The smoking ban war to begin again this time in the Senate
Senate bill aims to soften public ban on smoking which I’ve read in other areas but has now been reported in the Blade.
The actual text of S.B. 346 for those interested in the complete details.
The two largest area of changes are below with the struck out portion being how the legislation was written and passed:
(C) Family-owned A family-owned and operated places place of employment in which all employees are related to the owner, but only if the enclosed areas of the place of employment are not open to the public, are in a free standing structure occupied solely by the place of employment, and smoke from the place of employment does not migrate into an enclosed area where smoking is prohibited under the provisions of this chapter.
(G) Private clubs as defined in division (B)(13) of section 4301.01(B)(13) of the Revised Code, provided all of the following apply: the club has no employees; that the club is organized as a not-for-profit entity; only members of the club are present in the club’s building; no persons under the age of eighteen are present in the club’s building; the club is located in a freestanding structure occupied solely by the club; smoke from the club does not migrate into an enclosed area where smoking is prohibited under the provisions of this chapter; and, if the club serves alcohol, it holds a valid D4 liquor permit.
As the Blade article points out it doesn’t have much chance of passage in the House nor is it expected that the Governor would sign the bill if it were to pass in the House. It’s stated in the article that the:
The American Cancer Society, the primary force behind putting the smoking ban on the ballot, opposes any attempt to weaken the law.
It’s been joined by the Ohio Restaurant Association, which initially fought the ban at the polls but now wants to maintain the status quo.
My first thoughts in reading this with the statements that it’s not expected to gain support in the House or by the Governor was why even go through the motions.
I never really understoof the smoking bans. Shouldn’t the people of each location have the right to police their restaurants
November 24th, 2008 at 10:00 amIf it had of been ENACTED precisely as it was WORDED ON THE BALLOT, then y’all wouldn’t be in the mess now, would ya?
Who’s responsible for the changes? Since the ‘new law’ is NOT what we voted on, why is it a law? The whole thing should be thrown out and another vote taken.
Oh well – I’ve fled Ohio in favor of a state that’s less ‘problematic’.
November 24th, 2008 at 10:00 amGG, explain the differences to me please.
November 24th, 2008 at 10:01 amNo, Barga, the people’s right to ‘police’ themselves in long gone bye-bye.
We’ll have people asking for McDonalds & such to close because the food is unhealthy; people asking for a ban on bars because it causes alcoholism & DUI related accidents; close nude/exotic bars leading to rape & crimes against women; soda, because it rots teeth; fireplaces because it annoys the next door neighbors and gay bars because…well because it’s not ‘God’s Wish’!
The ‘Do-Gooders’ They all know what’s good for us and we don’t because we’re nothing but a bunch of ’sheeple’!
November 24th, 2008 at 10:08 amSince the American Cancer Society is showing itself to be nothing but a self perpetuating political action committee, I no longer donate. Their available job listings are mainly “advocates” (lobbyists) and fund raisers.
November 24th, 2008 at 10:14 amThey learned their lesson. Page seven of the “tobacco control advocates” tells them to “avoid ballot inititiatives”. See for yourself.
November 24th, 2008 at 10:21 amhttp://www.no-smoke.org/pdf/CIA_Fundamentals.pdf
Graphics I don’t disagree that all of the problems have been related to the way the ballot was written compared to how it was enacted.
Barga, this will help explain the controversy:
Ballot Language: What voters read when they cast their vote for Issue 5
was “Exempt from the smoking restrictions … outdoor patios, private clubs, and family-owned and operated places of business”. The ballot measure language did not define “family-owned and operated”.
The theory from the Department of Health and others is that since it appeared online and in some newspapers it was incumbent upon the voters to know that the ballot language was not all of the details.
November 24th, 2008 at 10:22 amBob, perhaps Ohio did that for them.
November 24th, 2008 at 10:23 amLisa – “Barga, this will help explain the controversy:
Ballot Language: What voters read when they cast their vote for Issue 5
was “Exempt from the smoking restrictions … outdoor patios, private clubs, and family-owned and operated places of business”. The ballot measure language did not define “family-owned and operated”.
The theory from the Department of Health and others is that since it appeared online and in some newspapers it was incumbent upon the voters to know that the ballot language was not all of the details.”
I believe a court ruled that private clubs are actually not covered, so it is more than the Health (i think it dealt with the VFW)…
Hmmm, family owned and operated means basically a small family only business, hence the operated
November 24th, 2008 at 10:42 amGG – “No, Barga, the people’s right to ‘police’ themselves in long gone bye-bye.
