[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 74 (Tuesday, June 3, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5256-S5257]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. LAUTENBERG (for himself, Mr. Durbin and Mr. Kerry):
  S. 826. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to protect the 
public from health hazards caused by exposure to environmental tobacco 
smoke, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Environment and 
Public Works.


                 THE SMOKE-FREE ENVIRONMENT ACT OF 1997

 Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I introduce the Smoke-Free 
Environment Act of 1997. This bill will help decrease the death rates 
from a toxic pollutant that exists in the air of our Nation's 
factories, office buildings, retail stores, and Government facilities. 
I am speaking of secondhand smoke from cigarettes and other tobacco 
products, which kills tens of thousands of Americans each year.
  A recent study put an end to the tobacco industry's distortions and 
misinformation on this issue. A Harvard University study which tracked 
32,000 nonsmoking women for 10 years found that regular exposure at 
home or at work to secondhand smoke nearly doubled their risk of heart 
disease.
  Mr. President, we have been aware of the risk of lung cancer from 
secondhand smoke for several years now, but this study confirms what 
many have suspected about the link between secondhand smoke and heart 
disease. The results of this study means that approximately 50,000 
fatal heart attacks each year are caused by exposure to tobacco smoke.
  My bill would require that every building--both Government and 
private--protect Americans from exposure to secondhand smoke. It can be 
accomplished in one of two ways. The building could either ban smoking 
altogether or set up smoking rooms that are separately ventilated from 
the rest of the building.
  Mr. President, the bill also would finish a job I started with 
Senator Durbin 10 years ago. In 1987, we banned smoking on domestic 
airline flights of 2 hours or less. In 1989, we extended that ban to 
flights of 6 hours or less.
  The smoking ban has been a tremendous success. Passengers have been 
so pleased by a smokefree environment in the air that many airlines 
have voluntarily extended the ban to all domestic flights and 
international flights. However, some airlines have not, and many 
passengers and flight attendants are still subjected to dangerous 
secondhand smoke on airplanes.
  Mr. President, the Smoke-Free Environment Act will also ban smoking 
on any flight that originates in the United States, and lands in a 
foreign country. Americans should be able to travel abroad with the 
peace of mind that they will not be locked into a poisonous cabin for 
10 or 15 hours, and flight attendants will not have to worry that they 
will increase their risk of heart disease almost twofold by simply 
performing their job.
  Mr. President, yesterday, a trial opened in Miami, in which flight 
attendants sued the tobacco industry over health injuries caused by 
exposure to secondhand smoke before the passage of my law banning 
smoking on domestic flights. These flight attendants have a legitimate 
case, and it is time to prevent similar litigation in the future by 
cleaning all the air in the skies, in Government offices, in stores, 
and in all of our places of work.
  Mr. President, nonsmokers never choose to be exposed to tobacco 
smoke. The smoke of a cigarette is not only harming the smoker, but 
also severely injuring others with secondhand smoke.
  Multiple studies have shown that regular exposure to secondhand smoke 
results in the following for nonsmokers: Damage to the arteries, 
reduction of oxygen supply in the body, and increases in the tendency 
of blood platelet to stick together and clot.
  Mr. President, how can we speak about the importance of children's 
health while our kids are being exposed to this deadly smoke. It is 
time for Congress to get serious about the health crisis caused by 
secondhand smoke, and pass the Smoke-Free Environment Act.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a copy of the bill be 
inserted into the Record. I also ask unanimous consent that a New York 
Times article on the Harvard study be inserted into the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                 S. 826

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Smoke-Free Environment Act 
     of 1997''.

     SEC. 2. SMOKE-FREE ENVIRONMENT POLICY.

       The Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 201 et seq.) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:
                ``TITLE XXVIII--SMOKE-FREE ENVIRONMENTS

     ``SEC. 2801. SMOKE-FREE ENVIRONMENT POLICY.

