Keep Columbia Free called and asked us to join the effort to reform marijuana laws in Missouri. To this end, we suggested that the editors of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch publish John Payne's strong op-ed and help begin the discussion statewide.
http://www.stltoday.com/news/opinion/guest-commentary-marijuana-laws-should-spare-adult-smokers/article_b69c95b5-b138-512f-aaa6-78f52d608407.html
Friday, December 30, 2011
Reasonable Marijuana Regulation in Missouri
Posted by Bill Hannegan at 7:55 AM |
Monday, December 26, 2011
Tuesday, December 20, 2011
Letter to Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels
Dear Governor Daniels,
I read online that you are considering supporting a smoking ban for Indiana. I wanted to warn you that smoking bans across the country have done grave economic harm to adult venues such as bars and casinos.
Please find attached to this e-mail a number of studies, all conducted by PhD economists, which find that smoking bans do indeed harm businesses such as bars and casinos. While I am sure the American Cancer Society has presented to you many contrary studies which find that smoking bans do no economic harm, I have to warn you that these contrary studies have been conducted almost entirely by public health professionals, not economists, and have been published in public health journals, not economic journals. As economist Dr. Jonathan Tomlin pointed out in Forbes Magazine, these amateur studies are "riddled with statistical shortcomings and... flaws."
Please allow me to suggest to you the preemptive exemption for "over 21" workplaces in the Tennessee smoking ban. Such an exemption would greatly reduce any economic harm threatened by an Indiana smoking ban. Please find the Tennessee public smoking law attached.
Governor Daniels, the latest Gallup Poll shows that while most Americans do favor a ban on smoking in restaurants, Americans also favor some sort of compromise accommodation of smokers in adult venues such as bars and casinos. Only 31 percent of Americans favor a total ban on smoking in bars and casinos. I am sure similar numbers hold true in Indiana as well.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/
DOI: 10.2202/1935-1682.1628
The Economic Impact of a Smoking Ban in Columbia, Missouri: An Analysis of Sales Tax Data for the First Year
A Report on the Impacts of the City of Dallas Smoking Ban on Alcoholic Beverage Sales March 2003 to March 2004
The Revenue Performance of Casinos after a Smoking Ban: The Case of Illinois
Impact of Smoking Bans on Restaurants
No Smoking at the Slot Machines: The Effect of a Smoke-Free Law on Delaware Gaming Revenues
Posted by Bill Hannegan at 2:23 PM |
Sunday, December 18, 2011
Smoking Ban Studies by PhD Economists Finding Business Loss
Letter sent to City of Indianapolis & Marion County City-County Council December 6th:
Honorable
Indianapolis & Marion County Councillors,
DOI: 10.2202/1935-1682.1628
The Economic Impact of a Smoking Ban in Columbia, Missouri: An Analysis of Sales Tax Data for the First Year
A Report on the Impacts of the City of Dallas Smoking Ban on Alcoholic Beverage Sales March 2003 to March 2004
The Revenue Performance of Casinos after a Smoking Ban: The Case of Illinois
Impact of Smoking Bans on Restaurants
No Smoking at the Slot Machines: The Effect of a Smoke-Free Law on Delaware Gaming Revenues
Posted by Bill Hannegan at 9:10 AM |
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
Sunday, November 27, 2011
Occupy St. Louis
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metro/occupy-group-holds-meeting-at-galleria/article_4c19f04e-ec00-5060-a8a6-79fde0dcc66c.html#ixzz1ez1RG8jh
Posted by Bill Hannegan at 11:39 PM |
O'Fallon VFW Post 5077 down 30 percent due to smoking ban!
The O'Fallon smoking ban is taking its toll. I called VFW Post 5077 in O'Fallon about Monday night's smoking ban vote. They report being down 30 percent due to the O'Fallon smoking ban! They also said they would not have minded the ban if the Post had voted on it, rather than the general populace.
Posted by Bill Hannegan at 1:42 PM |
Friday, November 25, 2011
Monday, November 21, 2011
Why the Pepper Spray?
My friends and I have been arrested at protests where we refused to walk. The police never had any trouble carting us off. Why the pepper spray?
