BILL ANALYSIS Ó
ABX2 8
Page 1
Date of Hearing: August 25, 2015
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC HEALTH AND DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES
Rob Bonta, Chair
ABX2 8
(Wood) - As Introduced July 16, 2015
SUBJECT: Tobacco products: minimum legal age.
SUMMARY: Raises the minimum legal smoking age from 18 to 21;
conforms existing law regarding the purchasing, selling, and
enforcement of tobacco and tobacco products to reflect the new
age limit; and, clarifies that these provisions are not intended
to prohibit a local standard from imposing a more restrictive
legal age to purchase or possess tobacco products.
EXISTING FEDERAL LAW restricts tobacco sales to minors and
requires states to vigorously enforce their laws prohibiting the
sale and distribution of tobacco products to persons under 18
years of age.
EXISTING STATE LAW:
1)Establishes the Stop Tobacco Access to Kids Enforcement
(STAKE) Act, which charges the Department of Public Health
(DPH) with developing a program to reduce the availability of
tobacco products to persons under 18 years of age and
specifies that various agencies, including, but not limited
to, DPH, the Attorney General, or local law enforcement
agencies may enforce the STAKE Act.
ABX2 8
Page 2
2)Provides that primary enforcement responsibilities lie with
DPH, and requires DPH to conduct random, onsite sting
inspections with the assistance of 15- and 16-year-olds;
allows DPH to conduct inspections in response to public
complaints; and to investigate illegal sales of tobacco
products to minors by telephone, mail or the Internet.
3)Requires DPH to establish requirements that tobacco retailers
conspicuously post notices at each point of purchase stating
that selling tobacco products to anyone under 18 years of age
is illegal and subject to penalties and that all persons
selling tobacco products must check the identification of a
purchaser who appears to be under 18.
4)Allows an enforcing agency to assess civil penalties, ranging
from $400 for a first offense to as much as $6,000, against
any person, firm, or corporation that sells, gives, or in any
way furnishes any tobacco, cigarette, cigarette papers, or any
other instrument or paraphernalia that is designed for the
smoking or ingestion of tobacco, based on the number of repeat
offenses within a given period.
5)Requires DPH, after a third, fourth, and fifth violation, to
notify the State Board of Equalization (BOE) of the violation
and for the BOE to then assess an additional civil penalty and
to suspend or revoke the sellers' license for a specific
amount of time, based on the number of violations in a given
period.
6)Prohibits selling, distributing, or giving away tobacco
products through the United States Postal Service or any other
public or private postal or package delivery service, to any
person under the age of 18. Requires a distributor or seller,
ABX2 8
Page 3
before providing any tobacco product through any of these
means, to verify that the purchaser is 18 years or older.
7)Makes selling, giving, or in any way furnishing any tobacco,
cigarette, cigarette paper, or blunts, any other preparation
of tobacco, or paraphernalia designed for smoking tobacco to
anyone under the age of 18 subject to either a criminal action
for a misdemeanor or to a civil action brought by a city
attorney, a county counsel, or a district attorney.
FISCAL EFFECT: This bill has not yet been analyzed by a fiscal
committee.
COMMENTS:
1)PURPOSE OF THIS BILL. According to the author, the health
care impacts and cost to society of tobacco products has been
widely documented and is no longer disputed. The author notes
that adolescent brains are more vulnerable to nicotine
addiction, and people who reach the age of 21 as non-smokers
have a minimal chance of becoming a smoker. The author states
that tobacco use results in increased health care costs and
changing the legal age will positively influence the adoption
rate of tobacco use. The author contends the legal age for
tobacco is no more carved in stone than that of alcohol
consumption or voting, both of which changed when society
determined there was compelling evidence or need to re-examine
those public policies. The author concludes the evidence and
need are clear on the legal age for tobacco and now is time
for us to make this change.
2)BACKGROUND.
a) Health effects of smoking. Smoking is a major cause of
ABX2 8
Page 4
many deadly health problems heart disease, aneurysms,
bronchitis, emphysema, and stroke. Using tobacco can
damage a womans reproductive health and hurt babies.
Tobacco use is linked with reduced fertility and a higher
risk of miscarriage, early delivery (premature birth), and
stillbirth. It is also a cause of low birth-weight in
infants and has been linked to a higher risk of birth
defects and sudden infant death syndrome.
Smoking causes 80% of all deaths from chronic obstrucb)tive
pulmonary disease, and causes stroke and coronary heart
disease, the leading causes of death in the United States.
Smokers are 30 to 40% more likely to develop type 2 diabetes
than nonsmokers, and people with diabetes who smoke are
more likely than nonsmokers to have trouble with insulin
dosing and with controlling their disease.
Smoking causes more than 480,000 deaths each year in the
Unites States, or about one in five deaths. The average
annual smoking-attributable mortality rate in California
for the years 2000-04 was 235 per 100,000. The range
across states is 138.3 per 100,000 to 370.6 per 100,000.
