PHAI Online - The Public Health Advocacy Institute
Archive for the ‘Publications’ Category
PHAI Publishes Case Study on Denver, CO Regional Transportation Districts Dropping of a Ban on Violent Video Game Advertisements
Friday, April 2nd, 2010
PHAI documented the 2006 decision by the Denver, Colorado’s Regional Transportation Districts to drop a ban on violent video game advertisements. In the fall of 2006, Rockstar Games launched a national advertising campaign for its “Mature”-rated video game Grand Theft Auto: Vice City Stories in advance of the holiday shopping season.
Advertisements ran on mass transit vehicles in cities across the country including Boston, MA, Denver, CO and Portland, OR. In response to the advertising campaign in Boston, the Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood (“CCFC”), a Boston-based child advocacy group, successfully orchestrated a campaign to have the Mass Bay Transit Authority (“MBTA”) change its ad policy to prohibit future ads for videogames rated “Mature” or “Adult Only.” Inspired by the policy change in Boston, in early 2007, the Parents Television Council (“PTC”) in conjunction with CCFC sought to have Denver, Colorado’s Regional Transportation District (“RTD”) amend its ad policy to prohibit future ads for “Mature” and “Adult Only” rated video games.
The RTD initially was receptive to the policy change and referred the policy recommendation to a committee, which voted to recommend the policy. When it came time for the policy to be formally voted on, the Entertainment Software Association (“ESA”), the video game industry association, sent a representative to the RTD Board meeting. At the meeting, the ESA outlined its legal arguments against the policy change. After consulting with legal counsel, the RTD Board voted down the ad policy change
There were several key differences that may have caused success in Boston and failure in Denver. The Boston campaign came first, and the ESA did not get involved. The ESA received some criticism for its failure to prevent the Boston ban and stepped in to prevent the ban from spreading to other cities. While PTC had dealt with the ESA in the past, PTC did not expect ESA involvement in Denver’s particular case. The timing in Boston also may have been a critical factor.
The Boston campaign occurred while the Grand Theft Auto: Vice City Stories ads were still running, which may have led to greater public and media interest. By the time the Denver campaign began, the ads had already finished running and there was less public attention. PTC felt that more public outcry would have been needed to overcome the threat of legal action. Also in Boston, several local politicians and police unions signed the letter requesting the ad policy changes. CCFC and PTC did not elicit the same support from locally known groups in Denver.
PHAI Publishes Case Study of MA Attorney General Tobacco Advertising Regulations and Legal Challenge to Them
Friday, April 2nd, 2010
PHAI documented the Massachusetts Attorney General’s Office’s 1999 passage of regulations to limit particular advertising and sales practices for cigarettes, cigars, little cigars and smokeless tobacco products. The goal of the regulations was to protect youth from the predatory marketing practices of the tobacco industry.
Shortly after the regulations were adopted and before they went into effect, tobacco manufacturers and retailers filed suit in federal court challenging most of the regulations based on preemption and First Amendment grounds. The U.S. Supreme Court struck down the outdoor and point-of-sale tobacco advertising restrictions were struck down.
We gleaned several conclusions form this case study. First, proponents were willing to persevere and take risks, including the risk of setting an adverse legal precedent, in order to limit the tobacco industry’s ability to market its products to children. Their determination was motivated by a belief that challenging the industry advertising practices, especially those directed at children, was “the right thing to do” and supported by “good faith” legal arguments.
Second, the case study demonstrates the tobacco industry’s determination of the tobacco industry to challenge regulation.
Third, the case demonstrates the establishment of legal precedent that can constrain future public health decision-making. Some of the regulations at issue in this case may once again be the subject of a legal challenge to the recently adopted federal law granting the Food and Drug Authority extensive authority to regulate tobacco products, including advertising.
An initial court decision on the validity of FDA authority over tobacco cited the 2001 U.S. Supreme Court case as justification for limiting FDA authority. It appears that more recent empirical evidence linking youth smoking to advertising targeting adults may be pivotal to any future First Amendment legal challenges to tobacco advertising regulations.
PHAI Publishes Case Study on Portland, ME School Committee’s Initiative to Provide Prescription Contraception Products to Middle School Students
Friday, April 2nd, 2010
PHAI documented the Portland School Committee’s 2007 vote to ratify a proposal from the King Student Health Center (“Health Center”) located at the King Middle School in Portland, ME to expand its services to provide prescription contraception to Health Center users. The proposal to offer the full range of contraceptive services at the Health Center came about after seventeen middle school-aged girls became pregnant in the City’s three middle schools over a four-year period.
The policy change drew intense and immediate scrutiny from local and national media. The American Center for Law & Justice, a public interest law firm, sent a letter to School Committee members threatening to sue the School Committee if the policy was not changed and the local prosecutor alleged that Health Center staff had not been properly complying with Maine’s mandatory reporting laws.
The School Nurse Coordinator for Portland Public Schools, the King Middle School Principal and Health Center staff, along with supportive members of the School Committee and the community did not waiver in light of the national media attention and the legal threats made. The policy went into effect without delay or amendment and no litigation has been filed to challenge the policy.