       ``(a) Policy Required.--In order to protect children and 
     adults from cancer, respiratory disease, heart disease, and 
     other adverse health effects from breathing environmental 
     tobacco smoke, the responsible entity for each public 
     facility shall adopt and implement at such facility a smoke-
     free environment policy which meets the requirements of 
     subsection (b).
       ``(b) Elements of Policy.--Each smoke-free environment 
     policy for a public facility shall--
       ``(1) prohibit the smoking of cigarettes, cigars, and 
     pipes, and any other combustion of tobacco, within the 
     facility and on facility property within the immediate 
     vicinity of the entrance to the facility; and
       ``(2) post a clear and prominent notice of the smoking 
     prohibition in appropriate and visible locations at the 
     public facility.

     The policy may provide an exception to the prohibition 
     specified in paragraph (1) for one or more specially 
     designated smoking areas within a public facility if such 
     area or areas meet the requirements of subsection (c).
       ``(c) Specially Designated Smoking Areas.--A specially 
     designated smoking area meets the requirements of this 
     subsection if it satisfies each of the following conditions:
       ``(1) The area is ventilated in accordance with 
     specifications promulgated by the Administrator that ensure 
     that air from the area is directly exhausted to the outside 
     and does not recirculate or drift to other areas within the 
     public facility.
       ``(2) Nonsmoking individuals do not have to enter the area 
     for any purpose.
       ``(3) Children under the age of 15 are prohibited from 
     entering the area.

     ``SEC. 2802. CITIZEN ACTIONS.

       ``(a) In General.--An action may be brought to enforce the 
     requirements of this title by any aggrieved person, any State 
     or local government agency, or the Administrator.
       ``(b) Venue.--Any action to enforce this title may be 
     brought in any United States district court for the district 
     in which the defendant resides or is doing business to enjoin 
     any violation of this title or to impose a civil penalty for 
     any such violation in the amount of not more than $5,000 per 
     day of violation. The district courts shall have 
     jurisdiction, without regard to the amount in controversy or 
     the citizenship of the parties, to enforce this title and to 
     impose civil penalties under this title.
       ``(c) Notice.--An aggrieved person shall give any alleged 
     violator notice of at least 60 days prior to commencing an 
     action under this section. No action may be commenced by an 
     aggrieved person under this section if such alleged violator 
     complies with the requirements of this title within such 60-
     day period and thereafter.
       ``(d) Costs.--The court, in issuing any final order in any 
     action brought pursuant to this section, may award costs of 
     litigation (including reasonable attorney and expert witness 
     fees) to any prevailing party, whenever the court determines 
     such award is appropriate.
       ``(e) Penalties.--The court in any action under this 
     section to apply civil penalties shall have discretion to 
     order that such civil penalties be used for projects that 
     further the policies of this title. The court shall obtain 
     the view of the Administrator in exercising such discretion 
     and selecting any such projects.
       ``(f) Damages.--No damages of any kind, whether 
     compensatory or punitive, shall be awarded in actions brought 
     pursuant to this title.
       ``(g) Isolated Incidents.--Violations of the prohibition 
     specified in section 2801(b)(1) by an individual within a 
     public facility or on facility property shall not be 
     considered violations of this title on the part of the 
     responsible entity if such violations--
       ``(1) are isolated incidents that are not part of a pattern 
     of violations of such prohibition; and
       ``(2) are not authorized by the responsible entity.

     ``SEC. 2803. PREEMPTION.

       ``Nothing in this title shall preempt or otherwise affect 
     any other Federal, State or local law which provides 
     protection from health hazards from environmental tobacco 
     smoke.

[[Page S5257]]

     ``SEC. 2804. REGULATIONS.

       ``The Administrator is authorized to promulgate such 
     regulations as the Administrator deems necessary to carry out 
     this title.

     ``SEC. 2805. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       ``The requirements of this title shall take effect on the 
     date that is 1 year after the date of the enactment of the 
     Smoke-Free Environment Act of 1997.

     ``SEC. 2806. DEFINITIONS.

       ``In this title:
       ``(1) Administrator.--The term `Administrator' means the 
     Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.
       ``(2) Public facility.--The term `public facility' means 
     any building regularly entered by 10 or more individuals at 
     least one day per week, including any such building owned by 
     or leased to a Federal, State, or local government entity. 
     Such term shall not include any building or portion thereof 
     regularly used for residential purposes.
       ``(3) Responsible entity.--The term `responsible entity' 
     means, with respect to any public facility, the owner of such 
     facility, except that in the case of any such facility or 
     portion thereof which is leased, such term means the 
     lessee.''.

