Nebraska Democratic Party: Unicam Update: Smoking Ban Gets First Round OK

Unicam Update: Smoking Ban Gets First Round OK

Mar 06, 02:24 PM CST

Lawmakers give first-round OK to smoking ban
By JoANNE YOUNG / Lincoln Journal Star

The sponsor of a bill that would ban smoking statewide agreed Tuesday to allow an amended version of the ban to advance to second reading.

But not happily.

“I probably would not support the bill as it presently is,” said Kearney Sen. Joel Johnson. But by the time it comes back to senators for debate, he said, a new set of amendments will better reflect what supporters want.

Johnson said some senators were absent on Tuesday who might have helped pass the bill in the form he would have preferred.

“We didn’t want to take a chance on the bill being killed today,” he said.

As it is now, LB395 would institute a statewide smoking ban but would allow cities or counties to opt out in whole or part with a vote of the people or a vote of a the local governing board or council.

Johnson said it presents a problem to allow city councils, village boards or county boards to vote on opting out of the ban. In some cases, three representatives, under distinct political pressure, would be making a decision on the health of a community, he said.

Allowing a vote of the people of a community would be a better opt-out provision, he said.

The compromise amendment to the smoking ban was developed by Blair Sen. Mick Mines and brought forward by Omaha Sen. Tom White in Mines’ absence on Tuesday.

White said the amended ban preserves local control.

The issue had come down to public health vs. rights of smokers and businesses.

Omaha Sen. Ernie Chambers said ban opponents were trying to elevate smoking to a right: a right to pollute the air, to be uncivil and to have an addiction and impose that on other people.

“When people talk about property rights, they don’t even know what they’re talking about,” he said.

– by | Send this to a friend

What exactly is the difference between the city having the right to pass a smoking ban on a local level or passing a state ban with an opt-out clause?

Aren’t there bigger concerns in the legislature than passing laws that are toothless or will infringe on city governments.

I believe this is a decision to be made at the city level, not on the State or county.
— Troy McDaniels Mar 06, 02:43 PM CST #
I think that the government should stay out of it. The decision should be up to the business. Their customers will let them know what works, it is a business decision. The problem with letting the people vote on it sounds good and democratic but it is not as the majority of bar and night club clientel smoke as do most of the people that work in these places. You will see in the long run even at the state level it will be a business decision as government loves the tax revenue generated by tobacco. The city of Lincoln was short about $9 million due to lost tax revenue from the bars and clubs after the ban. I feel that if you are going to ban smoking then you should not enjoy any of the taxes from tobacco. A tax for non-smokers should be created to make up for the lost tobacco taxes.
— Gregory Clark Mar 06, 11:21 PM CST #
Here’s a thought. Since there is highly documented evidence that second-hand smoke is dangerous to those exposed to it – just check out the U. S. Surgeon General’s comments on the topic – let’s go ahead and regulate smoking, just as we do any other activity that could be potentially harmful to people.
We could allow businesses to admit smokers. But, to alleviate their burden on America’s health care system and insurance industry, we could tax smokers with a “smoking license.” This would be kind of like a hunter’s permit. Anyone caught smoking without a license would be subject to fines. Stamps could be issued to differentiate between the types of smoke. Cigar smokers would pay a premium price as their’s is the most annoying kind. (I know, I used to smoke about 10 a day!)
Locales that permit smoking would also be required to pay a hefty fee. If they excluded all non-smokers, they could get a discount.
I also believe that smoking around children should be banned entirely, very heavy fines should be applied for that offense.
— Brian T. Osborn Mar 07, 10:24 AM CST #