THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Wednesday, March 8, 1995 TAG: 9503080502
SECTION: LOCAL PAGE: B1 EDITION: NORTH CAROLINA
SOURCE: BY MASON PETERS, STAFF WRITER
LENGTH: Medium: 71 lines
Efforts by the North Carolina General Assembly in 1993 to limit smoking in workplaces have not been effective, and by the year 2,000 nearly 60 percent of the state's private employees will be unprotected from second-hand tobacco smoke, a panel of U.S. health officials reported Tuesday.
``Rather than a victory for tobacco control, HB-957 (the 1993 anti-smoking law) has been a setback for public health in North Carolina,'' said an article published this week by U.S. cancer experts in the Journal of the American Medical Association.
Lung cancer caused by second-hand tobacco smoke is ``well-documented'' among nonsmokers, the article said in pointed criticism of health care in North Carolina - the largest tobacco-producing state.
The report, prepared by five experts at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta, said a pre-emptive provision in the General Assembly's anti-smoking law prevents the state's county and city governments from passing stricter tobacco control regulations.
``The success of local bans has prompted the tobacco industry to support smoking control legislation at the state level that preempts local regulations that are more restrictive,'' said the AMA-CDC report.
``These bills are usually promoted as pro-health measures. However, the restrictions are usually very weak, and local governments are prevented from adopting more restrictive measures,'' the report said.
The state's 1993 legislation was sponsored by state Rep. Milton F. ``Toby'' Fitch Jr. D-Wilson, and state Rep. Henry M. ``Mickey'' Michaux Jr., D-Durham.
The Fitch-Michaux law allowed smoking in 20 percent of the space in state-owned buildings; total nonsmoking areas were not mandated, the AMA report stated.
When the measure passed with minor changes on July 15, 1993, the final legislation stipulated that county and city governments could not enact stricter laws after Oct. 15, 1993. Local smoking regulations enacted before that time would be grandfathered, the legislation stated.
``The three-month deadline created an unnatural time frame for communities to organize, debate, and adopt restrictions for the indefinite future,'' said the AMA-CDC report.
In the northeastern part of the state, two counties had already put local ordinances on the books that limited smoking in public buildings.
``Currituck County commissioners voted to ban smoking in public buildings before the state law took final effect,'' said Sheila Doxey, Currituck County Superior Court Clerk.
The same was true in Pasquotank County and in Elizabeth City public structures.
Between July and October of 1993, more than half of the state's 100 counties passed some kind of local anti-smoking regulations, the AMA-CDC report said.
But, said the health panelists, the local regulations only rarely imposed smoking restrictions on private work sites.
``Twenty four percent of the (county) boards of health adopted regulations that met the criteria for minimal or partial protection. No regulatory board adopted rules that met the criteria for complete protection,'' the report stated.
``By the year 2,000 when all regulations will have gone into effect, 59-percent of the 2.6-million private employees in North Carolina will still not be guaranteed any legal protection from environmental tobacco smoke at their work site; 19-percent will have minimal protection, 22 percent will have partial protection and zero percent will have complete protection,'' the report said.
The panel emphasized that the state statute does not require adequate ventilation systems in areas where even limited smoking is permitted. by CNB