Advertisement
AJPH
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


American Journal of Public Health, Vol. 87, Issue 6 968-973, Copyright © 1997 by American Public Health Association

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow purchase articles
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Related articles in AJPH
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Right arrow Get other permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Heiser, P F
Right arrow Articles by Begay, M E
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Heiser, P F
Right arrow Articles by Begay, M E
The campaign to raise the tobacco tax in Massachusetts.

P F Heiser and M E Begay

Department of Community Health Studies, School of Public Health and Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts, Amherst 01003-0430, USA.

OBJECTIVES: Question 1 raised the Massachusetts state tobacco tax to fund tobacco education programs. This paper examines the process of qualifying and passing Question 1. METHODS: Information was gathered from internal memoranda, meeting minutes, newspaper articles, internal documents, letters, newsletters, news and press releases, and personal interviews. Data about campaign contributions were obtained from the Massachusetts Office of Campaign and Political Finance. RESULTS: Three factors help explain why Question 1 passed: (1) the policy environment was favorable because of the social unacceptability of smoking; (2) the activists assembled a large coalition of supporters; and (3) the activists countered industry claims that the new tax would hurt small business and lower-income smokers and would be wasted by the legislature. The ballot initiative passed despite the industry's $7 million campaign to defeat it. CONCLUSIONS: The apparent influence of the tobacco industry on the legislature was the driving force behind the decision of public health activists to qualify Question 1. Moving policy-making out of the legislature into the public arena widened the scope of conflict and enabled public health activists to win.


Related articles in AJPH:

Dealing with tobacco--the implications of a legislative settlement with the tobacco industry.
K E Warner
AJPH 1997 87: 906-909. [PDF]  



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
AJPHHome page
B. S. Andersen, M. E. Begay, and C. B. Lawson
Breaking the Alliance: Defeating the Tobacco Industry's Allies and Enacting Youth Access Restrictions in Massachusetts
Am J Public Health, November 1, 2003; 93(11): 1922 - 1928.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Epidemiol. Community HealthHome page
W. A Ritch and M. E Begay
Smoke and mirrors: how Massachusetts diverted millions in tobacco tax revenues
J Epidemiol Community Health, July 1, 2002; 56(7): 522 - 528.
[Abstract] [Full Text]


Home page
Health Educ ResHome page
M. Stead, G. Hastings, and D. Eadie
The challenge of evaluating complex interventions: a framework for evaluating media advocacy
Health Educ. Res., June 1, 2002; 17(3): 351 - 364.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Tobacco ControlHome page
C P Morley, K M Cummings, A Hyland, G A Giovino, and J K Horan
Tobacco Institute lobbying at the state and local levels of government in the 1990s
Tob. Control, March 1, 2002; 11(90001): i102 - 109.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Tobacco ControlHome page
W. A Ritch and M. E Begay
Smoke and mirrors: how Massachusetts diverted millions in tobacco tax revenues
Tob. Control, December 1, 2001; 10(4): 309 - 316.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Tobacco ControlHome page
L. K Goldman and S. A Glantz
The passage and initial implementation of Oregon's Measure 44
Tob. Control, September 1, 1999; 8(3): 311 - 322.
[Abstract] [Full Text]


Home page
Tobacco ControlHome page
S. A. Bialous and S. A Glantz
Arizona's tobacco control initiative illustrates the need for continuing oversight by tobacco control advocates
Tob. Control, June 1, 1999; 8(2): 141 - 151.
[Abstract] [Full Text]


Home page
JAMAHome page
J. P. Pierce, E. A. Gilpin, S. L. Emery, M. M. White, B. Rosbrook, and C. C. Berry
Has the California Tobacco Control Program Reduced Smoking?
JAMA, September 9, 1998; 280(10): 893 - 899.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JAMAHome page
L. K. Goldman and S. A. Glantz
Evaluation of Antismoking Advertising Campaigns
JAMA, March 11, 1998; 279(10): 772 - 777.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1997 by the American Public Health Association