Posted on 10/20/2007 1:52:53 PM PDT by Wheee The People
Poll: Two-thirds of Wyoming voters support statewide smoking ban
CHEYENNE, Wyo. - A statewide poll shows that two-thirds of Wyoming voters support a ban on smoking in public places, including restaurants and bars.
The poll, commissioned by the American Cancer Society in Wyoming and other health organizations, also found that 74 percent of registered voters believe the right of customers and employees to breathe clean air outweighs smokers' right to light up indoors.
"It shows that the people of Wyoming would absolutely support a smoke-free Wyoming," said Loretta Wolf, spokeswoman for the American Cancer Society in Wyoming. The American Cancer Society and the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids, a national group that supports smoke-free legislation, also helped pay for the poll.
Harstad Strategic Research Inc. of Boulder, Colo. conducted the poll between Sept. 26 and Oct 1. They contacted 504 registered voters across the state. The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.4 percent.
A poll commissioned last year by the Casper Star-Tribune found 57 percent of Wyoming voters supported a comprehensive, indoor smoking ban. That poll, conducted by Mason-Dixon Polling & Research, Inc., surveyed 625 Wyoming voters and had a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.
The new American Cancer Society poll found that 92 percent of voters say they would go to restaurants more frequently or at least as frequently as they currently do if smoking were prohibited in them.
Only 6 percent of voters said they would go to restaurants less frequently if indoor smoking were outlawed, while 8 percent said they would be less likely to frequent bars.
While 66 percent of voters supported a statewide smoking ban, the American Cancer Society poll found 32 percent opposed it. Democrats and Republicans supported the ban at about the same level, 67 percent and 68 percent, respectively.
Support for the ban also remained constant among people of different ages, with support only varying a few percentage points between voters aged 18 to those 60 or older.
The poll found that 70 percent of women supported a smoking ban compared to 61 percent of men.
More than 70 percent responded that they believe exposure to secondhand cigarette smoke is harmful to people's health. Twenty-seven percent of voters surveyed said that exposure to secondhand smoke is "just somewhat" or "not at all" harmful.
The poll results were released while a legislative committee is considering whether to introduce smoke-free legislation at the upcoming budget session in February.
Wolf, of the American Cancer Society, said her group is pushing for a comprehensive bill that includes a ban on smoking in bars, restaurants or other businesses. About 27 states have adopted smoke-free laws but the restrictions vary.
Sen. Charles Scott, R-Casper, chairman of the Labor, Health and Social Services Committee, has said he only intends to introduce the bill in next year's budget session if a majority of the committee members supports it.
Rep. Dan Zwonitzer, R-Cheyenne, sponsored a similar bill in the last session, but it failed to make it to the House floor for a first-reading vote. Lawmakers anticipate a tough fight in the coming session if the bill moves forward.
Dan Hatanelas, manager of a bar in Cheyenne, opposed a citywide smoking ordinance that became law last year. He said he would also oppose statewide legislation.
However, Hatanelas said that a statewide ban might be more fair to businesses in Cheyenne that now must compete against nearby Laramie County businesses that are exempt from the local ban. He said his bar saw a 19-percent drop in revenue during the first 12 months of the local ban, which took effect in August 2006.
"I'd hate to see anything happen, but maybe on a statewide basis it would be less traumatic for us," Hatanelas said.
In addition to Cheyenne, the cities of Laramie and Evanston have adopted their own smoke-free ordinances. The Rock Springs City Council is considering a similar ordinance. Voters in Casper rejected a proposed ban in 2000.
Information from: Star-Tribune, http://www.casperstartribune.net
Six justices agreed with the ruling of Dred-Scott, while one concurred with the ruling (but not its reasoning), and two dissented
I don’t smoke but my wife does.
