Posted on 01/02/2004 6:12:56 AM PST by SheLion
AUGUSTA - A petition drive to snuff out the state's ban on smoking in bars has stalled and will fail to meet a Feb. 2 deadline for putting the issue on the November ballot, an organizer said.Instead, the Maine Freedom Committee will submit the signatures to the Legislature in 2005 in hopes lawmakers will amend the law or send it to voters, said Stavros Mendros of the Maine Freedom Committee.
Mendros, a former Republican lawmaker from Lewiston, said the campaign didn't have funding to meet this year's deadline for petitions.
"The money wasn't there," Mendros said. "It's hard to do it with an all-volunteer effort."
Initially, the group hoped to overturn the law through a "people's veto," which would have required them to turn in signatures last September. When they were unable to make that deadline, their next chance became February, which would have put them on the ballot in November.
The delay signals that the campaign to gather signatures and stop the smoking ban hasn't gone well.
"I do believe it does spell doom for this effort," said Becky Birrell Smith, program coordinator for the Maine Coalition on Smoking or Health. "In every other state and municipality that's enacted this type of legislation, the popularity of the ban increases month by month."
Mendros said that on Election Day in November, the group gathered 10,000 to 20,000 signatures. But they would need 50,519 valid signatures to have the issue placed on a ballot.
Julie Flynn, deputy secretary of state, said the group has one year from the day they took out the petitions to gather signatures. That gives them a deadline of Oct. 16, 2004.
If the signatures are approved, they would then be presented to the Legislature in February 2005.
State health officials, legislators and anti-smoking groups supported the bill, in part, to protect the health of people who work in bars and are subjected to smoke every day.
Mendros, who does not smoke, said people who work in bars know what to expect.
"Most everyone I know, whether they smoke or not, is against it," he said.
Enforcement of the smoking ban was supposed to begin on New Year's Day.
Individual violators face a fine of $100 per offense and bars owners face a fine of $100 a day that they are not in compliance.
The bigger concern for bar owners, however, is that running afoul of the smoking ban is a violation of state liquor law. The ultimate penalty would be the suspension or revocation of a liquor license.
(Snitch Line)An assistant state attorney general has been assigned to work on compliance full time. Citizens can get in the act by reporting violators at (800) 560-5269 or by logging a complaint at www.tobaccofreemaine.org. (Snitch Line)
If someone was turned in for using cocaine or pot, I could understand it. But a legal product? What's next? A snitch line for Pepsi drinkers?
Of course the money wasn't there Mr. Mendros - it was all sucked up by the proponents of this idiocy.
One gal suggested that out-of-staters use the snitch line to tell them that Maine USED to be on the list for vacation spots. But no more! Sounds like a great idea to me!!
An uneven playing field for whom? It was working. Everyone was happy. The restaurants were forced to go smoke free, so those of us who smoke were able to frequent our local Tavern's for a good meal and relaxation. Now, since "they" want a "level playing field," we no longer have a choice.
Drinking and smoking in Bars/Sports Clubs/Tavern's go hand-in-hand. People who drink but don't smoke do not need to go to a bar to drink if they don't want to be around smokers.
Being able to go to a Tavern to enjoy a good meal, a beverage of our choice and enjoy a cigarette was our way of relaxation. Non-smokers have ALL the restaurants in this state where they can go and not be around smokers. Now, there is no place left to go for people who choose to use a legal product. And the business owners are going to be out of revenue because of this.
Super good point!
And yes, they ALL have parking lots. That's a very good point you make.
All the restaurants were forced into a smoking ban in 1999. A lot of them went out of business. But the smokers were left with Taverns who bought very expensive liquor licenses and spent thousands of dollars on remodeling to install huge smoke eaters in order to accommodate ALL of their patrons.
But, that still wasn't good enough for the state of Maine. They can't balance their state budget without the cigarette taxes that smokers pay, yet the state is using these tax dollars to ban, restrict and control people who choose to buy a legal product.
Level playing field? For who? It sure isn't going to "level out" the revenues lost by this ban. Our economy in Maine just keeps getting worse. Who needs Osama to hurt us, when our own state is sticking it to us.
We have been trying very hard to unravel the thought process that the general public has been pushed into by the anti-smoker groups. When the war on the smoker didn't work, they started using "second hand smoke" against us. Telling the general non-smoking public that our smoke was killing them.
Anyone with their own though process knows this is not true. I never read a death certificate that stated the cause of death was "second hand smoke." Have you? It's asinine to even think that this is true.
When a proposed smoking ban is announced, business owner's think it couldn't happen to them, and they remain silent. But when they realize the impact forced upon them by the ban, then they start to rethink this issue. By then, it's usually too late.
Why open up your dream business in the state of Maine if the Maine Governor and Lawmakers can just go in and dictate how you are to run it? They over take the business, you AND your money. Pity.
A lot of freepers are already doing this. And a lot of Freepers are also rolling their own.
Maine is starting to give the Indians a hard time over selling cigarettes as well. Not sure how this will turn out for our Reservations.
That what is the excuse for THIS?
My solution: Ban food ads on TV!
At this rate, let's ban alcohol and short skirts and tell Osama he's won.
Well, the state of Maine has already "banned" alcohol ads on TV. Except the E Channel. LOL! They can't GET to the E channel to stop their alcohol ads. But look at Busch and NASCAR. Maine can't cut out THOSE ads for beer, either. But they cut down on a lot of alcohol ads on regular networks. But be nice to become the Head Clergy of a state when you become Govenor, eh?
And who fears Osama? When our own state house is killing us! AND our economy!!!
You really think you have it all figured out, but things are not so cut and dried, and you apparently have based your perceptions on a narrow and biased body of research.
The part about having the freedom to smoke where non-smokers won't be harmed leaves the loop holes of a next door neighbor complaining or in an apartment building, your upstair neighbor-----Part two legislation to be continued.
"the vast majority of citizens agree"-- that brings MORE tyrany in the future.
AND most of all, Mary signs with "Partnership for a TOBACCO-FREE Maine". That goal would then strip you of the freedom she mentioned in the first part of the letter.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.