't smoke on my property," he questioned
whether they already have that right or whether this bill is
granting them a new right. In the event it is, he asked whether
that is reasonable now going to (audio difficulties) onto
someone else's property.
1:20:43 PM
SENATOR MICCICHE referred to HCS CSSB 63(CRA), [AS
18.35.302(c)(1), page 2, lines 28-30, which read as follows:
(c) An individual may not smoke outdoors
(1) within 10 feet of playground equipment
located at a public or private school or state or
municipal park while children are present;
SENATOR MICCICHE advised that the phrase "while children are
present" was added because it would be unreasonable if the
children were not present. He referred to HCSCSSB 63(CRA), [AS
18.35.302(c)(2), page 2, line 31, and 18.35.302(c)(2-4)
(A)(B)(C), page 4, lines 1-11, which read as follows:
(2) in a seating area for an outdoor arena,
stadium, amphitheater;
(3) at a place of employment or health care
facility that has declared the entire campus or
outside grounds or property to be smoke-free;
(4) within
(A) 10 feet of an entrance, open
window, or heating or ventilation system air intake
vent at an enclosed area at a place where smoking is
prohibited under this section; or
(C) a reasonable distance, as
determined by the owner or operator, of an entrance,
open window, or heating or ventilation system air
intake vent of
1:21:38 PM
SENATOR MICCICHE commented that "in most laws there is just a
place where everything does not fit," and a reasonable distance
is often defined by law as a "common sense approach" to what
that distance should be, and he could not see that it affects
other property owners. In the event two bars were sitting next
to each other and the two doors were adjoining, that is an issue
that must be worked out, he advised.
1:22:11 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP referred to [AS 18.35.302(h)(1), page 4,
lines 20-22, which read as follows:
(h) Nothing in this section prohibits an
individual from smoking
(1) at a private residence, except a private
residence described in (b) of this section or while a
healthcare provider is present;
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP surmised that the language makes clear that
it is not regulating the distance from the front door of a
person's house. He described that a person could "smoke away"
on their own property unless there was something unique about
that situation.
SENATOR MICCICHE noted that Representative Kopp was absolutely
correct because this bill was designed in such a manner so that
where a person chooses to smoke does not impact someone's else's
right to breathe clean air while working.
1:23:15 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX offered a scenario wherein an Uber driver
and their passenger would like to smoke.
SENATOR MICCICHE deferred to Emily Neenon.
1:24:07 PM
EMILY NEENON, Government Relations Director, American Cancer
Society, Cancer Action Network, responded that, under law, the
Uber driver is required to offer smoke-free transportation
because the Uber driver was providing transportation to the
public. She described that enforcement for the implementation
of HCS CSSB 63(CRA) is based upon self-reporting and that no one
will be out looking for problems.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX described Ms. Neenon's explanation as
confusing because she thought that if a law was passed, it would
then be enforced. She referred to the previous response that
the language is in the law and probably no one will do anything
about that law, is problematic, she offered.
SENATOR MICCICHE clarified that that is not what "we said at
all. What we said is that we have a law" that purposely has a
light footprint, it is complaint driven and it will be enforced.
There will not be a group of people from the Department of
Environmental Conservation (DEC), the Department of Health and
Social Services (DHSS), or anyone else moving from facility to
facility trying to catch a person smoking, he pointed out. The
law is quite clear that it is expected that smoke-free work
places are provided for Alaskan employees. However, in a case
such as the Uber driver, if the driver is smoking a cigarette in
their Uber car while no one is present, the driver would have to
complain on themselves in order for it to activate any potential
compliance action, which does not appear to be logical, he
remarked. The light footprint, he advised, is more of a
statement but it has the potential for compliance action if
someone chooses to ignore the law.
1:26:41 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX surmised that the legislation is to
protect employees and asked why not simply exempt the Uber
driver.
SENATOR MICCICHE commented that a member of the House Judiciary
Standing Committee has the right to offer an amendment, but that
he has spent a lot of time over the last several years listening
to hundreds of peoples' testimonies, and the bill has been
significantly amended to make it work. While the bill may not
be perfect, it is fairly close at this point, he remarked.
1:27:54 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN referred to the provision regarding
smoking in a residence and, in theory, the residence itself is
generally not a place prohibiting someone from smoking. He
referred to [AS 18.35.301((b)(7), pages 2, lines 26-27] which
read as follows:
(7) on a vessel operating as a shore-based
fisheries business under AS 43.75.
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN noted that the language specifically
exempts vessels from actually having that exemption. He offered
a scenario where someone owned a vessel that was also his
residence and they used it for fishing, and asked whether
because he uses it for fishing, he is no longer allowed to smoke
at his residence. He asked the rationale behind the language.
SENATOR MICCICHE related that he could spend a lot of time
finding situations such as that in any law passed in this
building, and he could find an extreme approach to a problem in
a bill. The Alaska Statute books would be many times the size
they are right now if the legislature tried to work out every
single situation. As to the vessel exemption, he explained that
some employees work on boats in 20-foot seas and the state would
not want people out on the deck enduring acute risk [to smoke]
when they should just stay indoors in certain situations and
smoke in the cabin. This, he offered, is a chronic problem that
will impact the person in the long-term, but it is believed that
that was a better choice for the vessels in the state. He
described the scenario wherein the vessel is a residence and
also a work vessel as an interesting question and suggested that
if Representative Eastman believed it was important to clarify
in that "rare case," he would be interested to see his solution.
1:31:40 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN opened public testimony on HCS SB 63(CRA).
SENATOR MICCICHE thanked Chair Claman for hearing this
legislation and noted that he has struggled with this bill, but
the reality is that there are certain aspects employees should
be protected against when it comes to public safety, especially
with smoking being the number one cause of avoidable diseases
and deaths in this state. That is the reason for his choice and
he asked how many non-smoking Alaskans must suffer unnecessarily
before the state decides to do something about the problem.
1:32:10 PM
PATTY OWEN advised that she is a lifelong Alaskan with children
and grandchildren being raised in Alaska, a public health and
safety advocate, and a former smoker. She noted that when she
thinks back to the early days of smoking in airplanes and the
workplace, she is horrified given the current information. She
said that she strongly supports HCS CSSB 63(CRA) as this is a
public health policy, and it is the state's responsibility to
pass this important legislation and protect the public's health
statewide. Tobacco prevention efforts have come a long way in
Alaska and this legislation will continue the work, she
remarked.
1:33:16 PM
JAYNE ANDREEN, Alaska Public Health Association, advised that it
goes without saying that the Alaska Public Health Association
strongly supports HCS CSSB 63(CRA) and encourages the committee
to pass it through this committee. Ms. Andreen referred to the
1/5/17, letter directed to Senator Peter Micciche from Brian A.