     SEC. 3. PROHIBITIONS AGAINST SMOKING ON SCHEDULED FLIGHTS.

       (a) In General.--Section 41706 of title 49, United States 
     Code, is amended to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 41706. Prohibitions against smoking on scheduled 
       flights

       ``(a) Smoking Prohibition in Intrastate and Interstate Air 
     Transportation.--An individual may not smoke in an aircraft 
     on a scheduled airline flight segment in interstate air 
     transportation or intrastate air transportation.
       ``(b) Smoking Prohibition in Foreign Air Transportation.--
     The Secretary of Transportation shall require all air 
     carriers and foreign air carriers to prohibit, on and after 
     the 120th day following the date of the enactment of the 
     Smoke-Free Environment Act of 1997, smoking in any aircraft 
     on a scheduled airline flight segment within the United 
     States or between a place in the United States and a place 
     outside the United States.
       ``(c) Limitation on Applicability.--With respect to an 
     aircraft operated by a foreign air carrier, the smoking 
     prohibitions contained in subsections (a) and (b) shall apply 
     only to the passenger cabin and lavatory of the aircraft.
       ``(d) Regulations.--The Secretary shall prescribe 
     regulations necessary to carry out this section.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) 
     shall take effect on the 60th day following the date of the 
     enactment of this Act.
                                                                    ____


          [From the New York Times News Service, May 20, 1997]

           Study Finds Secondhand Smoke Doubles Heart Disease

                           (By Denise Grady)

