Rendez-vous with . . . Jim Bergman, Co-Director of The Center for Social Gerontology
Author: Philippe BoucherRendez-vous with . . . Jim Bergman, Co-Director of The Center for Social Gerontolog
Rendez-vous 150 January 7 2003
Jim Bergman Co-Director of The Center for Social Gerontology Ann Arbor, Michigan http://www.tcsg.org/tobacco.htm jbergman@tcsg.org
Thank you Jim for accepting our rendez-vous.
May I ask you to introduce yourself?
Jim Bergman: One of the most succinct descriptions of me is that I'm a lawyer by training and an advocate by instinct. I've spent over 35 years in the field of aging, much of that devoted to legal and policy issues concerning older Americans. In 1992, I made a rather significant career change when I accepted the position as the first Executive Director of STAT (Stop Teenage Addiction to Tobacco), a national advocacy organization based in Springfield, Massachusetts. That was my introduction to tobacco control issues, or, more accurately, when I became immersed in tobacco control issues. When I left STAT in early 1995 to move to Ann Arbor, Michigan, it was a move to join two loves: 1) Penny Hommel, to whom I am now married and with whom I am Co-Director of The Center for Social Gerontology, Inc. (TCSG); and, 2) the field of law and aging. When I returned to the aging field, I couldn't leave behind my interest in tobacco control issues. I immediately asked what was going on in the area of tobacco and older persons; the answer, I discovered, was that virtually nothing was being done. Yet, it was older persons who were dying and suffering the debilitating diseases caused by tobacco use. Starting in 1995, we at TCSG began a determined effort to change this, including starting the National Center for Tobacco-Free Older Persons, creating a comprehensive web site on this topic at http://www.tcsg.org/tobacco.htm, and operating the Smoke-Free Environments Law Project (SFELP) in Michigan, which serves persons of all ages, but focuses special attention on secondhand smoke issues facing older persons.
Q1. You say little attention has been focused, thus far, on the health issues affecting older smokers and the effects of secondhand smoke on older non-smokers. The focus has certainly been more on kids. Can you explain your approach?
Jim Bergman: This nation has a long history of being youth-focused and of actively avoiding aging issues and fighting against the aging process; just look at who businesses and Madison Avenue think is their primary consumer audience and think of all the anti-aging products marketed to people to keep them looking young. This focus at times shows itself in ageist forms, whether in employment discrimination or in actions that overtly or somewhat subtly convey the message that older persons have little remaining value to society. In the tobacco control field, the result has been: 1) a lack of interest in and understanding of the effects of smoking and secondhand smoke on older persons; 2) almost no research on tobacco and older persons issues, including the effects of secondhand smoke on older persons; 3) virtually no smoking cessation efforts targeted at older smokers; and, 4) almost no efforts to include older persons or aging organizations in tobacco control efforts concerning secondhand smoke, use of state tobacco settlement funds, increases in tobacco taxes, and related policy initiatives.
Likewise, advocates and policymakers in the aging field - which has a highly developed and powerful network that is a force on the federal level and in all 50 states - knew virtually nothing about tobacco and aging issues when we began to work on this issue in the mid-1990s.
Therefore, our initial steps to change this were very basic. First, we compiled a comprehensive collection of basic information on tobacco and older persons; much of which we had to create, including on tobacco and older minority populations. This included simple fact sheets, as well as very extensive bibliographies. Second, we utilized our extensive contacts in both the aging and tobacco control fields to broadly disseminate this information to raise consciousness about why older persons should not continue to be ignored when tobacco and health issues were on the table. In this effort, we quickly made use of technology, creating a very user-friendly web site and utilizing list serves. Third, we initiated special policy research projects focusing on both smoke-free environments and older persons and on smoking cessation and older smokers. Fourth, when the Master Settlement Agreement was signed, we actively mobilized the aging network to seek settlement funding for aging programs directed at addressing tobacco-caused health problems of older persons and at tobacco control programs generally. The result of these latter efforts is that aging programs have now received over $2.5 billion in settlement funds for prescription drug programs and in-home care programs; this is as much or more than states have appropriated for tobacco control programs. The unfortunate part of this effort has been that in only a few states have aging and tobacco control advocates worked together to seek settlement funds for tobacco control efforts targeted at older and younger persons. And, fifth, we have sought to encourage aging, health and tobacco control organizations on the local, state and national level to focus more programmatic and policy attention on tobacco and older persons issues.