King, PhD, MPH, Deputy Director for Research Translation, Office
on Smoking and Health, Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, and advised that the reasons for support are listed
within the above-mentioned letter. Personally, she said, she
was raised in a family of smokers, her father had eight
brothers, "his father as well as four of his five brothers" who
died from lung cancer. Fortunately, her father and some uncles
all managed to quit smoking in time and are now living into
their late 80s and early 90s. She related that she started
smoking as a teen-ager because she wanted "to be cool," and in
the mid-1980s she was the director of a non-profit in Homer, and
her staff asked her whether she could take her smoking outside,
and she was fine with going outside. Then, in 2000, her husband
was advised that a spot had been discovered on his chest x-ray
and for a week they lived through hell, but it turned out to be
a fluke on the film. That was the final event for her to quit
smoking and one of the things she had to do was track when and
where she smoked. Except, she noted, Juneau has a clean indoor
air policy and she could only smoke in her home and car, which
then became an ash tray. After she had stopped smoking for a
year, she bought a new car, and pointed out that because there
were so few places she could smoke, it made quitting smoking a
whole lot easier. This legislation is not just about secondhand
smoke, but it is about developing and supporting people to be
smoke-free, she remarked.
1:35:44 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked whether Ms. Andreen believes all
smoking should be illegal.
MS. ANDREEN replied, "Absolutely not," because smoking is a
personal choice, but it is also important that the state ensure
that non-smokers are not impacted by secondhand smoke.
1:36:10 PM
MS. NEENON offered a history of the issue and what has changed
in her 20-years of working on this issue in Alaska. Bethel was
the first community in Alaska to pass a smoke-free workplace law
in 1998, and that momentum has continued to the point that
approximately one-half of the state is now covered. In 2006,
the United States Surgeon General's report came out as to
secondhand smoke and it definitively stated that there is no
safe exposure level to secondhand smoke and that ventilation
does not work. Although, she commented, ventilation may
possibly remove some smells and possibly visible smoke or odors,
but the carcinogens and ultra-fine particles in the smoke cannot
be removed. That report confirmed that the best option is to
just "take it outside" to protect workers and the public.
Another "big thing we know" is that the biggest impact from
smoke-free laws going into to effect is fewer heart attacks.
The studies of smoking-free laws going into place, first
prepared 10-years ago, showed a 15-20 percent drop in hospital
admissions from heart attacks and pregnancy complications.
Initially, she offered, a couple of doctors in Montana noted
that their emergency room was not as busy as it had been
previously, they looked into it, and the findings of these
doctors' studies have been replicated around the world by
offering an impact on cardiovascular health. The current
situation with e-cigarettes is that non-users can be exposed to
the same harmful chemicals found in e-cigarettes. She pointed
out that she is not comparing e-cigarettes to secondhand smoke,
but rather the comparison is to the standard of clean air and
working to protect all workers in the public.
1:38:59 PM
CARMEN LUNDE advised that she is affiliated with the Kodiak
Alaska Cabaret, Hotel, Restaurant and Retailers Association
(CHARR) and it is opposed to HCS CSSB 63(CRA) because it
strongly believes that business owners have the right to their
own choices without government, on a federal, state, or local
level, mandating laws that force business owners to go against
their wishes. She described this as a slippery slope when
government takes "our freedom of choice away." Smoking bans
violate private property rights because only the bar owner
should decide the smoking policies on their own premises in that
they know what is best for their own businesses and how to work
out their own compromises and solutions, she advised. The
community of Kodiak took a common-sense approach wherein three-
quarters of the bars in Kodiak are non-smoking and twenty-five
percent are smoking bars, thereby, giving every adult free
choice to go to the bar of their own choosing. This
demonstrates free choice (audio difficulties). When government
declares something to be illegal, it is chipping away at "our
rights" as individuals. She described the bill as targeted
toward bars because within all of the other places mentioned in
the proposed ban, no one has smoked for many years. The "self-
satisfied individuals" who feel entitled to force their views
upon the public's health, choices, behaviors, and social values
like to impose their laws that program the lives of individuals
and disregards the value of [our freedom of choice] that many
people hold most precious, she remarked. In the early 1840s,
President Abraham Lincoln advised that prohibition goes beyond
the bounds of freedom in matters of (audio difficulties) control
a man's appetite by legislation and make a crime out of things
that are not crimes. She advised that a prohibition law strikes
at all of the sensibilities upon which our government was
founded, she advised.
1:41:09 PM
BETTY MacTAVISH advised that she is a teacher, parent, and
grandparent in Kodiak. (audio difficulties). She said that she
has been diagnosed (audio difficulties) and she has never smoked
a day in her life, yet the black spots on her lungs make her
vulnerable to respiratory disease. During her years as (audio
difficulties) had pneumonia every February due to the financial
stress of missing work and the medical costs. The burden of
choice has been working to (audio difficulties) and the burden
now with the committee, it has the opportunity to provide safe
working environments for Alaskans. The Kodiak City Council, the
Kodiak Island Borough Assembly, and the Kodiak Island Borough
School District all unanimously passed resolutions of support
for this legislation. Fear is the answer to why Kodiak has not
passed this workplace ordinance locally, fear of reprisal
against the Kodiak elected officials from citizens, and neighbor
versus neighbor in a community so small. (Audio difficulties)
Alaskans are waiting for the legislature to protect workers'
health by passing HCS CSSB 63(CRA) quickly because lives are at
stake, she said.
1:43:02 PM
GABRIELE LARRY advised that she was once a smoker and now has
allergies toward smoke, and her children and grandchildren also
have allergies that have caused many medical issues. She
stressed that she endorses the right for everyone to breathe
clean air, whether in a bar, hospital, or airplane. Thirty-four
years ago, she gave birth to her daughter and shared a room with
a woman who brought her cigarettes and the baby into the room
and smoked, and Ms. Larry asked the hospital to let her and her
baby discharge. Currently, the hospital has a smoke-free zone
and it does not allow smoking on the premises. As a business
owner, she said that she has employees who are trying to quit
smoking and those who smoke, and she expects them to be
respectful and keep their smoking away from those who are trying
to quit that addiction. She advised that her brother recently
had one lung removed due to cancer and is still going through
treatment (audio difficulties) smoking. She emphatically asked
smokers to consider stopping, noting that "we need to help
everybody along the way" because, as a previous smoker, she
knows that as soon as the smoker smells that smoke it draws them
near a cigarette. She expressed that HCS CSSB 63(CRA) should
be passed because it is the right thing to do, and because clean
air is a right for everyone, she stressed.