PHAI Publishes Case Study of Hog Farmers’ Challenge of Worth County, IA Envronmental Ordinance
Friday, April 2nd, 2010
PHAI documented the Worth County, Iowa Board of Supervisors’ 2001 passage of an ordinance establishing local regulation of air and water emissions as well as worker health protections for concentrated animal feeding operations (“CAFOs).
The ordinance was the culmination of almost two years of community organizing and public hearings around the issue. A group of local hog producers and the Iowa Farm Bureau sued the county seeking to invalidate the ordinance. The Iowa Supreme Court struck down the ordinance, ruling that county governments are preempted by Iowa state law from regulating CAFOs.
While ultimately unsuccessful in court, Worth County’s attempt to regulate CAFOs was part of a lively public discourse throughout Iowa about the state of local control over CAFOs. The ordinance made clear to Worth County pork producers the community’s health standards. The controversy also created opportunities to educate the public about the health effects of mismanaged CAFOs. Worth County residents are now well-informed and well-organized around the environmental health issues associated with mismanaged CAFOs.
PHAI Attorney and Noted Univ of IL Economist Look at Applying Tobacco Taxation and Other Pricing Strategies to Reduce Obesity
Wednesday, March 31st, 2010
University of Illinois, Chicago Economist, Frank J. Chaloupka, and PHAI Senior Staff Attorney, Patricia A. Davidson, have published an article commissioned by the Tobacco Control Legal Consortium that explores the applicability of tobacco control taxation and pricing strategies to obesity prevention. Key points include:
- Tobacco consumption responds to price changes. Higher taxes reduce consumption and prevalence, especially among youth and the poor. Higher taxes also raise government revenue that may be dedicated to tobacco control or other public health initiatives.
- Most tax increases are justified on policy and economic grounds.
- The legality of tax increases is not generally a significant issue, unlike restrictions on advertising and marketing, which often spark First Amendment commercial speech debates.
- The tobacco industry, concerned with long-term profitability, has responded to tax increases with a variety of discounting practices. Tobacco control advocates could respond more aggressively to this strategy by adopting laws to restrict discount tools, such as coupons, multi-pack discounts, and other price discounts, including removing their protection under minimum pricing laws. Although the industry may argue that limits on discounts raise First Amendment issues, this argument should not be persuasive because laws pertaining to pricing and discount practices do not implicate the commercial speech doctrine. Such laws only need to be rationally related to a legitimate public health purpose (e.g., reducing consumption) to withstand a court challenge.
- Proposed taxes on sugar-sweetened beverages raise many of the same policy and legal issues as tobacco taxes. The food industry’s arguments against them are also similar to those of the tobacco industry. Tax increases, as well as any laws limiting industry discounting practices, do not implicate the First Amendment and are legally defensible as reasonable measures to reduce consumption.
- Higher taxes on sugar-sweetened beverages, at least as a first step, may currently be more politically palatable and justifiable than a potentially difficult to define and administer tax on snack foods.
- The successful strategy of dedicating a portion of tax increases to public health programs, including subsidies for healthier options, should be part of the legal policy model for taxing sugar-sweetened beverages or snack foods.
PHAI Publishes Case Study Examining Litigation Surrounding Atlantic City’s Needle Exchange Ordinace
Monday, March 29th, 2010
- PHAI Publishes Case Study Examining Litigation Surrounding Atlantic City’s Needle Exchange Ordinace (pdf)
PHAI documented Atlantic City’s 2004 passage an ordinance establishing a municipal needle exchange program. Atlantic City faced an HIV/AIDS public health crisis with one in forty residents infected and sixty percent of infections related to injection drug use.
The Atlantic City Department of Health and Human Services (“DHHS”), working in conjunction with Drug Policy Alliance of New Jersey (“DPA-NJ”), proposed a municipal needle exchange ordinance after the state legislature repeatedly failed to enact needle exchange legislation. The DHHS informed the Atlantic County Prosecutor and law enforcement of the proposed ordinance. The County Prosecutor told DHHS and the press that he believed the ordinance violated New Jersey’s criminal drug paraphernalia laws.
After consulting DPA-NJ, and with full support of the Mayor of Atlantic City and the head of the City Council, the ordinance was formally proposed and passed into law. The Atlantic County Prosecutor immediately filed suit to enjoin implementation of the ordinance, and the law was overturned in court. Despite the invalidation of the ordinance, Atlantic City’s bold action to address its public health crisis focused media attention on the HIV/AIDS issue and generated the political will necessary to successfully enact state-level needle exchange legislation in 2006.
- Funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation’s Public Health Practice & Policy Solutions, PHAI used case study research methodology to investigate threats of litigation made during the proposal and passage of public health laws. The case studies examine this experience across a range of public health issues. Public health officials, attorneys and advocates provide insight into their decision-making and planning process in anticipation of and in response to legal challenges.
