RE:   WHERE THERE'S SMOKE YOU WON'T JUST FIND CIGARETTES,
YOU'LL FIND  CANDLES TOO
 

December 29, 2000

To All Concerned:

On August 17, 2000, New York State Governor George Pataki signed legislation making New York the first state in the nation to require that cigarettes meet fire safety standards.

On April 22, 2000 I had written to Gov. Pataki, asking that he not sign a law of this nature for various reasons.  Sometime during this same period I had contact with the sponsor of this bill, Assemblyman Alexander "Pete" Grannis.  When I inquired why one product that may cause fires was being singled out for control by legislation when there are other products that may cause fires and should then also be regulated he responded, "This is what I am working on right now."  It is well known that the Assemblyman has been involved in attempts at fire-safe cigarette legislation for approximately 17 years so the word "now" seems a bit short of the attempt.  Assemblyman Grannis is an admitted anti-smoker and I included in our discussion my suspicion that he was more concerned with controlling tobacco than he was in reducing fires and saving the lives of fire-related victims.  He repeated his previous claim.  Although, I would think that in 17 years, if he was truly more concerned with public fire safety, he would have found the time to also try to regulate other fire producing products.

At the time I had originally contacted these gentleman I questioned the pureness behind their intent to regulate cigarettes by requiring fire-safety standards.  The motivation behind the targetting of cigarettes was and still is highly suspect.  I also offered my conclusions on what appeared to me to be conflicting concerns.  There have been journalists who have written articles also questioning the reasoning behind the fire-safe cigarette legislation, reaching the same conclusions as I had.  Those conclusions were that it was an anti-tobacco bill disguised as a fire-safety issue.

By requiring only a sub-par cigarette be sold in New York State I am sure it is their belief that this will reduce the number of smokers.  That when smokers are presented with a less than enjoyable cigarette they will opt to quit.  Rather, I am quite sure this will promote out-of-state purchases, smuggling or black-market sales.

The following are several of my arguments supporting my accusation at the time.

Propaganda towards creating a smoke-free society reared it's ugly head yet again.  This time it was by blaming cigarettes for causing fires and demanding "fire safe" cigarettes.  It is conveniently omitted that studies indicate that the majority of these cigarette caused fires were at the hands of an alcohol impaired person.  Exaggerations about cigarettes have become acceptable in the tyrannical way government is trying to stop adults from exercising their choice to smoke. In 1989, FEMA ranked smoking 6th on the nation-wide list of fire related causes. Candles are included as the 3rd leading cause of fires. I want to know when religious candles in the home will be mandated to be "fire safe". Or isn't that a politically correct thing to do?

 

According to the US Fire Administration (of FEMA), "during 1985-89,
defective heating equipment caused 23.4% of residential fires; cooking
equipment 18.7%; incendiary or suspicious causes 12.0%; other equipment
8.2%; electrical distribution 7.9%; and smoking material only 6.8%."
They also admit that, "Historically, in the majority of these cases, the
smoker has also been drinking."

According to a study in the New England Journal of Medicine (Runyan CW,
et al. NEJM 1992;327(12):859-863): "The presence of an alcohol-impaired
person was the strongest independent risk factor for death in the case
of a fire," 7.5, 95% CIs 4.4-12.7."

According to another study (Chernichko L et al. Can J Public Health
1993;84(5):317-320), "76% of the victims of fatal house fires blamed on
cigarettes were LEGALLY INTOXICATED. Only 16% had not been drinking at
all."

 As reported above, alcohol plays a large part in fires caused by cigarettes.  Instead of blaming and putting the onus on tobacco companies, who have become the easy mark in the hateful atmosphere created by anti-smoking fanatics, it would be more forthright to place the focus on what is behind the reason for these fires.   Yet cigarettes are regulated and alcohol has not been addressed.

Even more outstanding, fires started by candles in the home are also a major fire concern.  How many people have been lost to these fires?  Certainly not enough for politicians to risk political suicide by condemning candles, many lit for religious purposes.  According to the rhetoric applied to the demand for fire-safe cigarettes I thought even one death was too many.  Apparently, that only applies to cigarettes.  Both are easily controllable yet only one is singled out.

Since the time of my original contact with Gov. Pataki and Assemblyman Grannis, who, by the way, received heavy support from Brooklyn Fire Marshal Kevin James, there have been recent events and reports that support my questioning the reason behind the fire-safe cigarette law and have renewed my demand that fire-safety laws be applied equally across the board, not just to cigarettes, if it is true that public safety is the prime concern.  If they cannot be applied equally then the one that is should be reconsidered.