1:45:37 PM
STEVEN GREENHUT, Western Region Director, R Street Institute,
advised that the R Street Institute performs work in the area of
harm reduction. For example, it recommends that states and
localities eliminate e-cigarettes and other vapor products from
under the umbrella of tobacco products and their bans, and to
rather recognize the potential for a much safer alternative to
combustible cigarettes. He offered that e-cigarette use reduces
harm, and HCS CS 63(CRA) discourages smokers from switching to
much safer vaping because it does not make a clear distinction
between vaping and smoking. Vaporers understand that vaping is
not allowed in all indoor spaces, but there should be someplace
for them to vape. In fact, indoor vaping places would encourage
more smokers to switch, especially in cold climates like Alaska.
He noted that the previous testifier pointed out that smokers
smell that old smoke and possibly get back into the habit;
therefore, it is wrong to segregate vaporers into the category
of smokers because it is counterproductive. The alternative to
blanket legislation is allowing property owners and businesses
to determine their own vaping policies. Vaporers should not be
forced to share the same space with people who are smoking as it
undermines their ability to stay smoke-free, he said. (Audio
difficulties) vaping can be annoying to others but it is not
dangerous, which is why leaving it up to the property owners is
the best way to resolve this issue, and vaping is a useful tool
to help people break the dangerous habit of smoking, he
explained.
1:47:43 PM
GREGORY CONLEY, President, American Vaping Association, urged
the committee to either reject HCS CSSB 63(CRA) or amend it to
remove the inclusion of smoke-free vapor products and the bill's
definition of smoking. Vapor products do not involve fire,
smoke, or tobacco (audio difficulties). As a result, the
emissions generated by vapor products dissipate into the air and
there is virtually no resemblance to the amalgamation of toxic
chemicals generated by combustible cigarettes. There is simply
nothing of concern to "protect workers from," and vaporers are
not arguing for the unfettered right to vape wherever they wish.
Etiquette matters, and business owners should be able to decide
their own vaping policies, he reiterated. A study published
last year in the Journal of Health Economics revealed the
unintended consequences of these policies, such as banning
smoking or vaping. That study found that in states where (audio
difficulties) restrictions were in place, there was as much as
30 percent higher cigarette use (audio difficulties). The
researchers theorized that this would prove to be a false and
misleading message sent by the user restriction. In the event
legislators felt (audio difficulties) dangerous enough to ban
them indoors, they might as well have continued to smoke. In
the United Kingdom, the National Health Service, Board of
College of Physicians, and public health officials have all
concluded that vaping poses no legitimate risk (audio
difficulties), and they urged employers to voluntarily (audio
difficulties) who want to switch by allowing its usage indoors
or in certain areas. Defining the use of a smoke-free product
as smoking does not comport with the science or common sense.
He asked that the committee amend vaping products out of this
legislation.
1:49:55 PM
JEFF STIRE, Senior Fellow, Consumer Choice Center, advised that
he had spent more than 15 years working on public health issues
and advancing public health policies and he applauds this
committee for its work on protecting public health. He offered
his appreciation for HCS CSSB 63(CRA)'s light footprint;
however, he was concerned about the definition of smoking to
include a bill that people use to quit smoking, which is the use
of e-cigarettes that has no combustion. Public health (audio
difficulties) acknowledges, and he agrees, that it is hard to
stop smoking and many smokers are turning to e-cigarettes to
help them stop. Public Health (audio difficulties) stated that
in 2016, it was estimated that two-million consumers (audio
difficulties) had used these products and completely stopped
smoking, and 400,070 of the people used them to stop smoking.
The evidence is increasingly clear that e-cigarettes are
significantly less harmful to health than smoking tobacco and;
therefore, that is why the government is seeking to support
consumers to stop smoking and adopt the use of the less harmful
nicotine products of e-cigarettes. It is not just in England,
last year the United States National Institute of Health funded
a study published in the British Medical Journal, after having
evaluated direct census bureau data, and concluded that "the
substantial increase in e-cigarettes use among the (audio
difficulties) smokers was associated with the statistically
significant increase in smoking cessation rate." He offered
concern that if this legislation does not correct the
definitions about e-cigarettes, "we will lose out" and the
public health will be damaged because people will not be able to
quit smoking by using the less harmful e-cigarettes.
1:52:49 PM
JOSHUA SILAS advised that he is testifying in opposition to HCS
CSSB 63(CRA), he was testifying on his own behalf, and was born
and raised in Soldotna. Mr. Silas asked that the vape language
be removed from the bill, noting that he works in a vape shop
and he has help 496 people become tobacco-free and stop giving
themselves lung cancer. Respectfully, he asked that the
committee remove the vape shops and all e-cigarette language out
of this bill and keep vaping out of smoking laws.
1:54:27 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP noted to Joe Darnell, Alaska Behavioral
Health Tobacco Enforcement, that one of the committee's
balancing interests is looking at exactly what an e-cigarette
use is, as opposed to a combustion cigarette. Everyone wants
the use of harmful products to go down for young people and
according to reports included in the committee packet, there is
an indication that e-cigarette use is "basically exploding among
the youth." Whereas in 2015, more than 3 million students in
middle school and high school students were involved in its use,
and the use appears to be rising. He asked whether Mr. Darnell
had had any experiences running audits or running undercover
attempted buys from e-cigarette stores, similar to places that
sell tobacco products, to determine whether they were selling to
the youth.
1:56:10 PM
JOE DARNELL, State of Alaska Behavioral Health Tobacco
Enforcement, Department of Health & Social Services, responded
that in 2016-2017, a survey was performed identifying vape shops
around the state and they ran 16-17-year old individuals in the
shops to see whether they were able to buy vape products. In
2016, there was a 26 percent buy rate statewide of vape products
to underage kids, and the underage seller of tobacco was only
5.4 percent. In 2017, the study showed a 35 percent sale of
vape products to underage minors, and the tobacco sale to
underage minors was at a 4.7 percent sell rate. The vape shops
are selling regularly to underage minors (audio difficulties) in
Anchorage parents call in complaining of vape shops selling to
their children.
1:57:45 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP advised Mr. Darnell that because the audio
"was so garbled" he wanted to clarify that Mr. Darnell had said
that in 2017, the compliance program had determined, after his
office ran operations, that 35 percent of all vape shops sold to
underage minors, as compared to approximately 4.7 percent of the
tobacco shops.
MR. DARNELL answered in the affirmative.
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP asked Mr. Darnell's proposed solution for
this problem.
MR. DARNELL responded that his shop does not have the authority
to enforce those vape shops selling to underage minors. He
offered that a Senate bill that is moving within the two bodies
that addresses that issue by requiring that vape products be
added within tobacco products. He stressed that it should be
regulated the same as with tobacco products, and that licensing
is the same. That would make it much easier to help keep these
products out of the hands of Alaskan youth, he pointed out.