We’ll have people asking for McDonalds & such to close because the food is unhealthy; people asking for a ban on bars because it causes alcoholism & DUI related accidents; close nude/exotic bars leading to rape & crimes against women; soda, because it rots teeth; fireplaces because it annoys the next door neighbors and gay bars because…well because it’s not ‘God’s Wish’!
The ‘Do-Gooders’ They all know what’s good for us and we don’t because we’re nothing but a bunch of ’sheeple’!”
The thing is, the courts have often ruled that this is up to the people of the state, or even more local. For your strip club issue, that is a local issue and thus for home rule (community standards). That is different than a clear health concern, which arguably the state has grounds over.
My issue is the fact that I feel that it should have been a localized system, as they were passing in several locales already and thus it would have been truly grass roots
November 24th, 2008 at 10:45 amBarga that’s why I wrote “and others” if you knew about the whole Court saga than you really didn’t need the basic explanation of what the issue was, which was what I was providing from the linked material.
November 24th, 2008 at 10:48 amThe voters of Ohio passed the statewide ban on smoking, so a clear message from the voters to state Senate: “Stop undermining the general public’s majority votes, if we passed it WE PASSED IT! ” Enough of the meddling with the smoking issue! Focus on what really matters in this state like lowering taxes, legally fund the public schools adequately, improve the economy….
November 24th, 2008 at 1:02 pmIf the COSI levy started taxing you at 1 mill for 10 years instead of the 5year, .7mill as was on the ballot, you wouldn’t complain?
Hey, “If you passed it, you passed it!”
What part of ‘what we voted on was not what was on the ballot’ don’t y’all understand?
November 24th, 2008 at 1:49 pmI knew the “COSi” card would be played.
November 24th, 2008 at 2:46 pmI agree with Rockets Man. Leave the smoking ban alone. Isn’t it great to eat at a restaurant without having to smell someone else’s smoke from a nearby table? My God, you can even taste your food! Or to walk to your table through the bar area to get to your “non-smoking” table without a gas mask?
The Ohio Senate and House have bigger fish to fry including doing more with job creation than merely talking about it and working on the school funding dilemma. Or maybe they can work on the safe distance between an exotic dancer and his/her patron again. That was one of their bigger accomplishments in the last General Assembly.
November 24th, 2008 at 3:05 pmI enjoy smoke free but GraphicsGuy is right. The voter’s voted COSI down twice. We spoke. Precedent has been set. We cannot pick and choose.
November 24th, 2008 at 4:23 pm*cough* *cough*
hack hack
wwwwwhhhhheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeezzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz !!!!
oh no !
not this crap again !
November 24th, 2008 at 6:23 pmLisa Renee,
Maybe it’s time for Civics 101 again. The Constitution of the United States was written not only to carry out the will of the majority, but also to protect the minority from the tyranny of a strict majority rule. The smoking ban is a perfect and blatant example of that tyranny.
If you choose not to smoke, that is your choice. You can likewise choose to patronize establishments that do not allow smoking if it offends you. Taking away my right to choose or an owner’s right to choose about smoking crosses the line. Kudos to anyone who now chooses to continue to fight such laws.
November 24th, 2008 at 6:37 pmMark,
If you didn’t like the smoke, you shouldn’t have gone to the restaurant. The restaurant is private property. You are a guest. If it were my restaurant and you complained about the smell of smoke, I’d have invited you to bite me!
I don’t go to a restaurant where I can’t light up a fine cigar after a meal. Therefore, I don’t go to restaurants in Ohio. I’ve taken those dollars out of the Ohio economy. That’s all I can do to punish a repressive government.
November 24th, 2008 at 8:35 pmI am a cig. smoker and did not have a problem with the ban. I was fair to hubby when we went to resturants we took turns in the smoking or non smoking section. When I was younger and use to go out to a neighborhood bar the smoke use to bother me and irritate my eyes. They should of had a fan for better circulation. When we go out we drive one of my cars vs on of his. I will smoke in my cars and respect his. A coulple times a week I eat in the office for lunch. I barely think about a cig. Plus it looks stupid in my line of work that my customers would see me outside my office smoking.
November 24th, 2008 at 10:03 pmBrian!!!!! Gasp, shock, faint – are you actually standing up for Civil Rights here?
Good on ya’
November 25th, 2008 at 1:16 amKateb, I’m big on civil liberties. I’m not opposed to gay civil unions. Gay marriage I’d leave to the churches to decide. That’s unusual for a Republican.
I was a two pack a day smoker for many years. I quit cigarettes and all tobacco 13 years ago. I started smoking cigars about 10 years ago and find that a cigar a day helps keep me sane. Sometimes, I have two. I enjoy them.
Your finer restaurants will have a special room to which cigar smokers can adjourn for a fine cigar and a drink after work. Of course, Ohio killed that.