Posted by Bill Hannegan at 8:40 PM |
Sunday, November 13, 2011
Open Letter to St. Charles County Council
Cell phone: 314.315.3779
Posted by Bill Hannegan at 1:33 PM |
Wednesday, October 26, 2011
A Website to Nowhere
For close to a month ads have been running on KMOX. A man and a woman apparently sitting in a bar are concerned that people are smoking. After the man states that he thought there was a smoking ban, the woman explains that there are loopholes in the law. He states that it’s not fair or healthy. The narrator goes on to tell listeners to go to http://smokefreestl.org to find information on helping close the loopholes.
It’s a typical ad that is meant to drive users to the website. The ad is designed to appeal to listeners to take action. What I find baffling is if a listener actually went to the website they would find little information. The website as of 10/26/2011 has not been updated since July. Even then most recent updates have been links to newspaper articles. Anyone going to the site wouldn’t find any useable information.
The website is that of the nearly defunct Smoke-Free St Louis Organization. They were very active in 2009 helping to pass the St Louis City smoking ban. About two weeks before the Board of Alderman voted on the ban SFSTL lost its funding. I noted then that once nobody was paid to show at the aldermanic meeting all participation stopped. Over the next two years there have been only a couple of postings to the site.
When you look at the cost to write, pay voice actors and produce the ad how they could make such as simple mistake. Even worse, the ad ran many times daily for a month and no one ever thought to correct it. I can only guess to how much was spent on the campaign. It had to be tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands. Can you imagine a private company spending its advertising budget to promote a product that didn’t exist!
I have mixed feelings on this latest use of stimulus funds. As someone who opposes smoking bans, I’m happy they are not using taxpayer money in an efficient way to reduce our freedom. As a taxpayer it really upsets me that I along with all Americans have to pay this money back.
Tony Palazzolo
Posted by Bill Hannegan at 7:45 PM |
Sunday, October 09, 2011
Secondhand Paint Smoke
Is it plausible that burning paint with a torch outside could cause this sort of catastrophic effect described by this mom? I am very sceptical:
Posted by Bill Hannegan at 1:43 PM |
Sunday, October 02, 2011
American Cancer Society Missouri Tobacco Tax Increase Proposal
American Cancer Society Tobacco Tax
By this initiative petition, the American Cancer Society seeks to ensure for itself a permanent source of Missouri taxpayer funding for it lobbying activities.
Posted by Bill Hannegan at 5:42 PM |
Thursday, September 22, 2011
Tobacco Free St. Louis Warning Letter
Dear Tobacco-Free St. Louis Directors and Officers,
All this year the singe focus of Tobacco Free St. Louis has been its escalating lobbying campaign meant to induce County municipalities to pass strict smoking bans, and to force the St. Louis County Council to eliminate all exemptions from St. Louis County's Indoor Clean Air Code. This lobbying campaign has culminated in an attempt by Chairwoman Fraser, detailed this week in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, to enlist a federal agency to pressure the Council on this matter:
http://www.stltoday.com/news/
Clearly a 501c3 educational charity such as Tobacco Free St. Louis is not allowed to devote itself to influencing legislation in this way: http://www.irs.gov/charities/
While I do not wish to limit the speech or tactics of any group trying to influence St. Louis County government, it is wrong for any group lobbying to restrict the freedom of County businesses to enjoy the advantage of 501c3 tax-exempt status unavailable to the threatened businesses. I therefore ask that Tobacco Free St. Louis either abide by the lobbying rules governing 501c3 charities, or voluntarily give up its tax-exempt status. All I am asking for in this matter is fairness.