1:59:21 PM
JOSEPH YOURKOSKI referred to HCS CSSB 63(CRA) and advised that
he is a sophomore in Nikiski Middle High School, and he is
testifying on behalf of the American Cancer Society Cancer
Action Network. Mr. Yourkoski testified on HCS CSSB 63(CRA), as
follows:
I'd like to begin by thanking Chairman Claman and the
House Judiciary Standing Committee for allowing me the
opportunity to speak today. I am here to testify on
behalf of SB 63. This bill is important to me because
I, myself, am a cancer survivor. Smoking is the cause
of 30 percent of all cancers. I was diagnosed with
leukemia when I was 4-years old and lived through
harsh and rigorous 3.5-year treatment plan. Now
believe me, this is not an enjoyable experience for
anyone. Senate Bill 63 commonly referred to as a
"smoke-free workplace act" will protect those who do
not smoke from having to choose between a paycheck and
their health. This is supported by 88 percent of all
Alaskans, many of whom are like me and live in a
borough that does not have health powers. This bill
would make it illegal to smoke in a place of business
and as I move to toward the workforce, this becomes
even more important to me. This bill has the
potential to save hundreds of lives and people from
the tremendous hardship that is cancer. Cancer not
only affects the patient, but their family and friends
as well. By passing this bill Alaska can save lives
so I urge you to pass this bill.
2:00:55 PM
DANIEL PHUNG, Regional Representative, 5 Pawns, advised that 5
Pawns is based out of California as well as having several
business partners in Alaska, he noted that there were potential
impacts to his company related to this legislation, and asked
the committee to remove the vapor language from this bill.
Currently, he employs 20 people who share his vision in (audio
difficulties) reduction technology, and he has had product
representation for some time in various retail locations
throughout Alaska with multiple business partners throughout the
world. (Audio difficulties) people who agree with the benefits
of vaping and the need to separate the categories. He added
that 5 Pawns manufactures state-of-the-art clean (audio
difficulties) and have implemented quality systems to ensure
consistency, (audio difficulties), and accountability for all of
the products. He advised that he was not sharing this
information to impress the committee, but rather to impress upon
the committee that HCS CSSB 63(CRA) has negative implications to
what a vapor-related business is, and it also makes it difficult
for those who have chosen this path of tobacco (audio
difficulties) reduction technology to comfortably continue
toward a cigarette-free lifestyle. He referred to the "heat not
burn" technology and implored the committee to investigate the
separation of the categories. (Audio difficulties) does not
kill, it is the tar that kills, (audio difficulties) studies
have been released to speak to the long-term effects of vapor
products and current findings indicate the need to distinguish
between the two categories. For example, he offered, (audio
difficulties) New Zealand legalized vapor products as part of
its plan to have a smoke-free country by 2025. England has also
encouraged smokers to switch to vapor products and it is now
experiencing historic low smoking rates. Furthermore, this
technology has the ability to achieve equal or greater (audio
difficulties) in Alaska and has the potential to eliminate many
unnecessary tobacco-related healthcare costs.
2:03:44 PM
JAMIE MORGAN, Senior Director, Advocacy and Policy Campaign,
American Heart Association, advised that heart disease and
stroke remain the number one causes of death in the United
States, and that cigarette smoking is a major risk factor.
Smoking not only claims the lives of those who use tobacco, but
also those exposed to secondhand smoke. As reported by the
United States Surgeon General, exposure of secondhand smoke for
adults has immediate adverse effects on the cardiovascular
system and causes coronary heart disease and lung cancer. In
fact, she said, just 30-minutes of exposure to secondhand smoke
rapidly impairs vascular function, and long-term exposure to
secondhand smoke is associated with a 25-30 percent increased
risk of coronary heart disease in adult non-smokers. Due to
these effects on blood and blood vessels, the National Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention reports that there is a zero-
risk-free level of secondhand smoke because even brief exposure
can cause immediate harm. The American Heart Association knows
that smoke-free indoor air laws save lives, studies that (audio
difficulties) communities published in peer-reviewed journals
have shown a decrease in heart attack incidents after the
implementation of smoke-free laws. One example, she offered, is
within a town in Colorado wherein there was a 41 percent decline
in heart attack hospitalization. In addition to the health
benefits, there is an economic advantage when enacting smoke-
free laws because telling evidence shows no significant impact
in actual businesses, with the additional benefits that include:
lower cleaning costs; lower worker absenteeism; and increased
productivity. As the committee has heard, she reiterated that
only one-half of the Alaskan population is covered by smoke-free
workplace laws, so this legislation will better protect the
health and safety of all workers, patrons, and visitors from
diseases and pre-mature deaths caused by secondhand smoke. She
advised that the American Heart Association and the American
(indisc.) Association believes this legislation will positively
impact Alaskan residents regarding health care costs and benefit
businesses that would no longer be impacted by the various costs
associated with indoor smoking. She asked the committee to
please pass HCS CSSB 63(CRA) out of committee.
2:06:40 PM
JAMES SQUYRES advised that he lives in Rural Deltana and is a
constituent of Representative George Rauscher. He stated that
he is a non-smoker, he opposes to this legislation, and is
"appalled at the seemingly insatiable desire to increase the
size state footprint and influence government." This
[legislation] has been recycled by the primary sponsor many
times at the cost of state government, and the nays in the
Senate were as follows: Senators John Coghill, Mike Dunleavy,
Shelley Hughes, Pete Kelly, and Bert Stedman. (Audio
difficulties) opposed because they are heavy smokers, or because
they were concerned about the size and scope of government. He
remarked that not only does he encourage the chair to put HCS
CSSB 63(CRA) in the drawer, but the primary sponsor needs to be
notified to quit wasting this committee's time at the expense of
Alaskans. He advised that he would like to see "you folks out
of there in 90-days."
2:07:38 PM
DIANA REDWOOD offered strong support for the legislation and
noted that she lives in Anchorage and benefits from the smoke-
free bars and restaurants, especially for dancing and listening
to music. However, she pointed out, she travels around the
state for work and when visiting bars, she must leave due to the
smoke. Ms. Redwood reiterated that she strongly supports HCS
CSSB 63(CRA) and asked the committee to pass it into law.
2:08:35 PM
LARRY TAYLOR, JR., advised that he support this legislation and
its regulations on smoking. Mr. Tayler said that he retired 10-
years as an environmental engineer for the Anchorage Air Quality
Office, and pointed to a 2014 report, published by the
University of Alaska wherein it studied the effects of clean
indoor air ordinances on employment and air quality in
Anchorage. In 2000, Anchorage limited smoking in public places,
except bars, and in 2001, employment decreased by 10 percent in
restaurants that went smoke-free, and only 6 percent of the
restaurants that allowed restricted smoking. In 2007, an
amended ordinance stopped all smoking in restaurants and bars,
and from 2001-2010 bar employment was 10 percent higher than it
would have been without the ordinance. In 2008, a comparison of
Anchorage's no smoking bars and Juneau's smoking bars found that
there were 33 times more respirable particles in the Juneau
bars. He then asked that the committee pass HCS CSSB 63(CRA)
out of committee and move it closer to a House of
Representatives floor vote, where he opined it has good support
to pass.