California ranks 6th lowest per capita among all 50 states
in deaths attributed to smoking. If nobody smoked, one of
every three cancer deaths in the U.S. would not happen.
c) Smoking and youth. California monitors smoking rates
among high school students using the California Student
Tobacco Survey (CSTS). The 2012 survey showed the
percentage of California high school students who reported
smoking a cigarette within the previous 30 days was 10.5%,
or 297,000 students. Smoking among high school students in
California is declining consistently and is lower than for
the rest of the United States. Student smoking rates
declined 51% from 2000 to 2012; however, there are
substantial differences in student smoking prevalence when
examined by race or ethnicity. While rates declined for
ABX2 8
Page 5
non-Hispanic Whites, Hispanics, and Asian/Pacific
Islanders, the rate for African-Americans increased by
15.9% over this same time period.
d) Youth use of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes).
According to the January 2015 State Health Officer's report
on e-cigarettes, A Community Health Threat, e-cigarette use
is rising rapidly. In California, use among young adults
ages 18 to 29 tripled in one year. The report notes that
while the long-term health impact resulting from use of
this product is presently unknown, it is known that
e-cigarettes emit at least 10 chemicals that are found on
California's Proposition 65 list of chemicals known to
cause cancer, birth defects, or other reproductive harm. A
study published July 27, 2015 in the Journal of Pediatrics
surveyed almost 2,100 California high school students, and
found that one-quarter had tried e-cigarettes. Ten percent
were currently using e-cigarettes, and those current users
where much more likely than their peers to also smoke
cigarettes. E-cigarettes are currently defined in
California law as products designed to deliver nicotine or
other substances to a user in the form of a vapor. State
law also prohibits anyone from selling or furnishing an
electronic cigarette to anyone under the age of 18.
e) Effect of raising the minimum legal smoking age. A
March 2015 Institute of Medicine Report (IOM), Public
Health Implications of Raising the Minimum Age of Legal
Access to Tobacco Products, examined the impacts of raising
the legal minimum smoking age to 19, 21, and 25. The IOM
determined that relative to status quo projected decreases,
raising the age to 19 would result in a 3% additional
decrease; raising the age to 21, a 12% additional decrease;
and raising the age to 25, a 15% additional decrease. The
IOM concluded that the age group most impacted by raising
ABX2 8
Page 6
the minimum legal age would be 15 to 17 year olds for any
of the three ages studied. The IOM argued that increasing
the age for tobacco purchase will result in delayed use of
such products, which in turn will decrease the prevalence
of users. The IOM report stated that raising the smoking
age to 21 would result in 200,000 fewer premature deaths
and potentially millions of years of life gained for those
born between 2000 and 2019. On June 9, 2015 the Santa
Clara County Board of Supervisors adopted an ordinance to
raise the purchase age for tobacco and electronic smoking
products from 18 to 21, effective January 1, 2016. Santa
Clara County is the first California county to pass such an
ordinance.
3)SUPPORT. Supporters of this bill, including the American
Heart Association/American Stroke Association, American Cancer
Society Cancer Action Network, the California Academy of
Preventive Medicine, and the California Optometric Association
state tobacco use remains the leading cause of preventable
death in the U.S., killing more than 400,000 people each year.
Supporters note 2,800 youth try cigarettes daily, and many
use multiple tobacco products. Supporters point out 90% of
tobacco users take up this dangerous habit before the age of
18, but almost no one starts after the age of 25. Supporters
conclude raising the legal age for consumption of tobacco
products to 21 is predicted to reduce smoking prevalence by
12% and smoking-related deaths by nearly 10% for future
generations.
The Health Officers Association of California states despite
its diminishing prevalence over the last decade, the use of
tobacco continues to threaten public health and drain our
state's health care resources. Considered to be the leading
cause of preventable deaths in the U.S., smoking places a
heavy economic burden on California, costing our state
billions in direct and indirect health expenses from
smoking-related illnesses, premature deaths and lost
ABX2 8
Page 7
productivity.
The California State Association of Counties (CSAC) notes that
many 18-year-olds have social networks that include younger
peers since this age group often still attends high school,
and older peers are able to buy and supply tobacco products to
their minor friends. CSAC concludes, by raising the minimum
age to 21, the likelihood of mixed-age minors being in the
same social networks decreases, which would likely decrease
the chances of the initiation age occurring before 18.
4)OPPOSITION. Several military and veterans' organizations
oppose this bill, including the American Legion-Department of
California, the Military Officers Association of America,
California Council of Chapters, and the Vietnam Veterans of
America-California State Council. The opposition states this
bill would be very unfair to our currently serving men and
women stationed in California. The opposition notes men and
women can serve in our military, putting their lives on the
line for the rest of us at age 18, and they should certainly
be allowed to buy a legal product. The opposition concludes
this is not about tobacco, whether smoking is right or wrong,
this is about protecting the rights of our currently serving
military and their dependents from over-reaching nanny-state
laws.
