Weaker smoking ban backed
BOB BROWN/TIMES-DISPATCH
Members of the Virginia House of Delegates voted on an amendment yesterday to the smoking bill, which later passed 61-38.
Rejecting a deal brokered by House Speaker William J. Howell, R-Stafford, House Republicans yesterday pushed through a weakened version of a statewide ban on restaurant smoking that Howell fashioned with Gov. Timothy M. Kaine.
Before voting 61-38 to give tentative approval to House Bill 1703, members added more exceptions to the compromise, which already made allowances for private clubs and restaurants with a designated smoking room that is separated and independently ventilated.
"The governor is glad the bill is moving forward, though the amendments run counter to the agreement that was made by the leadership," Kaine spokesman Gordon Hickey said. "We will continue to work on the issue."
Among the amendments proposed yesterday by Del. Terry G. Kilgore, R-Scott, and approved by the House, were to postpone the implementation until Jan. 1, 2010, and to allow smoking whenever minors are not allowed.
The House's version of the bill comes up for a final vote today, which likely is a formality. If the legislation survives both chambers, Kaine can make amendments.
The House also voted 59-39 to approve a matching Senate bill that already had cleared that chamber.
Other changes made to the House bill yesterday were to require either a door or a separate ventilation system and to allow smoking in an entire restaurant if it is rented out for a private party. Violations would carry a fine of no more than $25.
Del. John A. Cosgrove, R-Chesapeake, patron of the House bill, was relieved to see the support, albeit with changes.
"I'm pleased that for the first time we've gotten a smoking-restriction bill that is very narrowly tailored off the House floor," he said. "Now we have to shepherd it through the rest of the process."
Anti-smoking advocates were disappointed with the House amendments.
"It's really not a smoke-free bill anymore," said Cathleen Smith Grzesiek, a spokeswoman for the American Heart Association.
The ramifications for Howell remain to be seen. The weakened measure's advancement could prove helpful this fall for imperiled GOP delegates in Northern Virginia and Hampton Roads.
Or the legislation could create an intra-party rift, warns a group of GOP party leaders and district chairmen who wrote a letter to Republicans in the General Assembly pleading for a "no" vote.
Among the letters' authors is Del. Jeffrey M. Frederick, R-Prince William, chairman of the state party.
"Supporting [House Bill] 1703 will discourage and demoralize the Republican base and confuse those that view us as the party of free market principles," the letter states.
The letter notes that Attorney General Bob McDonnell, the all-but-official Republican nominee for governor, "understands our principles and position in regard to the smoking ban, and we believe you should take heed of his position."
Del. William R. Janis, R-Henrico, spoke against the smoking measure on the floor, at one point saying that "it would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies."
Janis said that since September -- no matter what his constituents contacted him about -- they were most concerned about the economy and joblessness.
"Is this bill likely to create more jobs in your district, or is it likely to place more people on the rolls of the jobless?" he asked, adding that mom-and-pop restaurants particularly would be affected.
Del. David L. Englin, D-Alexandria, said that sometimes people who lose their employment consider restaurant work as an option.
"It's not fair in this economy to force a restaurant worker to choose between employment -- between keeping a job to support his or her family -- and being exposed to what we know is cancer-causing secondhand smoke," he said.
Contact Olympia Meola at (804) 649-6812 or
.
Advertisement
Reader Reactions
Ok, let’s see if we can understand this. A living human being requires AIR to BREATH. A living human being does NOT need SMOKE, aka cigarettes (a choice) to live. One is ABSOLULTELY necessary for life, the 2nd isn’t and causes death. Seems like a no-brainer here.
The subject at hand here is second-hand smoke and the rights of proprieters of restaurants and bars and nightclubs whether or not to allow smoking in their establishments.
The smokers or non-smokers have no choice in the matter. Except to or not to patronize an establishment that either does or does not permit smoking.
It seems unlikely to me that smokers are going to want to frequent restaurants etc. that ban smoking. Why would non-smokers want to trail smokers to eateries that do allow it?
There are many credible scientists that believe that the original EPA study on second used “corrupt science.“
The definitive study on this study was done and reported by the EPA itself.
The same principles were used by the IPCC in the global warming studies.
Corrupt science has two salient characteristics.
First instead of starting with a hypothesis and data and drawing a conclusion from these it does just the opposite:
starting with a desired conclusion, it then SELECTS data in order to support the hypothesis.
Second, it stifles dissent by excluding
those with different opinions from the process of review and by using ad hominem arguments to question their character and motives.
In the case of James Hansen and the global warming debacle he does not even allow his methods to be reviewed or tested by anyone!
