Kingdon and Second-Hand Smoke Assessment Kellen Sanger Wednesday, September 25, 2013 HOD 1800.

03

Introduction Timing is right to affect the public agenda on second-hand smoke as all three process streams align due to: 1) media events emphasizing the dangers of second-hand smoke and changing American values that escalate the issue a pressing problem; 2) favorable political timing from recent legislature and sufficient resources for action; 3) a successful softening up to second-hand smoke policy resulting in increased advocacy and the emergence of a consensus. The timing to affect the public agenda on second-hand smoking is right due to a complete joining of the three process streams in favor of a successful policy combatting the dangers of second-hand smoke. By 1979, the condition of exposure to second-hand smoke being harmful to those that did not directly make the decision to smoke has evolved into a critical problem that violated the publics values on what was acceptable in public (Spicer, 1995, p. 13). Policy makers during this time have found themselves with the necessary political resources and general support to act upon this public sentiment and to begin setting an agenda to combat second-hand smoke. The 1979 Surgeon Generals Report on Smoking and Health will act as a catalyst to focus public attention along with growing political support during a time in which policy action is crucial (Spicer, 1995, p. 7). Recent media exposure by Califano as well as previous reports and legislature passed on secondhand smoke act to soften people up to the ideas of anti-smoking policy and lead to a policy backed by a majority of Americans according to a 1978 national opinion poll (Spicer, 1995, p. 13). Based on these streams, the time to act in favor of restrictions on second-hand smoke is clear. Problem Stream The 1979 Surgeon Generals Report on Smoking and Health will act as a powerful focusing event to escalate the condition that is the dangers of second-hand smoke to involuntary smokers into a pressing problem. In accordance with Kingdon (2003), the report will not only act as a focusing event that is symbolic in nature due to its massive size but also as an emphasis on a growing national crisis (p. 1; Spicer, 1995, p. 7). The event will be effective because it is a firm indication of a problem and represents the preexisting perception that smoking is a dangerous, growing epidemic that is now understood to be harming those that do not even decide for themselves to voluntarily partake (Kingdon, 2003, p.1; Spicer, 1995, p. 4). The sizeable media attention that the report will draw provides a perfect time for the start of public action against the issue of secondhand smoke.
2

The problem of second-hand smoke is further intensified due to its infringement on important values thus making it clear that time is right to act upon the issue. Spicer (1995) cites new findings in behavioral research during 1975 that indicated smoking in public is becoming increasingly unacceptable and even only tolerated between consenting adults in private (p. 13). These feelings found scientific support in a 1978 report by the New England Journal of Medicine that revealed a stronger link than ever before established between heart disease and two of the principal constituents of second hand smoke (Spicer, 1995, p. 18). Smoking in public around others directly violates nonsmokers rights as they too experience the harmful effects of smoking thus transforming the issue into a serious problem for which many Americans passionately want immediate resolution. Politics Stream The strategic use of available resources to advance agenda setting in the political sphere provides another reason why the timing is right to pursue an effective second-hand smoke policy. With a resurrection of the Office on Smoking and Health, Califano strategically used available resources to increase staff, improve the quality of staff members, and move the office space directly into the beltway where closer proximity makes impacting politics easier (Spicer, 1995, p. 5). While all of these improve the prominence of second-hand smoke policy, many dismiss the campaign entirely due to the enormous amount of funds available to interests supported by the tobacco industry (Spicer, 1995, p. 7). However, second-hand smoke policy will be able to overcome these obstacles for two reasons. Pinney, a policy specialist brought in by Califano, will not need to outspend the tobacco industry but will instead strategically focus on issues that could generate their own publicity and momentum (Spicer, 1995, p. 7). The second reason is that according to Kingdon (2003), when interest groups such as those employed by the tobacco industry come into conflict with the desires of the general population, the desires of the general population usually win (p. 150). Apart from the strategic use of resources, the political timing of starting action on secondhand smoke agenda is favorable in the current environment. In 1978, political timing is correct to move forward with second-hand smoke policy due to state movements such as the Clean Air Initiative in California that severely restricted smoking in public places as well as the Clean Indoor Air Act of 1975 in Minnesota that restricted smoking in places of employment (Minnesota Clean Indoor Air Act, 1975; Spicer, 1995, p. 12). Another key example of political momentum in favor of second-hand smoke policy was the Civil Aeronautics Boards adoption of rules that segregated smokers and nonsmokers in airplane cabins in 1973(Lopipero & Bero, 2006). This legislature
3

indicates that political support for policy against second-hand smoke is available and growing in this time of monumental restrictions on public smoking. Policy Stream Timing is right for public agenda on second-hand smoke as successful softening up to the idea has set the stage for second-hand smoke policy to be well received. In congruence with the problem stream, the 1979 Surgeon General Report on Smoking and Health has had significant softening up in order to ensure people are receptive to the policy and not intimidated by a brand new idea (Kingdon, 2003, p.152).. For example, the 1975 report not only had a chapter on involuntary smoking, but it also has evolved the issue from a focus on the irritation effect of second-hand smoke to its disease effect (Spicer, 1995, p. 10). Second-hand smoke policy has undergone a thorough softening up by using a recombination of ideas in the 1979 report that will cause dramatic change and innovation while eliminating opposition that may of came from a drastic, new idea. Advocacy for second-hand smoke policy from medical experts, politicians, and the majority of the population has resulted in the emergence of a consensus for action against second-hand smoke. Advocacy for a solution to the pressing problem of second-hand smoke could experience record numbers as a new army of nonsmokers to the antismoking crusade would emerge due to new research on the dangers of second-hand smoke (Spicer, 1995, p. 12). The emergence of a consensus reflects this growing advocacy as a 1978 national opinion poll found that a majority of Americans believe second-hand smoke is harmful even to those not smoking and that a majority also support separate smoking sections in public places (Spicer, 1995, p. 13). This combines with the recent passing of legislature against smoking in public places to reveal a consensus emerging among politicians and the American population for action against second-hand smoke. Conclusion As these three separate streams join, the timing to affect the public agenda becomes right. The 1979 Surgeon Generals Report will bring unprecedented media attention to the pressing problem that is second-hand smoke and its value threating nature. This problem will demand a solution and a smoking restricting policy proposal with advocates and strategic introduction will couple with the second-hand smoke problem. Correct political timing and sufficient resources provides a suitable political environment for second-hand smoke policy. These linkages between the problem, political, and policy streams make it clear that a policy window has been opened and that the timing is right to affect public agenda on second-hand smoke.
4

References Kingdon, J. W. (2003). Agendas, Alternative, and Public Policies (1995). In J.W. Shatritz, K. S. Layne, C. P. Borich (Eds.). Classics of Public Policy, pp. 148-160. New York, NY: Pearson. Lopipero, P. A., & Bero, L. A. (2006). Tobacco interests or the public interest: 20 years of industry strategies to undermine airline smoking restrictions. Tobacco Control, 15. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2563596/. Minnesota Clean Indoor Air Act, Minn. Stat. 144.411-144.417 (1975). Spicer, D. E. (1995). Facing the Problem of Second-hand smoke: The Office on Smoking and Healths Decision. Kennedy School Case Program C16-93-1217.0. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.