Posted on 08/28/2006 8:05:15 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
SACRAMENTO
Californians who smoke in motor vehicles carrying young children could be slapped with $100 fines under a bill approved Monday by the state Senate.
But a measure to force automakers to produce more lower-polluting, alternative-fuel vehicles fell four votes short of passing.
The smoking ban, in a bill by Assemblyman Paul Koretz, D-West Hollywood, would cover vehicles carrying children who were required to ride in a child safety seat.
Under current law, that would be children who were younger than 6 or who weighed less than 60 pounds. But a bill on the governor's desk would require children younger than 8 years to ride in child seats unless they were at least 4-foot-9.
Sen. Deborah Ortiz, D-Sacramento, said the Koretz bill was an attempt to "protect the health of children who cannot protect themselves."
"We all know that secondhand smoke is hazardous," she said, particularly for young children whose lungs are still developing. "Children are effectively smoking a pack and a half a day for every hour they are exposed to smoke in a car."
A 23-14 vote returned the bill to the Assembly, which initially approved it last year when it dealt with a different subject.
The alternative fuel bill, by Assemblyman Joe Nation, D-San Rafael, would require the California Air Resources Board to adopt regulations requiring that at least half the new cars and light trucks sold in California starting in 2020 be classified as clean-running alternative vehicles.
Battery-powered cars, vehicles that ran on ethanol or another alternative fuel, and vehicles that used a fuel mixture that was less than half gasoline would meet that standard.
Sen. Christine Kehoe, D-San Diego, said the bill would "help move us away from our 99 percent dependence on petroleum for motor vehicle fuel."
But the bill, which did not generate debate on the Senate floor, received only 17 votes. It needed at least 21, a bare majority of the 40-member Senate, to pass. Eighteen senators voted against it.
Supporters indicated they would take up the measure for a second vote before lawmakers adjourn their 2006 session on Thursday.
Here's a rundown of some of the other bills voted on Monday:
POOL SAFETY By a 28-7 vote, the Senate approved another bill designed to protect children. The measure by Assemblyman Gene Mullin, D-South San Francisco, would require homeowners to install fences, door alarms or another anti-drowning device when they remodel a swimming pool or spa.
The bill, which goes back to the Assembly for a vote on Senate amendments, extends requirements that now cover new pools to older pools and spas when they are remodeled.
CELL PHONES The Senate, by a 23-16 vote, approved a bill by Assemblyman Ira Ruskin, D-Redwood City, that would give consumers 21 days to rescind a new cell phone service they found dissatisfactory.
The measure now goes back to the Assembly for a vote on Senate amendments.
DARFUR By a 29-7 vote, the Senate approved another Koretz bill that would attempt to pressure Sudan to stop genocidal violence in the Darfur region.
The bill would prohibit California's two giant public employee pension funds, the California Public Employees Retirement System and the State Teachers Retirement System, from investing in oil and other energy-related companies that operate in Sudan but haven't taken steps to stop the violence.
The measure also would bar the funds from investing in companies that supply weapons to Sudan.
Sen. Jack Scott, D-Pasadena, said a similar investment ban helped bring about the end of apartheid in South Africa.
HUMAN TRAFFICKING The Assembly approved a bill by Sen. Sheila Kuehl, D-Santa Monica, that would extend public services such as refugee cash assistance, Medi-Cal benefits and employment services to non-citizen victims of human trafficking, domestic violence and other violent crimes.
In order to receive state and local aid, those individuals would have to show that they were taking steps to meet eligibility requirements for federal benefits.
The bill passed 45-4 and now goes back to the Senate for a vote on Assembly amendments.
WAL-MART The Assembly voted 41-31 along party lines to approve a bill by Sen. Richard Alarcon, D-Van Nuys, that would require so-called "superstore retailers" such as Wal-Mart and Costco to provide cities and counties where they wish to build with a detailed economic impact report.
The reports would include an assessment of the effects the superstore would have on local retailers.
Assembly Republicans argued that the bill would create a hostile business environment and harm healthy competition among retailers.
It now returns to the Senate for a vote on Senate amendments.
___
Associated Press Writer Robin Hindery contributed to this report.
___
On the Net: http://www.assembly.ca.gov and http://www.senate.ca.gov
And in a previous thread, Freepers are wanting to protect children from swearing uttered during the 9-11 rescue efforts....
I like how our state can pass more nanny-state laws. Glad to see they have their priorities straight.
How's that work? Years ago when I smoked, I was up to a pack and a half a day, and could never pull that rate off. Doing a pack and a half in an hour would have required chain-smoking.
Not just chain-smoking -- more like running two cigarettes at a time. 30 cigarettes in an hour is a whole cigarette every two minutes, continuously.
WTF??!?!?
Of course if second hand smoke is harmful, there is no evidence of it.
It all depends on what you consider dangerous, doesn't it?
Just another reason for the CHP to pull over whoever they want to. Pathetic.
Smoking is my symbolic definition of American freedom.
Do not tread on me, unless you are willing to place your life on the line!
"Californians who smoke in motor vehicles carrying young children could be slapped with $100 fines under a bill approved Monday by the state Senate.
"
===
Pretty soon children of smokers will be taken away from them.
And space aliens have taken over the Girl Scouts.
Its all BS, and designed to do one thing and one thing only. Keeping smokers from smoking because the nanny state doesn't like it. Thats all any of these laws are about.
If it were about health tobacco would have been banned years ago. Its not about anyones health anymore.. its a move toward prohibition and control.
You weren't supposed to notice that.
Just bow subserviently to the tobacco Nazis and slit your wrists for doubting them
I'm afraid you're absolutely correct.
And what are we going to do about it?
I have drawn my line in the sand.
YOU CAN NOT CROSS THIS!
OOOPS. Sorry about that, Chief.
> Just bow subserviently to the tobacco Nazis and slit your wrists for doubting them
I'm workin' on it...
Show me one child that size in a car seat and I'll show you a kid that gets beat up at recess.
Take a deep breath. (Cigarette smoke may be included at your option.)
(No more Olmert! No more Kadima! No more Oslo! )
Just like Timothy McVeigh, I have drawn my line in the sand.
DO NOT CROSS THAT LINE!
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.