I let people smoke in my house. I let people smoke in my car. My mother died of lung cancer, but she would have never banned smoking in her home. I promised her as she was dying that I’d never become one of the anti-smoking Nazis.
November 25th, 2008 at 6:01 amBrian,
I politely decline your invitation in # 19. Strangely silent on the exotic dancer law in Ohio which your party passed through. That has to do with individual freedoms as well. But since they were playing to their right wing base to curry favor, I guess that was all right. Fire up a fat one!!
November 25th, 2008 at 7:08 amPrivate property. All I’m seeing with these smoking bans is people trying to remove the word “private”.
Should I own a business that allows smoking, and the majority of my clientel are non-smokers, I’d encourage them to vote with their dollars. If smoking is making me lose money, it should be up to me to make the decision to either allow smoking and go out of business or, ban it myself in my own establishment and be successfull and vice versa.
November 25th, 2008 at 7:38 amThe idea that the government can enter your private property without a warrant to search for smoking violators is such a tear in the bill of rights, it’s sickening and opens the door for the next thing they won’t need a warrant to search you for.
As the beat goes on……….
November 25th, 2008 at 8:05 amMark,
You are quite correct that the exotic dancer initiative was idiotic, stupid, and a waste of time. I agree with current Ohio GOP chairman Kevin DeWine that the GOP needs to focus on how our principles help people deal with the real problems they face and focus less on legislating morality.
Thank you for declining my invitation. It probably would not have been pleasant.
November 25th, 2008 at 8:29 amkateb wrote:
kateb, honey….
there are a few of these type in our area. They are known as ‘republicrats’.
After they get enough money thinking and acting as a republican, they begin to lighten up after THEIR future is secure.
Their conscience gets the best of them and they start to think along more humanitarian lines. They begin to see the errors of their ways and begin to subscribe to ideals that are of a more democratic nature.
would you care to have coffee with LR and myself after turkey day sometime ?
Love your anagrams.
November 25th, 2008 at 11:05 amel
Do you want a peeing section in your pool…? I wouldent care if I were not affected by your smoke, but you cant stop it from traveling up my nostril in a enclosed area. I can even smell it riding behind someone smoking in there care while following behind on my motorcycle. I don’t want to smoke your cigarette with you thanks but NO. Many people have health issues and dont need smoke in there lungs doing more damage to them. Maybe instead of worring about “YOUR RIGHTS” concider you are infringing on “OTHERS RIGHTS” not to have it negatively effect them or even smell it, or have there clothes stink for that matter. Ever had a shirt ruined by some irresponcable smoker dropping a cig or brushing it on you. Never even thaught bout that one aye? ITS ALL ABOUT YOU! How dare smokers have such a disreguard for others. Its YOUR screwed up habbit and you dont even wanna do it. No smoker really likes it they just NEED it. When I was a smoker I did it outside to respect my wife and children’s health. If it is passed on a federal level there will be no “across the state line” compitision. And you whiners could go home. I think the ratio of NON SMOKERS is like 85% are non-smokers. So you 15% are infringing on the 85%’s rights. Give it up or do it in a 2′x2′ filtered glass cubical in Alaska! Ha top that one!
November 25th, 2008 at 6:04 pmKiddnitro,
I’m not sure where to start dissecting your incoherent and illiterate rambling.
Suffice it to say that I’ve not seen anyone here argue that anyone has a right to smoke. What they (we) are arguing is that business owners have the right to decide what can and can’t be done on their property.
Smelling smoke on a moving motorcycle? Balderdash!
I don’t need to smoke. Sometimes I go days without smoking. I light a cigar when I am in the right place and right mood to smoke one. Otherwise, it is a waste.
November 25th, 2008 at 7:45 pmI smoke when I drink beer.
November 25th, 2008 at 8:16 pmNot again – I volunteer to be your designated driver in that new ‘vette.
But no smoking, please.
November 25th, 2008 at 8:22 pmAnd that explains that – a ‘reformed smoker’. OMG!
Kid, it’s not about smokers rights. It’s not about non-smokers rights. It’s about the the Freedom of Choice – a concept foreign to many of us.
You, as a non smoker have the right to not spend your money in an establishment where the owner has exercised his/her Freedom of Choice and allows smoking. I, as a smoker, have the right to not spend my money in an establishment that has exercised their Freedom of Choice and does not allow smoking (which I exercised frequently while living in Ohio by eating at Michigan restaurants that allowed smoking.)
I don’t drink, so I don’t frequent bars. I’m not gay, so I don’t visit those establishments. And, although ’spiritual’, I’m not religious, so I don’t attend ‘church’, but I allow those that drink, are gay, or religious to attend to their ‘needs & desires’. I just exercise my Freedom of Choice and stay away from people, places or things that make me uncomfortable or that I don’t agree with.
