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


     

AJPH First Look, published online ahead of print Jan 15, 2009
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
AJPH.2008.138461v1
99/3/430    most recent
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 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 Web of Science (1)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Tung, G. J.
Right arrow Articles by Glantz, S. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Tung, G. J.
Right arrow Articles by Glantz, S. A.
Related Collections
Right arrow Health Policy
Right arrow Media
Right arrow Government
Right arrow Tobacco Control
March 2009, Vol 99, No. 3 | American Journal of Public Health 430-439
© 2009 American Public Health Association
DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2008.138461

GOVERNMENT, POLITICS, AND LAW

Competing Initiatives: A New Tobacco Industry Strategy to Oppose Statewide Clean Indoor Air Ballot Measures

Gregory J. Tung, MPH, Yogi H. Hendlin, MSc and Stanton A. Glantz, PhD

The authors are with the Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education, University of California, San Francisco.

Correspondence: Requests for reprints should be sent to Stanton A. Glantz, PhD, Room 366 Library, 530 Parnassus, University of California, San Francisco, CA 94143-1390 (e-mail: glantz{at}medicine.ucsf.edu).

To describe how the tobacco and gaming industries opposed clean indoor air voter initiatives in 2006, we analyzed media records and government and other publicly available documents and conducted interviews with knowledgeable individuals. In an attempt to avoid strict "smoke free" regulations pursued by health groups via voter initiatives in Arizona, Ohio, and Nevada, in 2006, the tobacco and gaming industries sponsored competing voter initiatives for alternative laws.

Health groups succeeded in defeating the pro-tobacco competing initiatives because they were able to dispel confusion and create a head-to-head competition by associating each campaign with its respective backer and instructing voters to vote "no" on the pro-tobacco initiative in addition to voting "yes" on the health group initiative.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Tobacco ControlHome page
K L Lum, R L Barnes, and S A Glantz
Enacting tobacco taxes by direct popular vote in the United States: lessons from 20 years of experience
Tob. Control, October 1, 2009; 18(5): 377 - 386.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2009 by the American Public Health Association