Q2. You launched a national coalition for tobacco free older persons to promote a voice for the aging community. Where are you with this initiative?
jim Bergman: I start with the propositions that very little was being done on tobacco and older persons issues and that there is so much to do. We have made significant progress in raising consciousness within both the aging and tobacco control communities that older persons are the immediate victims of tobacco-caused illnesses and death. We have also produced new work on smoking cessation and older smokers. Very shortly, we will be broadly disseminating some of the first data on smoke-free policies in facilities serving older persons, together with model smoke-free policies for such facilities. As a result of the success of the aging network in obtaining tobacco settlement funds and actively supporting tobacco tax increases in some states, the political strength of the aging community on tobacco control issues has been demonstrated. However, as we have seen on other issues in the tobacco control field and in the aging field, creating changes in policy directions is like turning an aircraft carrier. I am certainly disappointed that the organizations with the funding - including federal and state agencies, as well as foundations - have done so little to encourage local, state and federal initiatives to address issues of older smokers and older victims of secondhand smoke. I am disappointed that the aging community has done so little to reach out to and coalesce on policy issues with tobacco control groups. Simply stated, we have much more to do, and the longer we wait, the more older victims of tobacco use and secondhand smoke suffer and die. Yet, I think the corner has been turned; now, we need to increase the commitment of policymakers, funders and advocates.
Q3. Your site has a substantial section on secondhand smoke issues in apartments and condominiums. Is that a growing concern? What are the main issues?
Jim Bergman: In our work on secondhand smoke issues, we have found that at least half of the calls we receive from individuals concern the seepage of secondhand smoke into apartments and condominiums. This is very definitely a serious issue, particularly since it is a life-threatening issue for many older persons, as well as younger persons with respiratory problems. It is also an issue that will not be addressed in the near future by smoke-free public places and worksite laws because such laws only cover the common areas of such housing, i.e., hallways, common rooms, etc. Therefore, the main issues are: 1) more broadly informing victims of secondhand smoke that there are potential legal remedies, such as the use of the federal Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act; 2) increasing the understanding of advocates in the tobacco control field about these remedies so that they are available to assist and advocate with victims; 3) convincing health and regulatory agencies, as well as the courts, that victims of secondhand smoke have rights that can be enforced against apartment owners; and, most importantly, 4) persuading apartment and condo owners that they not only have a legal right to make all or a portion of their facilities smoke-free, but that it makes economic sense for them to do so. As you note, more information on this is available on the SFELP site at http://www.tcsg.org/sfelp/home.htm.
Q4. You closely monitor the way the tobacco settlement funds are used (abused?).
What are the main trends you identify? Any lessons to be learned?
Jim Bergman: Yes, the section of our web site at http://www.tcsg.org/tobacco/settlement/updates.htm has daily updates on the use of tobacco settlement funds. We seem to be seeing good and bad trends. The good trend is that settlement funds devoted to providing money for new and expanded health care services for older victims of tobacco-caused diseases is in most states either growing or not being cut back, in spite of the poor economy and budget deficits. The very disturbing trend is that governors and legislators are embarked on a tobacco settlement funds feeding frenzy to cover state budget deficits and very few are protecting funding for tobacco control programs. That this is a moral violation of the basis on which the states received the funds is clear to any honest person. The lesson to taken from this is that the tobacco control community needs to do a better job of convincing policymakers of two things: 1) there are short-term, as well as long-term, economic benefits, i.e., reduced health care costs, as a result of tobacco control programs; and 2) there is a political price to be paid for cutting tobacco control programs. Until those facts are convincingly conveyed to policymakers, I fear we will see more reductions in settlement funding for tobacco control programs. This is also where coalitions between tobacco control and aging groups could be so beneficial, because no politician doubts the voting power of older persons.
Q5. You are located in Michigan. Can you tell us about the situation of tobacco control in Michigan now?
Jim Bergman: This is one of the true rays of sunshine I see currently in tobacco control. I think that the key statewide and local tobacco control groups in Michigan are working more cooperatively and effectively on smoke-free environments policy initiatives than I have ever seen in the state. The primary reason is that trust exists between all the key players, and, as a result, folks are comfortable in their respective roles. This came about through concerted efforts of the key statewide players - the Tobacco Section of the Michigan Department of Community Health, Tobacco-Free Michigan, and the Smoke-Free Environments Law Project, together with ALA, AHA and ACS. Without going into great detail, we have already in 2002 seen two major counties adopt comprehensive smoke-free worksite and public places regulations, and even in one other county in which we lost the vote we gained strength. I expect in the next two to three years, we will see almost every county in the state adopt comprehensive smoke-free regulations. Once that happens, statewide policymakers gain a measure of comfort - that is, they see such laws can be passed and the policymakers who voted for them don't get turned out by the voters - and we will see statewide smoke-free legislation becoming a real possibility.
Q6. Is there anything else you would like to add?
Jim Bergman: While there is much more that needs to be achieved, the tobacco control field is maturing and gaining a growing cadre of experienced advocates.
Social norms are changing as the general public understands in their gut, as well as their head, that tobacco use and secondhand smoke are dangerous. Most importantly, the general public is seeing the tobacco cartel for what it is - a greedy, untrustworthy industry which cannot reform itself without destroying itself - thereby leaving the public with the responsibility of taking actions to protect its citizens from the products of that industry. Once that view is a bit more prevalent, the policies will follow. Of that, I have no doubt.
Thank you very much Jim for taking the time to be with us today.