BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC HEALTH AND DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES
Senator Ed Hernandez, O.D., Chair
BILL NO: SBX2 8
---------------------------------------------------------------
|AUTHOR: |Liu |
|---------------+-----------------------------------------------|
|VERSION: |July 16, 2015 |
---------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------
|HEARING DATE: |August 19, | | |
| |2015 | | |
---------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------
|CONSULTANT: |Reyes Diaz |
---------------------------------------------------------------
SUBJECT : Tobacco use programs.
SUMMARY : Extends current tobacco use prevention funding eligibility and
requirements for county offices of education and school
districts to include charter schools. Broadens the definition of
products containing tobacco and nicotine, as specified, and
prohibits their use in specified areas of schools and school
districts, regardless of funding. Requires specified signs to be
prominently displayed at all entrances to school property.
Existing law:
1)Establishes the Tobacco Education and Research Oversight
Committee to provide advice to the Departments of Education
(CDE) and Public Health (DPH) regarding policy development,
integration, and evaluation of tobacco education programs.
2)Requires CDE to allocate funds to county offices of education
(COEs) for tobacco use prevention, intervention, and cessation
activities.
3)Requires all school districts and COEs that receive Tobacco
Use Prevention and Education (TUPE) program funding to adopt
and enforce tobacco-free policies, no later than July 1 of
each fiscal year, prohibiting the use of tobacco products, any
time, in district-owned or leased buildings, on district
property, and in district vehicles; prominently display signs
stating "Tobacco use is prohibited" at all entrances to school
property; and provide information about smoking cessation
support programs to students and staff.
This bill:
1)Expands eligibility for TUPE funding to include charter
SBX2 8 (Liu) Page 2 of ?
schools.
2)Extends to charter schools, as a condition of receiving TUPE
funding, all current requirements, including adopting and
enforcing a tobacco-free campus policy prohibiting the use of
products containing tobacco and nicotine, as defined;
prominently displaying "Tobacco use is prohibited" signs at
all entrances to school property; and providing information
about smoking cessation support programs to students and
staff.
3)Broadens the definition of products containing tobacco and
nicotine to include, but not limited to, smokeless tobacco,
snuff, chew, clove cigarettes, and nicotine delivery devices,
such as electronic cigarettes (e-cigs), at any time, in
charter school or school district-owned or leased buildings,
on school or district property, and in school or district
vehicles.
4)Exempts the use and possession of prescription products,
nicotine patches, or nicotine gum.
5)Prohibits the use of tobacco and nicotine products, regardless
of funding, at any time in COE, charter school, or school
district-owned or leased buildings, on school or district
property, and in school or district vehicles.
6)Requires school districts, charter schools, and COEs to
prominently display signs at all entrances to school property
stating "Tobacco use is prohibited."
FISCAL
EFFECT : This bill has not been analyzed by a fiscal committee.
COMMENTS :
1)Author's statement. According to the author, SBX2 8 will ban
smoking and tobacco products from all California schools.
California voters 27 years ago approved Proposition 99, which
increased taxes on cigarettes. The annual state budget act
appropriates funds from this source for several purposes,
including the TUPE program. School districts that receive
competitive grants must ban tobacco and post "Tobacco use is
prohibited" signs. About 75% of public school districts
participate and are certified as tobacco-free school
districts, but less than 10% of state-certified charter
SBX2 8 (Liu) Page 3 of ?
schools are certified as tobacco-free schools. We need to go
farther. This bill requires all public school districts, COEs,
and charter schools to be tobacco-free and post the same
tobacco prohibition signs. This bill also requires schools to
ban electronic cigarettes, snuff, chew, and other tobacco
products. This bill will help to keep tobacco out of the hands
of our youth while also increasing the overall health and
wellness of Californians.
