on November 14, 1995, the Congressional Research Services issued a report authored by C. Stephen Redhead and Richard E. Rowberg entitled Environmental Tobacco Smoke and Lung Cancer Risk. This report was prepared in response to multiple requests from congressional offices and presents an analysis of the potential health effects of environmental tobacco smoke [ETS]. Consistent with statutory requirements for CRS work, this report was prepared in a nonpartisan, unbiased manner and is an excellent example of the professional and academic quality of CRS work. The report calls into question some of the findings of the Environmental Protection Agency with regard to ETS. Not surprisingly, some of the conclusions contained in the report have proven controversial. Subsequent to the release of the report, one of the authors of the report made statements to the press regarding the conclusions of the report. Reports of the author's statements have appeared in several newspapers. It appears that his statements have been either misconstrued or taken out of context in an apparent attempt to discredit the results of the report. In a letter to me, dated March 19, 1996, Daniel P. Mulhollan, Director, CRS, clarified that, based on conversations with the author, news reports were either misleading or inaccurate. Further, Mr. Mulhollan stated that CRS continues to stand by the findings of the report.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing a Congressional Research Service report on environmental tobacco smoke and its implications.
Share
More from Gerald Ford
I was a part of a group of many Members on both sides of the aisle some few weeks ago who believed the argument put forward by many in the airline industry that if we did not pass an immediate industry stabilization package, I think…
I am just curious as a Member of the body and as a voter, when does it become President Bush's economy? You said this started back with Bill Clinton.
Do grant a full, free, and absolute pardon unto Richard Nixon for all offenses against the United States.
what is the problem then if my colleagues believe in removing all these taxes, which I think there is a lot of merit to, I am a big tax cutter like the gentleman is? I support those ideas. How is that consistent with the taking 3 million…





