Tobacco in the crosshairs during legislative session

SALEM, Ore. (AP) — It wasn't too long ago — just four years, in fact — that anti-smoking legislation was all but dead before it was drafted. In 2005, tobacco lobbyists and a Republican-controlled House managed to kill a ban on smoking in bars, a 10-cent-a-pack cigarette tax and "fire-safe" cigarettes.

But, as most any politician will tell you, a lot can change in four years.

At least six bills that target smoking and tobacco are making their way through the Capitol this session, and tobacco lobbyist Mark Nelson — one of the most influential in Salem — is finding that this time around he has to pick his battles carefully.

"Every years seems to be tobacco's turn in the barrel," Nelson said. But "I think there is more (legislation) this year than there has been in previous years."

To be sure, the 2007 legislative session was no treat for the tobacco lobby. Lawmakers finally managed to pass that ban on smoking in bars that had evaded them just one session before. But Nelson and others found a victory in forcing a popular vote on a proposed cigarette tax for children's health care, effectively killing it.

This year, though, there are more targets and considerably stronger Democratic majorities.

The legislation runs the gamut. So do the sponsors. So do their motivations.

Rep. Chuck Riley, a Hillsboro Democrat, is sponsoring a bill that would ban smoking in cars while riding with anybody younger than 17. "Just driving down the road and seeing kids strapped in the seat of a car filled with smoke — I just think that shouldn't happen," he said.

Rep. Carolyn Tomei, a Milwaukie Democrat, is sponsoring a bill that prohibits the distribution of free samples of non-cigarette tobacco products — think Snus, those little tobacco pellets that you hold under your lip like chew. She's also signed onto a bill that would force stores that sell tobacco products to also sell smoking cessation products.

"Even though tobacco companies might say (free samples) would only be distributed to people of a certain age, that of course, is not the case," she said. "They know it will get to young kids."

Then there's the Department of Human Services, which has introduced three bills. One would bar tobacco products from being sold in vending machines, another would require landlords to disclose their smoking policies, and the last would implement a 60-cent-a-pack cigarette tax.

"I think this is a really important area for us to be working in," said Mel Kohn, Oregon's public health officer. "I think there's huge public support for these kinds of bills."

Most of the proposed legislation seems to have reasonably strong support from the Legislature at large and the governor's office. All but two have had public hearings or will within the week — the first step in the committee process. The other two have had informational meetings. And the rental disclosure bill has already been approved by the Oregon House.

"I think there will be careful but positive action on several of those," said House Speaker Dave Hunt, a Gladstone Democrat. "The core issues for us are the health care issues."

Nevertheless, it's doubtful all six bills will make it through.

As Tomei explains, "there's just so many bills you can pass on a certain subject."

But, she adds, "you have got to get people thinking about it. ... I think lots of times good legislation doesn't pass the first time."

As unlikely as it is that all the bills will get approved, it's even less likely that none of them will. And so, says Nelson, the tobacco lobbyist, even though "we think a lot of these things are the responsibility of the individuals and not the responsibility of the state to micromanage these people's lives, we've got to pick and choose what we get involved in."

Nelson's biggest target? There's no contest. "The main thing we're concerned about is the tobacco tax."

"That, of course, is coming with the 61-cent increase on the federal tax," Nelson said. "People will be driving all the way to Mexico to buy cigarettes."

Interests groups have been going back and fourth about a tobacco tax for years now. Opponents won in 2007 by kicking the measure to the voters as a constitutional amendment and then spending millions persuading voters to reject it.

This year, though, supporters are as confident as ever in the bill, which could raise more than $100 million for a state that's facing a $4 billion budget deficit.

"It's pretty apparent that we're going to see some kind of tobacco tax," said Alejandro Queral of the American Heart Association.

A few things have happened to give him and others hope. People are becoming better educated about the social and health care costs associated with smoking, there's a need for revenue and the public health community in Oregon "has really come together for the first time in a long time," Queral said.

"I think those three elements are putting tobacco center stage this session."