2)Background. Proposition 99, approved by the California voters
in the November 1988 general election, increased the tax on
each pack of cigarettes sold in the state by 25 cents. The
annual Budget Act appropriates funds from the Tobacco Surtax
Fund for several purposes, including the TUPE program in
schools. According to CDE, the TUPE program provides funding
for programs in grades six through 12 through a competitive
application process for tobacco-specific student instruction,
reinforcement activities, special events, and intervention and
cessation programs for students. All local educational
agencies (currently school districts and COEs) that are
certified as having a fully implemented tobacco-free school
district board policy are eligible to apply for funding.
Programs are locally developed, but they are expected to align
with the federal Principles of Effectiveness, the recommended
California guidelines for tobacco prevention in Getting
Results and the Health Framework for California Public
Schools. Each COE is eligible to receive funding through the
County Technical Assistance and Leadership Funds application
to assist school districts within their county in program
development, to provide staff development for school and
district personnel, and to provide technical assistance as
needed. CDE states that the purpose of the TUPE program is to
reduce youth tobacco use by helping young people make
healthful tobacco-related decisions through tobacco-specific,
research-validated educational instruction and activities that
build knowledge, as well as social skills and youth
development assets.
According to CDE's Web page, a tobacco-free school prohibits
all tobacco use anytime, anywhere, and by anyone on all school
property, and at all school-sponsored events. School property
includes buildings, grounds, and vehicles owned or leased by
the school. School-sponsored events include sporting events,
school dances, and other events held on and off school
property. The goal of CDE's tobacco-free school district
SBX2 8 (Liu) Page 4 of ?
certification process is to protect children's health by
encouraging all school districts and COEs to adopt a model
100% tobacco-free policy. CDE staff works closely with DPH's
California Tobacco Control Program to promote smoke-free
environments and tobacco-free lifestyles throughout the state,
particularly among youth.
3)Smoking prevalence. According to the 2012 Surgeon General's
Report, nearly 90% of smokers in the U.S. started smoking by
the age of 18, and 99% started by age 26. In California, 64%
of smokers start by the age of 18, and 96% start by age 26.
According to DPH, in 2010, 36.8% of high school students had
smoked a whole cigarette by age 13 or 14, and in 2012, illegal
tobacco sales to minors rose to 8.7% from 5.6% in 2011.
According to DPH, in 2010, 11.9% of the state's adults smoked,
down from 13.1% in 2009, making California one of only two
states to reach the federal Healthy People 2020 target of
reducing the adult smoking prevalence rate to 12%. However,
research highlights that the burdens of smoking do not fall
evenly across the state. According to the American Lung
Association (ALA), African-American men and women have the
highest smoking usage rate at 21.3% and 17.1% respectively,
followed by white men at 17.2% and Latino men at 16%. The ALA
reports that Korean men have an unusually high tobacco usage
rate at 27.9%, as do Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender
women who smoke at almost triple the rate of women in general.
4)Tobacco-related diseases. Every year, an estimated 443,000
people in the U.S. die from tobacco and smoking-related
illnesses or exposure to secondhand smoke, according to the
federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The
CDC also reports that another 8.6 million people suffer from
serious smoking-related illnesses. According to DPH, smoking
causes ischemic heart disease, cancer, stroke, and chronic
lower respiratory diseases, which are the leading causes of
death and disability among adults in California.
Smoking-attributed diseases are an economic burden due not
only to health care expenses but also productivity losses
related to disability or early death. DPH asserts, since the
passage of Proposition 99, adult smoking rates declined by
more than 40% from 22.7% to 13.3% in 2008. As smoking rates
declined, mortality and morbidity rates for diseases related
to smoking also declined. This parallel trend, according to
DPH, supports causal association between these conditions and
smoking.
SBX2 8 (Liu) Page 5 of ?
5)E-cigs. According to a 2014 report by the World Health
Organization (WHO), e-cigs are battery heated devices that
deliver nicotine by heating solution that users inhale. E-cig
cartridges (e-liquids) contain liquid nicotine, and chemicals
introduced into a liquid vehicle produce aromas and various
flavors such as tobacco, chocolate mint, cotton candy, gummy
bear, and grape. The concentration of nicotine varies both
across different manufacturers and sometimes within the same
brand. The report states that although some e-cigs are shaped
to look like conventional cigarettes, they also take the form
of everyday items like pens and USB flash drives.