Using the excuse that your clothes smell, burns your eyes, or otherwise ‘inconveniences’ you is a poor excuse. Exercise your Freedom of Choice and stay the **** out of places that makes you stinky, burns your eyes, or is an ‘inconvenience! Why is it that y’all have to have someone make your choices for ya?
November 25th, 2008 at 8:23 pmI don’t smoke in my vehicles. It makes them stinky.
November 25th, 2008 at 8:26 pmBrian Schwartz wrote:
I think you’re starting to get your groove back Brian. Being out of the Carty gerbil wheel has to feel good.
It’s takes about a year tho, in all seriousness, to get past something like that.
Several of you have made the point that the opposition to the smoking ban is about civil rights. And it is. For legal activities to be banned is a problem.
This is America. Where you can be as successful as you earn the right to be or as educated as you fight to be.
In America – you can be well educated and you also have the right to do stupid things. Because it’s about pursuing your own happiness and protecting all of liberties.
It’s smoking now – but what if the topic becomes obesity? For many of the same reasons. It’s a drain on the medical system – it causes huge expenses to health insurance companies that we all share the cost for – so what if someone brings a ballot initiative for banning obesity?
Or parental rights? A person who brings a ban controlling parental rights, because that has the same outcome often. Many children wind up in the system. It’s a cost and a drain on the Social Service agencies, both public and private, the Judicial system and hey – if we start controlling parental rights then maybe we wouldn’t have to fund a separate jail for juveniles.
The arguments and topics are endless. But once we lose our liberties, and so many have died for us to have them and to defend them and they’re so easy to lose, they’re gone.
We are supposed to be tolerant of each other and intent on preserving our neighbors rights as well as our own. We can’t expect everyone to conform to our own expectations and cater to us. Not if we want to keep those broad liberties that more than 600,000 died fighting for.
November 25th, 2008 at 8:42 pmKiddnitro wrote:
So…does that like mean that like 85% of non smokers are like non smokers?
Being a high school graduate with some higher education, I have trouble understanding ‘pidgin English’.
November 25th, 2008 at 9:42 pmhere is how it should work
The consumer has a choice as to where to go. I would not go to restaurants with smoking sections… A private enterprise has the right to do what it wishes with its property, provided it violates nobody elses rights
November 25th, 2008 at 10:43 pmSounds to me like barga is against the smoking ban.
November 25th, 2008 at 11:08 pmnot locally, i am fine with citywide ones
November 25th, 2008 at 11:09 pmGraphics guy… ummmm hummm well… Maybe your edumication should have helped your intellect decipher such a bad typo but since spell check cant help u here guess you can’t continue. Gee sorry I think u got the message did u not?
I have a RIGHT as a non-smoker not to have to inhale smoke in a PUBLIC place! End of story! It isn’t about WHICH PUBLIC place i choose to go in. If it is PUBLIC than its PUBLIC!
Maybe lets see here just WHO do these Businesses cater to? The Public or Private? ALL of these businesses cater to the Public! Private clubs are not effected by it. Take the Legion Hall which I am a member! When I go in there I expect it and I dont go often. I fought for freedom as some one brought up. Many of you all have not but ride on shirttails of someone that did. Many of you take advantage of the RIGHTS have been given, never having earned or made sacrifices for even one.
Brian… You obviously don’t ride… nothing more needs to be said, but for those of us that ride one of the beauties of riding is all the smells. So hop back into your Yugo and light one up!
“I let people smoke in my house. I let people smoke in my car. My mother died of lung cancer, but she would have never banned smoking in her home. I promised her as she was dying that I’d never become one of the anti-smoking Nazis.”
November 26th, 2008 at 11:47 amHow touching of a moment that would have been..Mama cigs killed you, and made you suffer a painful death but I promice I wont stop it from hurting others. Kinda like sayin The alcoholism and liver failure were bad in my family but that never stoped me from drinkin.. in fact I encouraged my neices and nephews to drink! .. hickup.. causin it tastes gud! Now I know why u work for who u do, that’s pure Carty intelligence! Brian wake up be a Shepard not a sheep!
# 27 el gato grande
Positively!!! Coffee is good!! {{{{{jjjjjjjjjjjjava java java}}}}}}}}}}}
November 26th, 2008 at 9:31 pmBrian – I think what you said is remarkable. Liberties are to be extended under all circumstances even when it’s really REALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLY hard to do it.
I still can’t remember – but who said something to this effect “I may despise what it is that you have to say, but I will defend your right to say it”.
November 26th, 2008 at 9:33 pmI remember. It is from the The Friends of Voltaire by Evelyn Hall
November 26th, 2008 at 9:38 pm