Sincerely,
Bill Hannegan
Home phone: 314.367.3779
Cell phone: 314.315.3779
Posted by Bill Hannegan at 6:05 PM |
Thursday, August 25, 2011
Lets Face It
Lets Face It is the slogan for the anti-tobacco campaign for St Louis County. It comes from the 7.6 million dollar stimulus grant to St Louis County. They have run commercials over the past several months. One commercial caught my attention. It wasn't that the message was new or unique. It was what the message included. The commercial is several young people making statements. One of the statements is "smoking makes you look cool". The message is that people say all kinds of weird things that aren't true. The statement that I found odd was "One day I'll find calculus useful." Now we have a government agency making fun of a higher education. Are we now using tax dollars to dissuade people from higher learning? Now I don't believe that anyone is going to drop calculus because of this commercial. Of course I don't believe that anyone is going to quit smoking either. One idea did pop in my mind. Of course they don't like people with higher math skills. The entire anti-smoking campaign is built on the general populations lack of math skill. If you understand how to read the research you understand that the "risk" is so small that it can't be measured. You would understand that driving to a restaurant or bar is hundreds of times more risky. You would ask questions that they can't answer honestly. I'm sure this was not their intent. I don't have a problem with programs that help people stop smoking. Does it really take millions of dollars to advertise a website that regurgitated all the quit smoking strategies. Even worse it pushes people away from far more effective methods of auricular therapy, electronic cigarettes and cold turkey. The message is that the only way to do it is with pharma nicotine replacement drugs and counseling. Its really a taxpayer paid advertisement for pharmaceutical solutions. I wouldn't have a problem if it was effective. I wouldn't have a problem if it disseminated unbiased information. I wouldn't have a problem if as a taxpayer I didn't have to pay this money back. Lets Face It, they are more interested in pushing pharma products then helping people quit. Lets face it, it's a complete waste of money.
Tony Palazzolo
Posted by Bill Hannegan at 8:52 AM |
Wednesday, August 03, 2011
Councilman Steve Stenger
Back in March, Tobacco Free St. Louis head Pat Lindsey assured everyone that the elimination of exemptions was such "a done deal" by County Executive Dooley and the Health Department that she didn't even need to lobby anymore, as if an exemption free ordinance had already been written.
http://blogs.riverfronttimes.com/dailyrft/2011/03/county_smoking_ban_exemptions_st_louis.php
New Tobacco Free St. Louis head Barb Fraser recently warned the County Council that they owed the elimination of the exemptions in exchange for the $7,000,000 of Stimulus money the County Health Department got to fight smoking.
http://mogasp.wordpress.com/2011/08/01/2011-07-27-p-d-st-louis-county-council-is-urged-to-end-smoking-ban-exemptions/
I am glad to see that Councilman Stenger has resolved to do his own independent thinking on this issue. Check Jason Rosenbaum's Patch article on Stenger:
http://clayton-richmondheights.patch.com/articles/stenger-smoking-ban-changes-wont-come-immediately
Posted by Bill Hannegan at 8:54 PM |
Sunday, July 17, 2011
Barbara Fraser and Tobacco Free St. Louis
Dear Board Members of Tobacco Free St. Louis,
An article by Brett Blume of KMOX identifies Barbara Fraser as the new head of Tobacco Free St. Louis. If this is so, I hope the Board will remind Ms. Fraser that her new position puts limits on her former ability to lobby for smoking bans. I am all for Ms. Fraser's freedom to promote specific smoking ban legislation as a private citizen or councilman, but she now can no longer do that as the head of a tax-exempt educational charity. Her statements at the July 13th press conference clearly constitute the "lobbying" or "attempts to influence legislation" in St. Louis County that is beyond the legitimate educational purpose of a 501c3 charity.
http://www.irs.gov/charities/
I hope in the future Ms.Fraser will work to educate the St. Louis public concerning the dangers of tobacco smoke and the possible benefits of smoking bans in general, but leave the fight for specific new laws for St. Louis County to grassroots political groups who can legitimately undertake that fight.
Sincerely,
Bill Hannegan
Home phone: 314.367.3779
Cell phone: 314.315.3779
Posted by Bill Hannegan at 8:45 PM |
Saturday, July 16, 2011
Barbara Fraser heads Tobacco Free St. Louis
I checked with reporter Brett Blume at KMOX yesterday and he confirmed that Barbara Fraser has replaced Pat Lindsey as the head of Tobacco Free St. Louis. I am not sure this was a smart move. Everyone liked Pat Lindsey, but a lot of hard feelings on County Council remain due to her handling of the smoking ban issue in 2009.
Posted by Bill Hannegan at 7:59 AM |
Wednesday, July 13, 2011
Letter to Stacy Reliford
Dear Chairman Reliford,
I was alarmed that the survey released today by the American Cancer Society is so at odds with previous research concerning St. Louis County. The latest survey by Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services found that only 30 percent of County residents favored a total ban on smoking in bars and cocktail lounges. This finding was backed up by a 2010 national Gallup Poll which found that only 30 percent of Americans favor a total ban on smoking in bars. I find the sudden change of local opinion your survey implies implausible.