6)Health risks and increase in use of e-cigs. DPH's State Health
Officer released a report in January 2015, "A Community Health
Threat," about e-cigs that cites, among other things, the
concern about the health risks of e-cigs and the growing
number of e-cig users. E-cig poisonings increased from seven
in 2012 to 154 in 2014. By the end of 2014, e-cig poisonings
to young children tripled in one year, making up more than 60%
of all e-cig poisoning calls, according to the report. The
State Health Officer also noted that in California, use of
e-cigs among those between the ages of 18 and 29 tripled in
one year, from 2.3% to 7.6%. Nearly 20% of these young adult
e-cig users had never smoked traditional cigarettes. The State
Health Officer concludes that there is a high need to educate
the public about e-cig safety concerns and that existing laws
currently in place to protect minors and the general public
from traditional tobacco products should be extended to cover
e-cigs.
7)Marketing of e-cigs as cessation devices. The DPH report also
cites the unrestricted marketing tactics for e-cigs. E-cig
marketing continues to claim they are a safer alternative to
traditional cigarettes. To date, the effectiveness of e-cigs
as cessation aids has not been proven by e-cig companies or
approved by the FDA as such. The report states that a number
of studies actually show that e-cig users are no more likely
to quit than smokers of traditional cigarettes, and in one
study, 89% of e-cig users were still using them one year
later. Dual use of e-cigs and traditional cigarettes continues
to rise, which, according to the report, may be attributed to
the unrestricted marketing of e-cigs. E-cig companies are
using tactics previously used by tobacco companies that have
since been banned. These include running unrestricted ads and
SBX2 8 (Liu) Page 6 of ?
promotions on TV, radio, and social media, and in magazines,
newspapers, and retail stores, as well as sponsoring sport and
music events and giving out free samples, according to the
report.
8) Related legislation. SBX2 5 (Leno)/AB X2 6 (Cooper) recast
and broaden the definition of "tobacco product" in current law
to include electronic cigarettes as specified; extend current
restrictions and prohibitions against the use of tobacco
products to electronic cigarettes; extend current licensing
requirements for manufacturers, importers, distributors,
wholesalers, and retailers of tobacco products to electronic
cigarettes; and, require electronic cigarette cartridges to be
child-resistant. SB X2 5 will be heard on August 19, 2015 in
this committee and AB X2 6 is pending in the Assembly.
SBX2 6 (Monning)/AB X2 7 (Stone) prohibit smoking in
owner-operated businesses and remove specified exemptions in
existing law that allow tobacco smoking in certain workplaces.
SB X2 6 will be heard on August 19, 2015 in this committee and
AB X2 7 is pending in the Assembly.
SBX2 7 (Hernandez)/AB X2 8 (Wood) increase the minimum legal
age to purchase or consume tobacco from 18 to 21. SB X2 7 will
be heard on August 19, 2015 in this committee and AB X2 8 is
pending in the Assembly.
ABX2 9 (Thurmond and Nazarian) extends current tobacco use
prevention funding eligibility and requirements to charter
schools; broaden the definition of products containing tobacco
and nicotine, as specified, and prohibit their use in
specified areas of schools and school districts, regardless of
funding; and require specified signs to be prominently
displayed at all entrances to school property. AB X2 9 is
pending in the Assembly.
SBX2 9 (McGuire)/ABX2 10 (Bloom) allow counties to impose a
tax on the privilege of distributing cigarettes and tobacco
products. SB X2 9 will be heard on August 19, 2015 in this
committee and AB X2 10 is pending in the Assembly.
SBX2 10 (Beall)/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
SBX2 8 (Liu) Page 7 of ?