5)RELATED LEGISLATION.
a) SBX2 7 (Ed Hernandez) is substantially similar to this
bill. SBX2 7 was heard in the Senate Committee on Public
Health and Developmental Services on August 19, 2015 and
passed out with a vote of 9 to 3. SBX2 7 is currently
pending in the Senate Appropriations Committee.
b) SBX2 5 (Leno) and ABX2 6 (Cooper) define the term
ABX2 8
Page 8
smoking for purposes of the STAKE Act; expand the
definition of a tobacco product to include e-cigarettes and
extends current restrictions and prohibitions against the
use of tobacco products to e-cigarettes. Extend current
licensing requirements for manufacturers, importers,
distributors, wholesalers, and retailers of tobacco
products to e-cigarettes. SBX2 5 was heard in the Senate
Committee on Public Health and Developmental Disabilities
on August 19, 2015 and passed out on a vote of 9 to 3.
SBX2 5 is currently pending in the Senate Committee on
Appropriations. ABX2 6 is set to be heard on August 25th
in this Committee.
c) SBX2 6 (Monning) and ABX2 7 (Stone) prohibit smoking in
owner-operated businesses and remove specified exemptions
in existing law that allow tobacco smoking in certain
workplaces. SBX2 6 was heard on August 19, 2015 in the
Senate Committee on Public Health and Developmental
Disabilities and passed on a 9 to 2 vote. ABX2 7 is set to
be heard on August 25th in this Committee.
d) SBX2 8 (Liu) and ABX2 9 (Thurmond and Nazarian) clarify
charter school eligibility for tobacco use prevention
program (TUPE) funds; require the California State
Department of Education to require all school districts,
charter schools, and county offices of education receiving
TUPE funds to adopt and enforce a tobacco-free campus
policy; prohibit the use of tobacco and nicotine products
in any county office of education, charter school, or
school district-owned or leased building, on school or
district property, and in school or district vehicles; and,
require all schools, districts, and offices of education to
post a sign reading "Tobacco use is prohibited" at all
entrances. SBX2 8 passed the Senate Committee on Public
ABX2 8
Page 9
Health and Developmental Disabilities with a vote of 9 to 3
on August 19, 2015 and is currently pending in the Senate
Committee on Appropriations. ABX2 9 is set for hearing on
August 25th in this Committee.
e) SBX2 9 (McGuire) and ABX2 10 (Bloom) allow counties to
impose a tax on the privilege of distributing cigarettes
and tobacco products. SBX2 9 was heard on August 19, 2015
in the Senate Committee on Public Health and Developmental
Disabilities and passed with a vote of 9 to 2 and is
currently pending in the Senate Appropriations Committee.
ABX2 10 is set for hearing on August 25th in this
Committee.
f) SBX2 10 (Beall) and ABX2 11 (Nazarian) revise the
Cigarette and Tobacco Products Licensing Act of 2003 to
change the retailer license fee from a $100 one-time fee to
a $265 annual fee, and increase the distributor and
wholesaler license fee from $1,000 to $1,200. SBX2 10 was
heard on August 19, 2015 in the Senate Committee on Public
Health and Developmental Disabilities and passed with a
vote of 9 to 3 and is currently pending in the Senate
Appropriations Committee. ABX2 11 is set for hearing on
August 25th in this Committee.
g) SB 151 (Ed Hernandez) is substantially similar to this
bill. SB 151 is currently pending hearing in the Assembly
Governmental Organization Committee.
6)PREVIOUS LEGISLATION.
ABX2 8
Page 10
a) AB 221 (Koretz) of 2003 was substantially similar to
this bill. AB 221 failed passage in the Assembly
Governmental Organization Committee.
b) SB 1821 (Dunn) of 2003, was substantially similar to
this bill. SB 1821 was held on the Senate Appropriations
Committee suspense file.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network
American Heart Association/American Stroke Association
American Lung Association in California
Association of Northern California Oncologists
California Academy of Preventive Medicine
California Black Health Network
California Chronic Care Coalition
California Dental Association
California Medical Association
California Optometric Association
California Pan-Ethnic Health Network
California Primary Care Association
California State Association of Counties
California Society of Addiction Medicine
Community Action Fund of Planned parenthood of Orange and San
Bernardino Counties
First 5 Association of California
Health Access California
ABX2 8
Page 11
Health Officers Association of California
Medical Oncology Association of Southern California, Inc.
Planned Parenthood Action Fund of the Pacific Southwest
Planned Parenthood Advocacy Project Los Angeles
Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California
Planned Parenthood Mar Monte
Planned Parenthood Northern California Action Fund
Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors
Service Employees International Union, California
Opposition
American Legion-Department of California
AMVETS-Department of California
Association of the United States Army, California State
Commanders Veterans Council
Fleet Reserve Association
Jewish War Veterans, Department of California
Military Officers Association of America, California Council of
Chapters
Military Order of the Purple Heart, Department of California
Vietnam Veterans of America - California State Council
Analysis Prepared by:Lara Flynn / HEALTH / (916) 319-2097
ABX2 8
Page 12