I am also disappointed that the Mellman group was chosen to conduct your phone survey. In its website self-description, the Mellman group reveals itself to be more of a PR/advocacy firm than a neutral research group! They make this promise to paying clients like the American Cancer Society:
"Whether winning for you means getting more votes than your opponent, selling more product, changing public policy, raising more money or generating more activism, The Mellman Group transforms data into winning strategies."
http://www.mellmangroup.com/
I have to wonder if the "win at all costs" philosophy of the Mellman group led to some bias in the questions asked or the selection of those called. Perhaps you could release the survey in order to resolve any doubt.
Chairman Reliford, I was also surprised to learn today in the KMOX report that former County Councilman Barbara Fraser was chosen to head Tobacco Free St. Louis. This choice bodes ill for St. Louis County small bars since Ms. Fraser has privately stated that casinos are "too powerful to include in a smoking ban". I hope you and she are not working to ban smoking in all St. Louis County mom and pop bars, but exempt the "powerful" casinos! As you know, the only fair and rational exemption is an "over 21" exemption that treats all businesses equally. To exempt only casinos is just wrong.
Sincerely,
Bill Hannegan
Home phone: 314.367.3779
Cell phone: 314.315.3779
Posted by Bill Hannegan at 9:45 PM |
Tuesday, June 21, 2011
Dr. Varun Puri's Statements in Suburban Journal
Dear St. Charles County Councilmen,
In a Suburban Journal article yesterday, Dr. Varun Puri made statements in support of a St. Charles County smoking ban that need qualification. While Dr. Puri rightly suggests that no one in the scientific community contends that all secondhand smoke exposure is without ill health effects, the extent of those ill-effects is indeed still in dispute as is the ability of ventilation/filtrations systems to reduce secondhand smoke exposure to an tolerable level. As evidence of this ongoing dispute, please find attached a letter written in 2009 by Dr. Geoffrey Kabat, Senior Epidemiologist at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, to the St. Louis County Council, which questions the extent of the life risk of second smoke and makes this statement about the use of air filtration to address the health concerns of secondhand smoke:
"Yet, since the available evidence suggests that the effects of environmental tobacco smoke, particularly for coronary heart disease, are considerably smaller than generally believed, lawmakers may therefore have greater latitude than generally believed to consider the segregation of smokers and nonsmokers and the use of air filtration as adequate and responsible ways to address the health concerns of environmental tobacco smoke in workplaces such as bars and restaurants."
Please also find attached a letter from Dr. Roger Jenkins, a scientist at the Department of Energy's Oak Ridge National Laboratory, who led the largest study ever conducted concerning the actual smoke exposure of employees in bars and restaurants in 16 US cites, as well as tests of the effectiveness of restaurant ventilation systems against secondhand smoke. St. Louis was one of the cities tested. Dr. Jenkins sums up his findings:
"Overall concentrations of ETS were fairly low: the highest concentration of particles measured in any facility were still 1/7th of the OSHA Permissible Exposure Limit...The data from the study indicated that it is possible to reduce ETS in the non‐smoking section to levels that are comparable to those encountered in similar facilities in which smoking is prohibited altogether. The findings suggested that effective segregation of smoking and non‐smoking areas in hospitality facilities is both achievable and economically viable if sufficient attention is given to overall system design, robust air exchange rates, directional airflow, and the use of appropriate heat recovery systems."
Let me further add that even Surgeon General Carmona in his 2006 report reserved judgement concerning the ability of air filtration systems to remove smoke from bar and restaurant air saying that their effectiveness needed more widespread demonstration to be accepted. Local bar employees report that such systems can indeed remove the sight and smell of smoke, and tests conducted by the casinos have found that their best air filtration systems are able to render indoor air as clean as the air outdoors despite indoor smoking. Please find this casino research attached.
Councilmen, please do not let overblown statements in the press by smoking ban advocates bully you into not considering technologies that could provide a legitimate basis for a rational smoking ban exemption such as the City of Chicago included in its ban. Though I believe OSHA's ruling concerning secondhand smoke in the workplace should be accepted as final, rational options short of a total County ban exist which can allow business owners, employees and patrons continued free choice and should be explored.
Sincerely,
Bill Hannegan
314.367.3779
314.315.3779 (cell)
Posted by Bill Hannegan at 2:02 PM |