$1,000 to $1,200. SB X2 10 will be heard on August 19, 2015 in
this committee and AB X2 11 is pending in the Assembly.
9)Prior legislation. SB 648 (Corbett, of 2014) would have made
the provision of the STAKE Act restricting the sale of
cigarette and tobacco products from vending machines
applicable to e-cigs, as defined. SB 648 died in the Assembly
Appropriations Committee.
AB 320 (Nazarian, 2013) was substantially similar to this
bill. AB 320 died in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.
SB 882 (Corbett, Chapter 310, Statutes of 2010), made it
unlawful, to the extent not preempted by federal law, for a
person to sell or otherwise furnish an e-cig to a person under
the age of 18.
SB 400 (Corbett, 2009), would have defined e-cigs as drugs
under state law, made them subject to the Sherman Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Law, and allowed DPH to halt the sale,
distribution, or offering of e-cigs as part of its enforcement
of the STAKE Act. SB 400 was vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger
who stated that while he supported restricting access of
e-cigs to children under the age of 18, he could not sign a
measure that also declared them a federally regulated drug
when the matter is being decided through pending litigation.
He noted that items defined as "tobacco products" are legal
for anyone over the age of 18, and if adults want to purchase
and consume these products with an understanding of the
associated health risks, they should be able to do so unless
and until federal law changes the legal status of these
tobacco products.
SB 1927 (Hayden, Chapter 1009, Statutes of 1994), enacted the
STAKE Act to address the increase in tobacco sales to minors
in California and fulfill the federal mandate that prohibited
the sale of cigarettes and tobacco products to minors.
10)Support. Supporters of this bill argue that, under current
law, only school districts that receive TUPE funding are
required to implement 100% tobacco-free policies, which
currently equates to only 46% of school districts, leaving
more school districts with no obligation to ban tobacco on
their campuses. Supporters argue that smoking increases the
risk of heart disease and stroke by two to four times, and is
SBX2 8 (Liu) Page 8 of ?
linked to reduced school attendance, physical fitness, and
learning abilities for youth. Supporters state that schools
that consistently enforce tobacco-free policies have shown
decreased rates of smoking among their students.
11)Technical amendments. The author may wish to consider the
following amendments:
In SEC. 1, Section 104420(n)(2) of the Health and Safety Code
is amended to read:
All Require that all school districts, charter schools, and
county offices of education that receive funding pursuant to
paragraph (1) shall adopt and enforce a tobacco-free campus
policy no later than July of each fiscal year. The policy
shall prohibit the use of products containing tobacco
products, and nicotine, including, but not limited to,
smokeless tobacco, snuff, chew, clove cigarettes, and nicotine
delivery devices, such as electronic cigarettes, which can
deliver nicotine and nonnicotine vaporized solutions, at any
time, in charter school or school district-owned or leased
buildings, on school or district property property, and in
school or district vehicles. However, this section does not
prohibit the use or possession of prescription products,
nicotine patches, or nicotine gum. Information about the
policy and enforcement procedures shall be communicated
clearly to school personnel, parents, pupils, and the larger
community. Signs stating "Tobacco use is prohibited" shall be
prominently displayed at all entrances to school property.
property as provided in Section 104559. Information about
smoking cessation support programs shall be made available and
encouraged for pupils and staff. Any school district, charter
school, or county office of education that does not have a
tobacco-free district policy implemented by July 1, July 1
shall not be eligible to apply for funds from the Cigarette
and Tobacco Products Surtax Fund for that fiscal year.
SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION :
Support: American Heart Association/American Stroke Association
American Lung Association in California
Association of Northern California Oncologists
California Black Health Network
California Chronic Care Coalition
California Dental Association
California Medical Association
SBX2 8 (Liu) Page 9 of ?
California Pan-Ethnic Health Network
California Primary Care Association
California Society of Addiction Medicine
First 5 Association of California
Medical Oncology Association of Southern California
Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California
Oppose: None received.
-- END --