MR. TAYLOR referred to vaping issue that all of the "outside
guys are calling in about," and advised that there is nicotine
in vaping fumes, and possibly formaldehyde which is definitely a
problem, and there is diacetyl, which is a popcorn flavoring
that is safe in popcorn, but it is not safe to breathe in
because it can cause lung problems called "popcorn lung." He
pointed out that "it would just be really simple" not to have to
worry about that and enact the requirement that vaping is taken
outdoors because if smokers have to go outside, why not
vaporers.
2:10:52 PM
KELLY LARSON advised that she has worked since she was old
enough to receive a work permit from the State of Alaska due to
a financial need. Without transportation, she advised, she was
limited to the businesses that were within walking distance from
her home. For many years she had to work in smoke filled
environments, she was sick all the time, and the doctor had to
prescrib harmful medication, and she is undergoing (audio
difficulties) treatment. During her earlier years, the students
in middle school and high school teased her about the manner in
which she could breathe as it was labored and loud, so even as a
child she knew she was sick. Cigarette smoke (audio
difficulties) exposed everywhere, work, home, and even at school
with smoke billowing out of the teachers' lounge and smoking
areas and into where she had to (audio difficulties). She
stressed that she should have been protected by her employers
and protected from teachers smoking in their workplace. She
stressed that until a person experiences the effects of
secondhand smoke and what it can do to a body, no one could
possibly understand. She described it as having an elephant sit
on your chest while gasoline is poured down your throat, your
sinus filled with tobacco (audio difficulties) and onions are
rubbed in your eyes. That, she noted, is what she deals with
due to secondhand smoke, and 20 years later she was diagnosed
with severe environmentally induced asthma with the most common
trigger being cigarette smoke. She related that she has a son
who smokes and vapes, and his vape smoke makes her sick, so he
has to take it outside and not be anywhere around her car or her
grandchildren. She worries that as she ages she will develop
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) or a lung or throat
cancer, and yet, she said, she has never smoked a day in her
life. She does not want to see any person without a choice have
to work in a smoke-filled environment, noting that she did not
have a choice. Alaskans need protection and they cannot afford
to wait on this issue, and to please advance HCS CSSB 63(CRA) as
quickly as possible, she asked.
2:13:25 PM
JENNY OLENDORFF advised that she is a lifelong Alaskan and lives
in "beautiful smoke-free Palmer." She offered support for HCS
CSSB 63(CRA) and advised that last summer (audio difficulties)
Soldotna (audio difficulties) Senator Peter Micciche's tireless
statewide efforts, workers are still not protected from
secondhand smoke. She remarked that she has advocated for
smoke-free workplaces in Alaska for over 10-years due to being
subjected to secondhand smoke in her workplace in Soldotna. She
described that it was a small strip mall that became so
pervasive and unhealthy that she broke her lease and moved into
a smoke-free office complex uptown. Please, she asked, for the
sake of all Alaskan workers and for the benefit of public
health, pass this legislation out of the House Judiciary
Standing Committee and include protections from e-cigarette
aerosol, so legislators can finally vote on this important
legislation.
2:14:27 PM
NOEL CROWLEY BELL advised that she supports HCS CSSB 63(CRA)
because she wants a smoke-free workplace for all Alaskans,
especially teens, young adults, and her young children. She
expressed that young Alaskans are anxious to begin working and
often begin their employment careers in industries, or areas of
the state not currently protected from the effects of secondhand
smoke. She remembers being a non-smoker in a small office where
the manager smoked and "it was horrible" because there were no
smoke-free workplace laws, and in the event she found work
elsewhere, there were no guarantees that workplace would protect
her from the exposure of secondhand smoke, she related. Within
Alaska, only about 50 percent of Alaskans are protected by a
smoke-free workplace law so please pass this legislation out of
committee, she asked. Ms. Bell offered her belief that all
Alaskans, not just those privileged to live in a city that can
pass this law, should be protected from the known health risks
of both secondhand smoke and vape aerosol, and it is important
to include vaping in this legislation.
2:16:00 PM
ELIZABETH RIPLEY, Mat-Su Health Foundation, advised that she is
the CEO of the Mat-Su Health Foundation and HCS CSSB 63(CRA) is
its top legislative priority, and that Mat-Su Health Foundation
offered its full support for the bill. She pointed out that the
Mat-Su is a second-class borough and it, together with many
other regions, do not have the health powers to enact a smoke-
free workplace law, which is why the statewide regulations are
critical. While headway has made to reduce smoking rates among
Alaskans, Alaskans are losing ground to e-cigarettes. She noted
that locally and statewide, the state still has some of the
highest tobacco use rates in the nation thereby, increasing the
state's chronic respiratory disease rates. This legislation is
the next big step Alaska can take to reduce these rates of
smoking and disease, and this bill will have more impact on the
immediate health of Alaskans than probably any bill enacted this
session. Eleven studies were analyzed, and of more than 2.5
million births had approximately 250,000 asthma attacks, and the
studies found that the number of premature births in children's
hospitals and visits for asthma dropped 10 percent in certain
regions of the United States, Canada, and Europe, one year after
enacting no smoking laws. An impact analysis of smoking bans on
adult health demonstrated a 15 percent reduction in
cardiovascular events, and that every community instituting
these smoking bans has seen a decrease in heart attacks. She
pointed out that passing this bill is a fiscally responsible
effort to make because tobacco use has cost Alaska $579 million
annually in direct medical costs and lost productivity.
Medicaid pays for over 60 percent of babies (audio difficulties)
regional and across Alaska, and this bill would reduce asthma
admissions (audio difficulties) for births by 10 percent to save
state dollars. (Audio difficulties) recommends that this law be
passed to reduce high (audio difficulties) impact on the state
operating budget. She offered that HCS CSSB 63(CRA) is the next
step for Alaska to reduce smoking rates (audio difficulties) and
offered appreciation for supporting HCS CSSB 63(CRA).
2:18:31 PM
BECKY STOPPA asked that the committee pass HCS CSSB 63(CRA) out
of committee. She noted that she is a lifelong non-smoker, but
she grew up in a house full of smokers and her first employers
throughout her teens and 20s were smoking workplaces. As a
result, she has suffered numerous bouts of pneumonia and
bronchitis to the point she was hospitalized. It has been more
than 25-years since being exposed to secondhand smoke in the
workplace, yet she still suffers the consequences because she
has asthma and an embarrassing chronic cough that is oftentimes
debilitating. She urged the committee to support this
legislation and protect all Alaskans from the harmful effects of
secondhand smoke, thereby, ensuring that everyone has a safe
place to work.