Candles have become increasingly responsible for fire-related deaths.  As of December 24, 2000, 15 people  in New York City alone have died in fires caused by careless use of candles this year.  Most recently two children have succumbed to this tragedy.  There have been 240 fires caused by candles this year, according to New York City Fire Commissioner Thomas Von Essen.  Commissioner Von Essen goes on to say, "It's a new hazard."   He expresses growing concern in the use of candles.  Data indicates that about 7 of 10 households regularly use candles.  These numbers illustrate the great potential for an increasing number of fires related to candle use.  Yet cigarettes are regulated and candles are not.

Slightly less risky are portable space heaters but they are of equal concern.  About 100,000 residential fires, responsible for 600 deaths, are ignited each year by portable space heaters, according to the US Consumer Product Safety Commission.   Another 100 people die from carbon-monoxide poisoning from their space heaters and at least 20,000 people receive hospital emergency room care for burn injuries associated with touching the heaters' scalding surfaces. Those are many more victims than there are cigarette related fire victims.  Yet cigarettes are regulated and legal space heaters are not.

Of course,  safety from fires in residential homes could be addressed in one fell swoop by requiring that manufacturers of all home furnishings increase their products' resistence to fire.  Mandate a level of flame retardation be met.  If the manufactuers of home furnishings cannot meet the proposed standards then their products should be banned from sale in the state of  New York.  I am being facetious in that the product be banned but not completely without merit.  Why has one business been targeted for extreme regulation when furniture and window dressings, etc. are as culpable as products that are capable of starting fires?  Remove the possibility of items catching fire and you remove the danger of ALL items that burn.  This is a case of the chicken and the egg.  Why blame the chicken and not the egg  (or vice versa, however your own philosophy dictates).  Yet cigarettes are regulated and home furnishings apparently remain with less than adequate regulations.

I am also curious as to how this law will be enforced regarding visitors to New York from other states and countries, many of whom (especially the foreigners) will be bringing their own supply of cigarettes into the state.  It would be unfair to turn a blind eye to those you consider "guests" while actively enforcing the law on residents.  If this law cannot be, or is not, applied evenly to all within the borders of New York then there is reason to doubt its legitimacy.

It is at this time that I again address the issues and strongly urge that the law requiring cigarettes in New York State meet fire-safety standards be reviewed and reversed due to enactment by means of bias, otherwise candles and all currently legal heaters should be required to meet some sort of equitable fire-safety standard that now only applies to cigarettes.

Why aren't Gov. Pataki, Assemblyman Grannis and Fire Marshal James actively working on requirements to make these products safer for use if their prime concerns, as they have all stated, is saving even just one life from a fire?  They continually cry out that children are the innocent victims of tobacco, fire-related and otherwise.  The last two victims of a candle-related fire were children.  The Fire Commissioner himself has expressed deep concern.  Certainly that is enough to instill some action in those who profess they want to reduce the number of fires and have been victors in that quest, is it not?   Or are they merely creating that illusion by having the fire-safe cigarette law passed under the guise of fire safety when in reality  it is an anti-tobacco law? Let their actions speak for themselves and you decide.
 

Audrey Silk
P.O. Box 1036
Brooklyn, New York  11234

FAX:  1-530-690-8990

Email:  nycclash@mail.com
 

Founder:  NYC Citizens Lobbying Against Smoker Harassment (NYC C.L.A.S.H.)
http://www.nycclash.com

Disclaimer:  I do not work for any tobacco companies or companies associated with tobacco.  Nor do I accept any contributions from same.  I am not in contact with same for any reason or purpose and they have not contacted me.  I am a dues paying member of the National Smokers Alliance and our affiliation ends there.
 

CC:  Governor George Pataki
        New York State Assembly
        New York State Senate
        Mayor Rudolph Giuliani
        New York City Council
        Conservative Party of New York
        Libertarian Party of New York
        Commissioner, FDNY
        CBS News and affiliated news magazine programs
        NBC News and affiliated news magazine programs
        ABC News and affiliated news magazine programs
        John Stossel, ABC’s 20/20
        New York One News
        WB11 News
        FOX News
        UPN 9 News
        New York Times
        New York Daily News
        New York Post
        New York Newsday
        Wall Street Journal
        The Village Voice
        Jewish Post of New York
        Staten Island Advance
        Kings Courier
        Brooklyn Skyline
        All New York Press Association Members