The federal initiative to halt the sale of tobacco to children--the Synar Amendment, 1992-2000: lessons learned
UMass Chan Affiliations
Department of Family Medicine and Community HealthDocument Type
Journal ArticlePublication Date
2005-03-26Keywords
AdolescentChild
Commerce
Financing, Organized
Government Regulation
Humans
Law Enforcement
Population Surveillance
Smoking
State Government
United States
Life Sciences
Medicine and Health Sciences
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
BACKGROUND: The Synar Amendment was enacted by the US Congress in 1992 to require states and territories to establish and enforce laws prohibiting the sale of tobacco to minors. OBJECTIVE: To describe state and federal efforts to comply with the Synar mandate. METHODS: State and federal actions were examined for the eight years following enactment. DATA SOURCES: Federal documents from 1992-2003, annual block grant applications from 59 states and territories describing activities during federal fiscal years 1995-2000. MEASURES: Whether applicants made a good faith effort to comply by enacting a law, enforcing it with inspections and penalties, conducting a valid survey and meeting violation rate targets set by the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). RESULTS: Between 1996 and 2000, 26 states had made a good faith effort to comply with Synar every year. In 2000, 57 jurisdictions (excluding Maryland and Montana) had established laws without loopholes, 57 conducted a valid survey, and 54 actively enforced their laws. By 2002, violation rates had dropped substantially everywhere but Alaska and a few small territories. No state reached the violation rate goal of 20% without penalising violators. CONCLUSIONS: The Synar Amendment has resulted in the universal adoption of laws prohibiting tobacco sales to minors and almost universal enforcement of those laws, resulting in dramatically reduced violation rates. Implementation was slowed significantly by a lack of good faith effort in many states and by DHHS's decision not to require states to enforce their laws by penalising lawbreakers.Source
Tob Control. 2005 Apr;14(2):93-8. Link to article on publisher's site
DOI
10.1136/tc.2004.009373Permanent Link to this Item
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14038/38831PubMed ID
15791018Related Resources
ae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1136/tc.2004.009373