2:19:42 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN related that he would now repeat a query from a
Kodiak listener, and asked whether the American Legion Clubs
would be exempt.
SENATOR MICCICHE answered that the clubs are not exempt.
2:20:34 PM
SUSAN SMALLEY, Volunteer, American Cancan Society, advised that
she is a volunteer for the American Cancer Society, a cancer
survivor, and a 48-year Alaskan. She noted that she has been
testifying for more than a decade, during which time the Alaskan
workers have been exposed to the dangers of secondhand smoke in
the workplace and stressed that it is a health hazard not unlike
asbestos or lead paint. Several years ago, she worked in a
restaurant and lasted just one eight-hour shift because she was
sick from secondhand smoke, and she quit her job. Although,
that option is not available for everyone, and she noted that a
friend of hers has no choice and has a similar job and she talks
about undressing in her garage after work at the smoking
establishment because she does not want to share her tobacco
infused smell with her children. She reiterated that changing
her job is not an option, so her friend risks her own health to
support her family. (Audio difficulties) cannot do it by
ourselves, "we don't have the power," the state needs smoke-free
workplaces and she requested the committee's support for HCS
CSSB 63(CRA) and save lives, money, and make Alaska healthier
because Alaskan lives are precious.
2:21:59 PM
CHRYSTAL SHOENROCK, Owner, 4 Lands Bar, advised that she owns 4
Lands Bar in Nikiski, she has employees who all smoke, her
customers want to continue smoking in the bar, and it is her
prerogative to run her business as sees fit as long as she pays
her taxes and lives within the law. She stressed that she does
not believe "we need" government control to tell people what to
do, and some customers are 'old veterans' who have fought and
fought for this country for the public's freedoms," yet, the
legislature is trying to take them "away from us." She
commented that there are enough establishments in Nikiski with
non-smoking policies, and if a person is a non-smoker they
should work in those establishments. A smoker should have a
place to go where they can feel at-home and "do whatever," and,
she stressed that she did not feel "you people" need to be
telling "us how to run our businesses," you need to worry about
the deficit, downsize the government, and "get off this subject
that we're on."
2:23:21 PM
JOHNA BEECH advised that she is a volunteer for the American
Cancer Society, Cancer Action Network, and is testifying as a
private citizen. She said that she is offering support for
smoke-free workplaces and that for years she worked in a smoking
environment because she did not have the skill set to work in a
different environment. She related that she did not acquire the
skill set to get her out of that environment until she was
approximately 21 years old. The workers in today's market
should not have to decide between a paycheck and their health.
She asked the committee to pass HCS CSSB 63(CRA) from committee
and allow it to go to the House of Representatives floor for a
vote and keep the e-cigarettes and vaping language in the bill.
Remember, she related, it is not about the smoker, it is about
the smoke, it is not about the vaporer it is about the vape, and
all Alaskans have the right to breathe smoke-free air.
2:24:25 PM
PAMELA HOWARD advised that she is speaking on behalf of high
school students. She said that she has been a school nurse in
Alaska for 31-years and it came to her attention during her
presentations to the students that most students believe there
is already a law protecting them from secondhand smoke. When
they were told that the state legislature was looking at this
bill, over 95 percent of the students supported its passage.
She explained that the documentation of this percentage amount
comes about because the school offers a "agree/disagree line."
The students also wonder why the opioid bill moved through the
two bodies so quickly, and yet, tobacco exposure continues to
kill so many more people every day. It is the students' hope,
she offered, that this bill not be held up any longer.
Personally, she remarked, she wishes a law had been in place
when she first joined the workforce because through her exposure
to secondhand smoke she now has asthma even though she has never
smoked. It is too late for her, but not for the students and
she said that she hopes this bill will prevent her grandson from
dealing with secondhand smoke. As to the vaping issue, she
related that the current trend of students is to initiate vaping
rather than smoking, although the majority of students believe
that vaping is a risk to both the vaporer and those breathing in
the secondhand vaping smoke. She pointed out that the students
do not want to wait as long as it has taken to find out that
smoking is injurious to their health.
2:26:27 PM
PAMELA OLSON advised that she worked for a non-profit agency
that was located above a bingo and pull-tab facility of which
had a ventilation system, but most of the time it was not
working. As a result, the concentrated levels of smoke entered
the non-profit agency's office and being a non-profit (audio
difficulties) relocate until two-years ago. The new location
for the non-profit agency is smoke-free, but she and her co-
workers are still suffering from the results of being exposed to
those concentrated levels of toxins. It takes her 20-30 minutes
to clear her lungs each morning due to the damage caused during
that time, and she encouraged the committee to pass HCS CSSB
63(CRA) on behalf of those workers who do not have control over
the secondhand smoke they are exposed to, and on behalf of all
Alaskans.
2:27:53 PM
BENJAMIN SCHMAUSS advised that he was raised in southern Alaska
(audio difficulties). He offered support for HCS CSSB 63(CRA),
because his mother worked as a bartender when she was pregnant
with Mr. Schmauss, and as a child he suffered from hearing
problems and different medical problems based from his exposure
to secondhand smoke. His grandfather, a World War II veteran,
died of lung cancer, and he strongly believes that Alaskans
should be able to work in safety and not risk their health
because they have to provide for their families. (Audio
difficulties.)
2:29:45 PM
PENNY PALMQUIST advised that she quit smoking in 1991, but she
has worked in many smoking environments, and probably her
biggest (audio difficulties) was when she worked for the
Sullivan Arena, a municipal building that was smoke-free, but
sometimes everyone smoked whenever they pleased. (Audio
difficulties) take me several days to get over it, and she is a
cancer survivor. A statistic she found showed that 41,000
people in the United States die every year from secondhand
smoke, yet these people had never smoked a cigarette in their
lives. (Audio difficulties) breast cancer people have
approximately 44,000 besides (audio difficulties). She noted
that there are various communities wherein employees do not have
the choice of where to work, and they oftentimes work in bars,
restaurants, and office spaces where people smoke and also vape.
With respect to the kids, she related that they "dip" which is
where they heat a portion of the e-cigarette to get a higher hit
off of the vape, and some places in Alaska are selling these e-
cigarettes to young people. She then strongly urged the
committee to pass HCS CSSB 63(CRA) out of committee.