       Secondhand cigarette smoke is more dangerous than 
     previously thought, Harvard researchers are reporting on 
     Tuesday in a study with broad implications for public health 
     policy and probable direct impact on at least one major 
     lawsuit.
       The 10-year study, which tracked more than 32,000 healthy 
     women who never smoked, has found that regular exposure to 
     other peoples' smoking at home or work almost doubled the 
     risk of heart disease.
       Many earlier studies have linked secondhand smoke to heart 
     disease, but the new findings show the biggest increase in 
     risk ever reported, and the researchers say that it applies 
     equally to men and women.
       The women in the study, who ranged in age from 36 to 61 
     when the study began, suffered 152 heart attacks, 25 of them 
     fatal. The results mean that ``there may be up to 50,000 
     Americans dying of heart attacks from passive smoking each 
     year,'' said Dr. Ichiro Kawachi, an assistant professor of 
     health and social behavior at the Harvard School of Public 
     Health and the lead author of the study, which was published 
     in the journal Circulation.
       By contrast, lung cancer deaths from passive smoking are 
     estimated to be far fewer, at 3,000 to 4,000 a year. Because 
     heart disease is much more common than lung cancer, even a 
     small increase in risk can cause many deaths.
       Before this study, it was known that passive smoking caused 
     increased risk for several ailments, including asthma and 
     bronchitis, as well as middle-ear infections in young 
     children. But the increased risk for heath disease had been 
     estimated at about 30 percent.
       ``This is a very important study,' said Dr. Stanton Glantz, 
     a professor of medicine at the University of California at 
     San Francisco, who has done extensive research on passive 
     smoking but who was not involved in the Harvard study. ``It's 
     exceptionally strong and from a very solid group.'' Glantz 
     also praised the Harvard team for what he called its careful 
     analysis of workplace exposure to smoke, which had rarely 
     been done before.
       :`That's important because of the effort to create laws 
     controlling smoking in the workplace,'' he said.
       Although the federal Occupational Safety and Health 
     Administration has proposed nationwide workplace rules, they 
     are not yet in effect. Regulations vary by state or city.
       ``This study will be of enormous help to legislative 
     bodies, statewide and locally, who are trying to get limits 
     on smoking, especially in controversial areas like 
     restaurants and bars, where the tobacco industry has worked 
     closely with restaurant associations to block legislation to 
     make these places go smoke free,'' said Edward Sweda, a 
     senior lawyer with the Tobacco Control Resource Center at 
     Northeastern University in Boston.
       The study may be particularly pertinent for one lawsuit.
       ``From our standpoint, that's a wonderful study,'' said 
     Stanley Rosenblatt, a Miami lawyer representing flight 
     attendants in a class-action suit against tobacco companies 
     that will go to trial on June 2.
       That suit is the first class-action suit based on the 
     effects of secondhand smoke. The case could ultimately 
     involve 60,000 former and current flight attendants, who will 
     be seeking billions in damages, Rosenblatt said. The 
     attendants contend they were harmed by smoke in airplane 
     cabins when smoking was legal on most flights. Most of the 
     plaintiffs have had lung cancer or respiratory ailments.
       The Philip Morris Cos., which is named in the flight 
     attendants' suit, declined to comment on the study. The 
     Tobacco Institute, an industry group, said it could not 
     comment on the study because it has not seen a copy of it.
       The data being reported on Tuesday are from the Nurses' 
     Health Study, a project that began in 1976 with 121,700 
     female nurses filling out detailed surveys every two years 
     about their health and habits. To measure the effects of 
     passive smoking, the researchers asked the women in 1982 
     about their exposure, and then monitored new cases of heart 
     disease for the next decade. The analysis did not include all 
     the study participants, but only the 32,046 who had never 
     smoked and who at the onset did not have heart disease or 
     cancer.
       The women who reported being exposed regularly to cigarette 
     smoke at home or work had a 91 percent higher risk of heart 
     attack than those with no exposure. Even though the women 
     worked in hospitals some were exposed to smoke on the job 
     because at the time of the study many hospitals allowed 
     smoking in certain areas. The study was set up to make sure 
     that other risk factors like diabetes and high blood pressure 
     did not account for the difference between the two groups.
       Laboratory studies of the effects of passive smoke on the 
     body support the survey findings, Glantz said.
       In studies of both people and animals. Glantz and other 
     researchers have identified several ways in which the 
     chemicals in secondhand smoke can contribute to heart 
     disease. Besides reducing a person's oxygen supply, the 
     substances damage arteries, lower levels of the beneficial 
     form of cholesterol known as HDL and increase the tendency of 
     blood platelets to stick to one another and form clots that 
     can trigger a heart attack. A study last year of healthy 
     teen-agers and adults exposed to passive smoking for an hour 
     or more a day detected artery damage. The higher the exposure 
     was, the greater the damage.
       But once the exposure ceases, the damage may quickly heal.
       ``In active smokers, the risk of heart disease drops 
     immediately,'' half of the way to that of a nonsmoker within 
     a year, Glantz said. ``It never gets quite back to the 
     nonsmoker's level, but it comes close,'' he said. ``One would 
     expect the same to be true for passive smoking.''
       The Harvard study may supply ammunition for more lawsuit 
     against the tobacco industry.
       ``I think it could have very profound implications 
     legally,'' said John Banzhaf, a law professor at George 
     Washington University and executive director of Action on 
     Smoking and Health, an antismoking group. ``We now have proof 
     which will meet the legal threshold requirement. In an 
     ordinary civil suit, you have to prove something by what we 
     call a preponderance of evidence, which means it's more 
     probable than not.''
       The doubling of risk shown on Tuesday's study satisfied 
     that requirement, Banzhaf said, adding, ``You're right in 
     that striking range with regard to the quantum of proof which 
     we need.''
       Because passive smoke can cause heart problems more quickly 
     than it causes lung cancer, Banzhaf said, it will be easier 
     to prove the connection to juries.
       The study may also affect negotiations between Northwest 
     Airlines and its flight attendants. The airline still allows 
     smoking on many of its flights to Japan and has stated that 
     it will continue to even after other American carriers ban 
     smoking on those routes in July.
       Flight attendants have protested the decision, but a 
     spokesman for Northwest, John Austin, said the airline would 
     maintain a smoking section because its major competitor on 
     those flights, Japan Air Lines, permitted smoking.
       ``We believe that absent a smoking section we'll lose quite 
     a bit of business in Japan,'' Austin said. But he added that 
     Northwest's management had not yet seen the Harvard study. 
     ``It'll certainly factor in,'' he said. ``But it's hard to 
     say what the impact will be.''
                                 ______