And for all the hoopla. The fine for
ignoring the no-smoking ban would have been a whopping $25.
Now lets not put out of context what I was stating. I was agreeing with Ethan on Government being involved with Building Codes and Health Codes. No do respect to you and your family but isn’t this why we are having the Government step in because of our society’s greed? That Ron Paul “crap” can never work, but agree big governments can’t either. But instead of us all complaining and telling the Times how horrible our government is; maybe you should get involved.
“...sometimes we need the government to step in for our own well being.“
WHAT!?!?! I think I know better than some government bureaucrat what is best for me and my family. That’s the problems today, too many people want Big Daddy Government to come in and take care of all their problems…choices can be hard, let the government decide for me…let the government choose my doctor…I’m too stupid to save for retirement, I’ll let the government seize my money and put into Social Security (we’ll see how “secure” that social security really is in about 15 years!).
Wake up People!!! Otherwise, stop using names and just assign yourself a number, since you’re already Drones (well, I guess the government would have to assign those numbers though, wouldn’t they??)
Smokers, you are not losing your rights to your addiction. What’s wrong with taking a little step outside and being courteous while in a restaurant? After leaving a college house full of smokers, I realized everything is tainted with the smell of cigarettes. If your smoking addiction is making you to decide on whether to stay home or go out….it’s time to realize the addiction you have. Like Ethan said, sometimes we need the government to step in for our own well being. They’re not asking much…just leave it outside
I’m all for the free market, but we must remember that this always has limitations. If a legislator wants to make the “property owner rights” argument, then he/she should attach an amendment that abolishes the requirements of the building codes and the health codes. Yes, the government encroachment into our lives is a consideration, but when it’s for public safety, we have to concede certain things.
Somebody mentioned “Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness”; what many forget is that the phrase derived from Thomas Paine who wrote “Life, Liberty and Property” were the 3 God given rights that could not be taken away by Government…Who am I, or you, or the State, to tell an owner if they can allow LEGAL activity on their premises?
My VFW Hall has no smoking section, the whole place is constantly filled with a haze of smoke. It also is a resaurant. Many veterans began smoking to help them stay alert on watch, with cigarettes provided by Uncle Sam. Who is going to walk into a VFW hall and tell these heros of D-Day and Iwo Jima, of the “Frozin Chosin” and the Ia Drang Valley, of Kuwait and Baghdad and Falluja that they can’t smoke in their OWN place, because it’s bad for their health. Many of these men carry metal in their body, others left behind body parts - that wasn’t too healthy either. Is it fair for any of us to tell these men that they can’t smoke in their own building? I think not.
Hypocrites! First the idea is to protect the workers. Now, with the allowance of smoking in bars that do not allow children, it’s OK! So…is it the workers, or the kids?
pick a strategy and stick with it. Neither will fly on their own merit, so they do whatever they can to get a bill passed. Step one of many to come.
But the thing is is that smokers ARE imposing their will on non-smokers. If you are sitting at your table in the restaurant and you are drinking wine, and I am sitting at another table across the way, you are not making me drink. If you are sitting at same said table and eating everything laced with saturated fats, you are not making me partake. However, if you are in the “smoking section” (term used loosley as it applies today) and you are smoking - you ARE making me smoke while I’m eating my meal. And that is wrong. And that is what this is all about. You think smokers are the ones taking the hit, how about my insurance costs going up and up because of having to cover the costs of those dealing with lung disease brought on by voluntary actions. I have watched my family die from it, I have seen others die from it and I know how it affects me everytime I’m around it. So don’t bellyache to me about how your rights are being violated. And yes, my family is being forced to go to smokefree environments just to survive!
After decades of being lied to and manipulated by money-grubbing purveyors of cancer-causing products, I am amazed that there are still smokers and defenders of the tobacco industry. The only explanation is that the extreme effects of nicotine addiction can drive some to an absence of common sense.
I applaud our legislators who are trying their best to help improve the health and extend the lives of children, wait staff, and others who are routinely subjected to second-hand smoke. My wife and I decided years ago to boycott any restaurant that permitted smoking. Our daughter waits tables in a bar in Maryland to supplement her income. She was elated when Maryland made ALL public establishments smoke-free. It’s too bad Virginia is lagging behind progressive states to the North.
I do not begrudge anyone the right to smoke as much as they want. It is probably Nature’s way of culling the herd. The earlier the stupid die, the less likely they will be able to pass along their defective genes. Just keep them sequestered so they do not spread their disease to the rest of us.
Post a Comment(Requires free registration)
- Please avoid offensive, vulgar, or hateful language.
- Respect others.
- Use the "Flag Comment" link when necessary.
- See the Terms and Conditions for details.
Advertisement