2:32:05 PM
EDELTRAUD RODEWALD advised that she is a 35-year resident of
Alaska and is currently living in Anchorage. She said that this
issue affects non-smokers and smokers, and few people disagree
that smoking is bad for a person's health, such that her long-
time smoking father died at age 37 from cancer, and her brother
who is now unemployed suffers from the health effects of smoking
and he has zero health insurance. Starting to smoke may be a
choice, but continued smoking is an addiction, she pointed out,
and it is known that smoke-free work environments assist people
in cutting back on their smoking and helps young people to never
start smoking. She said that she is really here testifying
about Alaskans breathing smoke-free air, including free from the
effects of aerosol from vaping. In working her way through
college by working in smoky bars, she now has a chronic cough
and doctors question her as to whether she was a smoker, and she
was not. She offered that 88 percent of Alaskans agree that it
is time to pass this smoke-free workplace legislation out of
committee.
2:33:51 PM
GEORGE STEWART thanked the sponsor for attempting to eliminate
smoking in workplaces around the state and he strongly supports
HCS CSSB 63(CRA). He stated that Alaskans are entitled to clean
air, smoke-free air, with a majority of Alaskans voting in favor
of this type of legislation because there are all kinds of
toxins in cigarette and e-cigarette smoke. (Audio difficulties)
nicotine, (audio difficulties) volatile organic compounds (audio
difficulties) hydrocarbons and other things. Particularly, as
to teen-agers who vape, there is a higher risk of them becoming
cigarette smokers. (Audio difficulties) a publication from the
Institute of Drug Abuse advised that 30.7 percent of teen-agers
who vape cigarettes became actual cigarette smokers; therefore,
vaping should be banned as well due to the toxins in e-cigarette
smoke. Basically, he pointed out, if a person is a smoker "take
it outdoors," rather than exposing Alaskans to cigarette smoke
and e-cigarette smoke in the workplace. He asked the committee
to please pass this legislation.
2:35:19 PM
WILLIAM HARRINGTON advised that he is not a paid shill of the
vaping industry, "and the audio in the Anchorage LIO sucks
today." He said that there are some penalties he did not
believe the state would be using often because they are too
light for the offenses. He referred to HCS CSSB 63(CRA), [AS
18.35.399(11)] page 11, lines 13-15, which read as follows:
(11) "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.
MR. HARRINGTON referred to the language: "or plant product
intended for inhalation," and said that "marijuana or cannabis,
I don't see in any of my reading, and yet, I do believe that a
plant product intended for inhalation is being pushed on the
streets as very many of these pot shop these days, so if this
includes pot when talking about smoking, it's not, you know, on
the same page." He pointed to information located in the
1/21/18, FF (audio difficulties) Newspaper, that the tax on
recreational marijuana in Berkeley, California is presently 26.5
percent. He offered his agreement with Senator Micciche that
the state must protect employees from all job-related lung
hazards (audio difficulties) asbestos if the committee requires
more extreme examples. Education of the youth from 1st grade on
of the hazards to themselves from (audio difficulties) self-harm
behavior is the only viable long-term solution, he said.
2:37:21 PM
MARG STONEKING, Executive Director, American Lung Association-
Alaska, offered that secondhand smoke is especially dangerous,
and that secondhand smoke makes it harder for people living with
lung diseases, (audio difficulties) COPD, and there are over
100,000 Alaskans for whom that is true. She said referred
specifically comments from the e-cigarette industry
representatives calling in from outside of Alaska and said that
several times public health (audio difficulties). She pointed
out that in other countries, public health is regulated under
the (audio difficulties) drug administration found that families
smoking tobacco is bad for prevention control. In late 2016, e-
cigarettes were included under that act and are; therefore,
regulated as a recreational tobacco product (audio difficulties)
attempting to go down a different route. However, in this
country no (audio difficulties) has prevented (audio
difficulties) as a cessation device to the FDA. Further, in
2016, the United States Surgeon General published the first
report on e-cigarettes and focused on using young adults
because, as the committee heard, that is where the preponderance
of youth takes place. Within the Surgeon General's report, he
concluded that e-vape aerosol is not safe and recommended
inclusion of e-cigarettes within smoke-free laws all across the
United States. She reiterated that she is from the American
Lung Association and it is the American public's health
authority, and it advocates for the inclusion of aerosol in
[smoke free laws]. She pointed out that the e-cigarettes
aerosol is full of high concentrations of ultra-fine particles,
even higher than conventional cigarettes smoke, she added.
2:40:08 PM
KRISTIN MILLER advised that she believes it is important that
Alaska becomes smoke-free across all workplaces because all
Alaskans deserve a smoke-free workplace. Smoking continues to
be a personal choice and smoking should be done in private, so
that those who do not smoke, not be exposed [to secondhand
smoke] knowingly or unknowingly, she stated.
2:40:50 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN, after ascertaining no one wished to testify,
closed public hearing on HCS SB 63(CRA).
2:41:14 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN referred to [HCS CSSB 63(CRA), AS
18.35.399(5)(6)], page 10, lines 15-18, which read as follows:
(5) "employee" means a person who is
employed by a business for compensation or works for a
business as a volunteer without compensation;
(6) "employer" means the state, a
municipality, a regional education attendance area,
and a person or a business with one or more employees;
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN commented that when using the word
"employee," he generally thinks of someone who is working and is
paid by someone. Under the current definition of employer, the
draft includes anyone with "one or more volunteers," and he
noted that that appears to "rub up against the way we usually --
normally use those terms."
SENATOR MICCICHE answered that he strongly believes Alaskans who
are either employed in the traditional sense of the word or
volunteering as many as 30-40 hours per week should be protected
in a smoke-free workplace whether they are compensated or
volunteering to be in that workplace.
2:42:30 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked whether there was a time limit in
the current draft for volunteers.
SENATOR MICCICHE responded that there is not currently a minimum
in the bill.
2:42:50 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FANSLER, noting that the House Community and
Regional Affairs Standing Committee discussed marijuana and the
prohibition of possibly hurting the state's commerce, asked the
sponsor to explain where the bill is in relation to that issue.
SENATOR MICCICHE offered that that is something "we struggled
with" because it is a bit hypocritical to protect employees from
the effects of cigarette smoke, and yet, allow the effects of
marijuana smoke on perhaps those same employees. Currently, he
answered, the bill defers to the board's decision as to how it
moves forward because he felt "they were overstepping a little
bit. Although, I struggle with that decision."
2:44:08 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX related that she understands that some
people do not have a choice where they work and if there is
smoking in the establishment, they do not have the option of
quitting and moving to another job. Although, in the situation
of a volunteer who is not being paid and can come and go as they
please, she asked why the volunteer would be included in the
definition of employee because nothing is forcing them to stay.