PHAI Publishes Case Study on Challenges to Pharmacy Tobacco Sales Ban in San Francisco County
Monday, March 29th, 2010
PHAI documented the ban on tobacco product sales in pharmacies located in the County of San Francisco in August 2008. Even when faced with the likelihood of litigation, San Francisco lawmakers moved forward with the ban. In September 2008, a large pharmacy chain filed a lawsuit claiming that ban violated its equal rights. The ban excluded grocery stores and big box stores that housed pharmacies. Later in September 2008, a tobacco manufacturer filed a second lawsuit claiming that the ban violated commercial free speech rights.
The decision to pass the ban despite the threat of litigation was undergirded by some key points. First, the harm caused by tobacco justified the ban. Second, proponents believed establishing new, effective tobacco control laws inevitably meant having to face the tobacco industry in court, given the industry’s aggressive use of litigation. Third, proponents felt that litigation would confirm the legality of pharmacy bans, and thus, establish legal precedent for other jurisdictions to follow. Third, an effort to thwart passage of the ban would generate public interest and awareness of the health effects of tobacco use. Fourth, several years of capacity building established a range of stakeholders who understood and supported the ban. Fifth, the ban represented a first step in a larger effort to reduce tobacco sales in San Francisco through a reduction of retail outlets. The pharmacy ban would be good, and somewhat safe first step towards that goal.
Funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation’s Public Health Practice & Policy Solutions, PHAI used case study research methodology to investigate threats of litigation made during the proposal and passage of public health laws. The case studies examine this experience across a range of public health issues. Public health officials, attorneys and advocates provide insight into their decision-making and planning process in anticipation of and in response to legal challenges.
PHAI publishes Case Study on NYC Menu Labeling Litigation
Monday, March 29th, 2010
PHAI documented the successful passage of the nation’s first restaurant calorie disclosure law. In an effort to address increases in obesity rates and obesity-related health problems, the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (“DOHMH”) amended the City’s Health Code on December 5, 2006 and then again on January 22, 2008 to require that chain restaurants post the number of calories contained in standardized menu items. The disclosure appears close to each item on the menu or menu board. Restaurant patrons are more likely to see and act upon these disclosures, compared to information posted in less obvious locations in restaurants or on websites.
Although several public health practitioners and organizations supported the concept of the disclosure law, its legality was untested in the courts when DOHMH acted. DOHMH knew it would face an organized and well-funded opposition. DOHMH nevertheless passed the disclosure law and faced two lawsuits. The final outcome was that DOHMH established a version of the disclosure law that was more comprehensive than originally intended. (The first version applied only to restaurants that voluntarily agreed to post calorie information. The final version applies to most chain restaurants, regardless of whether they want to post calorie information.) Numerous states and municipalities have subsequently passed disclosure law in their jurisdictions.
The decision by DOHMH to proceed was under-girded by some key factors. First, the scope of the increase in obesity prevalence was (and remains) alarming. The problem had been documented in health surveillance data. Second, several public health organizations have recommended the concept of mandating clear disclosure of calorie information for restaurant meals at the point of purchase. Third, organizational changes at DOHMH allowed public health practitioners to identify and focus on environmental risk factors for obesity. Fourth, questions of legality were addressed early on through a comprehensive internal legal review and dialogue that included a well-informed consideration of the potential public health benefits.
Funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation’s Public Health Practice & Policy Solutions, PHAI used case study research methodology to investigate threats of litigation made during the proposal and passage of public health laws. The case studies examine this experience across a range of public health issues. Public health officials, attorneys and advocates provide insight into their decision-making and planning process in anticipation of and in response to legal challenges.
PHAI Publishes “Managing and Conducting Public Health Inspections: A Selected Bibliography and Topical Outline (1988)”
Friday, July 31st, 2009
In 1988, Dr. Anthony Robbins and his colleagues at Boston University School of Public Health created this document reviewing inspection-based enforcement in public health programs. Because of new interest in regulation, we are posting the document. When recently uncovered, it existed only in a paper and ink version, thus the document here was created by optical character recognition software after scanning the original. It may contain formatting errors due to the conversion.
Download the document here (pdf).
PHAI Publishes Issue Briefs on Tobacco Industry’s Corporate Makeover
Friday, May 8th, 2009
YEAR ONE – CORPORATE MAKEOVER
The Public Health Advocacy Institute, supported by the American Legacy Foundation, has completed a year of research on the tobacco industry’s attempted corporate makeover, and has created five issue briefs on the topic. A 60 minute Webinar was broadcast on May 11, 2009 and is archived HERE. They highlight various aspects of the tobacco industry’s use of corporate social responsibility rhetoric and tactics to attempt to rehabilitate its image and fend off tobacco control activism. These briefs each contain issues, the evidence and possible messages for State Tobacco Control Programs to use in their interventions and counter-marketing campaigns, and to generate support for future interventions. The issue briefs can be used effectively to denormalize the tobacco companies and better understand the motives behind their corporate makeover attempts.
- Download Webinar Archive (approximately 1 hour – requires Windows Media Player)
Issue Brief Topics:
- Corporate Social Responsibility Overview
- Manipulating Science
- Manipulating the Press
- Manipulating the Public and Regulators
- Youth Smoking
All briefs are in PDF format. 
