State preemption: A significant and quiet threat to public health in the United States

Jennifer L. Pomeranz, Mark Pertschuk

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Abstract

State and local governments traditionally protect the health and safety of their populations more strenuously than does the federal government. Preemption, when a higher level of government restricts or withdraws the authority of a lower level of government to act on a particular issue, was historically used as a point of negotiation in the legislative process. More recently, however, 3 new preemption-related issues have emerged that have direct implications for public health. First, multiple industries are working on a 50-state strategy to enact state laws preempting local regulation. Second, legislators supporting preemptive state legislation often do not support adopting meaningful state health protections and enact preemptive legislation to weaken protections or halt progress. Third, states have begun adopting enhanced punishments for localities and individual local officials for acting outside the confines of preemption. These actions have direct implications for health and cover such topics as increased minimum wages, paid family and sick leave, firearm safety, and nutrition policies. Stakeholders across public health fields and disciplines should join together in advocacy, action, research, and education to support and maintain local public health infrastructures and protections.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)900-902
Number of pages3
JournalAmerican Journal of Public Health
Volume107
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 1 2017

Fingerprint

Public Health
Legislation
Health
Family Leave
Safety
State Government
Nutrition Policy
Local Government
Federal Government
Sick Leave
Punishment
Health Services Research
Salaries and Fringe Benefits
Negotiating
Firearms
Industry
Education
Population
preempt

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

State preemption : A significant and quiet threat to public health in the United States. / Pomeranz, Jennifer L.; Pertschuk, Mark.

In: American Journal of Public Health, Vol. 107, No. 6, 01.06.2017, p. 900-902.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

@article{ccb45de3c323407b92e2db3f64139eb8,
title = "State preemption: A significant and quiet threat to public health in the United States",
abstract = "State and local governments traditionally protect the health and safety of their populations more strenuously than does the federal government. Preemption, when a higher level of government restricts or withdraws the authority of a lower level of government to act on a particular issue, was historically used as a point of negotiation in the legislative process. More recently, however, 3 new preemption-related issues have emerged that have direct implications for public health. First, multiple industries are working on a 50-state strategy to enact state laws preempting local regulation. Second, legislators supporting preemptive state legislation often do not support adopting meaningful state health protections and enact preemptive legislation to weaken protections or halt progress. Third, states have begun adopting enhanced punishments for localities and individual local officials for acting outside the confines of preemption. These actions have direct implications for health and cover such topics as increased minimum wages, paid family and sick leave, firearm safety, and nutrition policies. Stakeholders across public health fields and disciplines should join together in advocacy, action, research, and education to support and maintain local public health infrastructures and protections.",
author = "Pomeranz, {Jennifer L.} and Mark Pertschuk",
year = "2017",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.2105/AJPH.2017.303756",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "107",
pages = "900--902",
journal = "American Journal of Public Health",
issn = "0090-0036",
publisher = "American Public Health Association Inc.",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - State preemption

T2 - A significant and quiet threat to public health in the United States

AU - Pomeranz, Jennifer L.

AU - Pertschuk, Mark

PY - 2017/6/1

Y1 - 2017/6/1

N2 - State and local governments traditionally protect the health and safety of their populations more strenuously than does the federal government. Preemption, when a higher level of government restricts or withdraws the authority of a lower level of government to act on a particular issue, was historically used as a point of negotiation in the legislative process. More recently, however, 3 new preemption-related issues have emerged that have direct implications for public health. First, multiple industries are working on a 50-state strategy to enact state laws preempting local regulation. Second, legislators supporting preemptive state legislation often do not support adopting meaningful state health protections and enact preemptive legislation to weaken protections or halt progress. Third, states have begun adopting enhanced punishments for localities and individual local officials for acting outside the confines of preemption. These actions have direct implications for health and cover such topics as increased minimum wages, paid family and sick leave, firearm safety, and nutrition policies. Stakeholders across public health fields and disciplines should join together in advocacy, action, research, and education to support and maintain local public health infrastructures and protections.

AB - State and local governments traditionally protect the health and safety of their populations more strenuously than does the federal government. Preemption, when a higher level of government restricts or withdraws the authority of a lower level of government to act on a particular issue, was historically used as a point of negotiation in the legislative process. More recently, however, 3 new preemption-related issues have emerged that have direct implications for public health. First, multiple industries are working on a 50-state strategy to enact state laws preempting local regulation. Second, legislators supporting preemptive state legislation often do not support adopting meaningful state health protections and enact preemptive legislation to weaken protections or halt progress. Third, states have begun adopting enhanced punishments for localities and individual local officials for acting outside the confines of preemption. These actions have direct implications for health and cover such topics as increased minimum wages, paid family and sick leave, firearm safety, and nutrition policies. Stakeholders across public health fields and disciplines should join together in advocacy, action, research, and education to support and maintain local public health infrastructures and protections.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85020646556&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85020646556&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.2105/AJPH.2017.303756

DO - 10.2105/AJPH.2017.303756

M3 - Review article

C2 - 28426304

AN - SCOPUS:85020646556

VL - 107

SP - 900

EP - 902

JO - American Journal of Public Health

JF - American Journal of Public Health

SN - 0090-0036

IS - 6

ER -