Problem/Objective: Preemptive state laws in the area of smoke-free air preclude local jurisdictions from enacting smoking restrictions that are more stringent than the state standard. At least 16 states have such laws in place for at least some settings. There is a widespread consensus among tobacco control practitioners that preemption is a barrier to reducing secondhand smoke exposure. For example, it has been noted that, in addition to impeding local action to protect nonsmoking workers and nonsmoking business patrons from secondhand smoke exposure, preemption may also prevent the public debate and the accompanying education that typically occur when local smoke-free ordinances are considered, and may pose a barrier to local enforcement of state smoking restrictions. However, few studies have documented or quantified the impact of state preemptive laws by examining their effect on concrete outcomes.

Methods: This study uses data from the 2003 Tobacco Use Supplement to the Current Population Survey and other data sources to investigate differences in various outcomes between states with and without preemption.

Results: The outcomes examined will include the number of local smoke-free ordinances, the proportion of a state's workforce that is covered by smoke-free workplace policies, cigarette sales and consumption, tobacco-related attitudes and beliefs, and the strength of public support for smoke-free policies.

Conclusions: The study's findings should be helpful to public health practitioners who must address this topic, both in states that currently have preemptive provisions in place and in states that do not.