SENATOR MICCICHE then offered his reason as to why it is
appropriate to be in the bill in that some folks can be creative
in how they define employee and volunteers. Some folks could
have an employee working for them in one business, and perhaps
they choose to volunteer in another business. He believes that
it was a way to avoid a "work around" and using the word
"volunteer" creatively. Unless Representative LeDoux could
think of another way to ensure that people were not finding a
way to do that, because "again you have the same problem, people
have to work" and that is the reason he supports it remaining in
the bill, he said.
2:45:54 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX noted that the sponsor had previously
talked about wanting to have the softest footprint, and
including a volunteer without any evidence that the volunteer is
actually being coerced because they work for another business,
does not seem to be the softest possible footprint. She
suggested that an employee be defined as one normally would
define an employee, and if there turns out to be a problem to
address the problem.
SENATOR MICCICHE commented that that dovetails with his answer
earlier regarding the issue with the Veterans' Clubs and many of
the animal clubs, such as the Elks, Moose, Eagles, and so forth.
In this case, he advised, those clubs have a tendency to have a
lot of volunteers that cover some of the hours and it could
become confusing. He mentioned that many folks have approached
him on that kind of a private club, particularly the Veterans'
Clubs, and stressed that there are Veterans' Club members
"screaming for smoke-free establishments" where they can visit
with their veterans. He said, "They don't want to step out
often," but younger veterans are coming home from various
countries with younger families, and "they are having
difficulties growing those clubs" due to some of the tobacco
consumption taking place in those clubs. Although, he
acknowledged, not "all of them" have come out formally in
support of this bill, the unofficial supporter is a high
proportion of users of those facilities. A lot of those
facilities have volunteers covering some of the hours, which was
one of the considerations, he said.
2:48:19 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX noted that she was still confused because
Senator Micciche had not given her anything that suggests that
our Veterans' Clubs or all sorts of clubs would have a tendency
to try to circumvent the law. Certainly, our veterans who have
fought for our freedoms and risked their lives for our freedoms
would be the last people to try to circumvent the law, she
opined.
SENATOR MICCICHE advised Chair Claman that "I will not sit here
and have my words twisted as though" ... He said that he could
give a long speech about his support for veterans, but what he
is trying to explain is that a lot of organizations have a lot
of volunteers. He stressed that this bill can in no manner be
construed in any reasonable approach to be anti-veteran, the
fact is that it is pro-veteran, especially pro-younger veterans
who are exposed to secondhand smoke and want to see a change.
He pointed out that he is supporting veterans in that approach
who want to see a change
CHAIR CLAMAN noted that this debate covers the classic question
about "where does one individual's right end and the right of
one's neighbor begins?" These are not easy questions and they
have been debated for decades.
2:50:04 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX surmised that the argument with the
veterans' organizations is not so much a concern with anyone
circumventing the law vis-à-vis the volunteers, but merely
because the sponsor believes that a number of people,
particularly the younger veterans, would like to see a smoke-
free environment.
SENATOR MICCICHE opined that there were many considerations to
be taken when processing a bill for four-years, and both
statements are true. He pointed out that there are individuals
who will find a creative way to (audio difficulties) that
sometimes continues to put people at risk, and he offered to
provide Representative LeDoux with publications from the
different veteran's groups that they have been working on this
nationwide effort to go smoke-free. He offered that it could be
a privately held facility that decides it will find a way to
find some volunteers for different events to avoid claiming
employees, but the effects are the same. He opined that Chair
Claman was correct in that it is about the greatest property
right, and the greatest property right in this country, as far
as he concerned, is the right of your own person. It is the
right, in a typical setting, for employees to be protected from
the effects of secondhand smoking, he advised.
2:51:57 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP asked whether it is true that most non-
profits in Alaska have a combination of paid and unpaid people
working for them.
SENATOR MICCICHE advised that "I can say" that the majority, but
he could also say there is a high percentage of private clubs
that have volunteer support within their ranks.
2:52:42 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP advised that when he was a staffer, he
carried this bill for two-years for Senate Micciche and regrets
they could not get it across the finish line. One of the things
they discovered with this question is that non-profits, by the
dozens, will have one paid CEO and a dozen volunteers.
Therefore, if people start parsing the definition, it is almost
impossible to go smoke-free, he pointed out.
2:53:17 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FANSLER advised that many times in Bethel, folks
may get sentenced to community service as part of their
[sentencing] and they are forced to volunteer "and that that can
take a large range." He asked whether that is what the bill is
also seeking to capture here, as well perhaps by the definition
of volunteer. For example, a situation where a single sole
practitioner business needs some volunteers to possibly unload a
shipment or help sort through donations. He asked whether that
would expand this to protect those people who are "kind of"
forced to volunteer in that situation.
SENATOR MICCICHE opined that that would probably be an area that
would not capture them. For instance, an accounting office
without employees and is an expansion of a home, that is not
covered by this. He said that he certainly does not think that
anyone will have the opportunity to recognize that they have
temporary volunteers working in that business that is not
generally covered. His interpretation, he offered, is that it
would be in a business that is generally covered, where the
volunteers would be regarded as employees.
2:54:48 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN referred to [HCS CSSB 63(CRA), AS
18.35.306(b)], page 6, lines 6-8, which read as follows:
(b) ... conspicuously display a sign that reads
"Smoking within (number of feet) Feet of Entrance
Prohibited by Law--Fine $50" visible from the outside
of each entrance to the building.
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN noted that in other places of the bill
there is just a prohibition on smoking generally with a $50
fine. He asked whether that would apply to Uber drivers and
whether every Uber driver must put that type of signage in their
vehicles.
SENATOR MICCICHE commented that possibly someone from Uber is
listening and could clarify that as a national policy, neither
Uber or Lyft allows for smoking in their vehicles at any time.
He said that he does not know whether they require the signage
and whether taxis or other vehicles for hire require signage.
2:56:03 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN referred to people who work out of the
house and asked whether that becomes prohibited under this bill
as far as smoking or signage.
SENATOR MICCICHE answered "No."
MS. NEENON, in response to Representative Eastman's previous
question, answered that vehicles would have to have some sort of
a no smoking sign, which could include anything from a little no
smoking sticker, or something printed off, or a "no Puffin"
sign, "those are all allowed for in here."
2:57:12 PM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD expressed concern about parents smoking
in their homes and commented that there is nothing the
legislature can do about that issue. She said her husband grew
up in a family where both parents smoked, and he suffers the
effects. She offered concern as to the powerful testimonies and
the harmful impacts that secondhand smoking causes on innocent
bystanders.
2:59:58 PM
SENATOR MICCICHE thanked the committee for hearing the bill,
noting that it is difficult to find the proper line between the
government's role, protecting innocent folks, and a parent's
choice. He related that it was a struggle "that we had, which
is the only reason I could go as far as I would go, I really
don't support going any further."
[HCS SB 63(CRA) was held over.]
3:00:42 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Judiciary Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 3:00 p.m.