You could do like we have to do here now.
we only go to places which allow smoking under TN’s new ban.....bars, outside, 21 and older clubs and bars with food.
it should be up to the restaurants, if they feel they want smoking then they can and folks like you can just not go
and vice versa...some were already banning smoking here
likewise....I disagree that completely separate areas with walls and door enclosure and adequate ventilation don’t separate smokers from non-smokers...that too should suffice
You bring up asthma.....well, my two oldest boys are allergic to dogs...bigtime....I cannot take them to parks near dogs...should that ban folks from bringing their dogs to parks? no
if a restaurant decides to accommodate smokers that should be it
it’s the usual slippery slope.
it all started 3 decades ago with smoking sections and now look........some cities ban smoking in public parks...ridiculous
it never ends
we have five kids....we like to go out alone or with friends when we can....my wife likes to unwind and drink and smoke during the eating out for dinner time......all this nanny state garbage really puts a dent in out down time
used to be we could go to Mortons or Palm or Ruth’s Chris and enjoy some wine and decent food and she could smoke in separate smoking section....
now...we hear Mortons is going to seal off their bar area separate with only door access
When it gets to banning smoking in public outdoor venues, family vehicles and homes, I am against any restrictions.
Personally, I don’t understand who drives that crap?
It’s fairly obviously where I come down on smoking in restaurants and bars, but I don’t know anyone who wants to stop smoking in these venues.
BTW, I’m sorry this has created a hardship for you.
Note my tagline this month.....
If smoking is banned, so be it. But allow restaurants that cater to only-smokers.
Remember when normal people used to think, "How ridiculous, this will never fly?" Now, the more Nazi-like the proposal, the more likely I think it'll eventually percolate to the surface as "health" policy:
Smokers should be forced to apply for an annual £200 licence in order to purchase cigarettes, a Government advisor has suggested.
The scheme would ensure smokers had to make a conscious decision to continue the habit and require people to become "registered addicts".
Unfrickin’ believable. No, these people aren’t out of control — nah. How in the world is this happening and so quickly to boot? Nazi’s all — litterally. Gees.
Since May 7, 2007
I hope you read his postings going back to 2003 (his start date here), before making your statement.
Otherwise, you might be guilty of what you’re accusing him of.
After reading on, I see that you were right. “Whee” comes across as a single-issue fascist.
I back The Ghost of Rudy McRomney. Wheee owes a lot of us here at FR an apology. He’s posted insulting pics and words. Many of us here have tried to actually have an adult discussion with him, but he refuses. He is extreme on this issue, not just passionate, extreme. If you doubt his extremity, just look at his home page. We’re fed up and we’re not going to stand for his actions any further. I just had the mod remove one of his comments last week.
If the jackboot fits....
Wheee's finally found a group he perceives as lower than him in the pecking order and he's been working out his emotional problems on smokers for years.
Sad little life spent seeking anonymous revenge for all those years of rejection by normal people.
If he weren't so loathesome, I'd pity him.
I know (now) and agree. See my post 229.
Oh, I know you do. :-) I was just trying to get others to post their feelings as well. :-)
OH please! Smokers are NORMAL? By and large most smokers consider themselves addicts.
Be careful there, Wheee.
This isn’t meant toward you, dear Lady, but I’m REALLY getting sick of this ‘newbie’ $hit from other posters. Some here apparently think your opinions/comments don’t mean anything unless you signed up at least five years ago. Since EVERYONE HERE had to be a ‘newbie’ at one time or another, it’s starting to get on my nerves. It reminds me of high school and the upperclassmen vs. the freshmen.
Gee...and I knew that, and you didn’t....even though I’m a ‘newbie’. LOL :^D I lurked for quite some time before signing up.
Hey, I welcome anyone’s comments, as long as they’re at least somewhat respectful. I love meeting new FRiends. I’ve been here since 1988, and who cares? I don’t even remember how I came upon this site. I’m no one special. Someone being new may have an even better understanding of an issue than me or someone else. Me, I’m just a dummy with my own two cents. There are a lot more intelligent people than me here, that’s for sure. Yes, indeed, I’m tired of the “high school” type mentality of people as well. It seems that a lot of people just want to post a “hit-and-run” type comment — they just want to post their insults. I will not allow my FRiends to be insulted any longer. A lot of my favorite posters (and they were great posters with great articles) left FR because of this, and I almost gave up as well. They contributed a lot, and I miss them. Keep plugging along, buddy. :-)
I’ll try. ;^) Yeah, I noticed when I was lurking that things seemed more like a big family here until around about six months before the 2006 elections. Then it got insulting, selfish, elitist, and downright vile sometimes. I could see the shift quite clearly, but didn’t know why it was happening.
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.