Posted on 02/13/2004 10:25:28 AM PST by Republican Wildcat
Invoking the words of Ronald Reagan and the Founding Fathers, members of the Senate agriculture committee said they were upholding personal freedoms by unanimously approving a bill that would outlaw local smoking bans.
By a 10-0 vote, lawmakers embraced Sen. Dan Seum's proposal, which would prohibit cities from banning public smoking in areas other than local government buildings. Under the bill, cities could require businesses to post entrance signs that state their smoking policies, giving adults the choice whether to walk into a smoky environment, the committee members said.
Several supporters described the bill as "common sense."
"It's a compromise, but it's what we need to do around here to keep bad ideas from becoming law," said Sen. Damon Thayer, R-Georgetown, referring to ordinances such as Lexington's ban, which would be invalidated under the legislation.
Thayer cited a quote from Reagan about lost freedoms, and then asked: "What's next? ... Cell phone usage? Fast food and the amount we intake? Driving SUVs?" A woman in the audience snickered. "You laugh, but there are movements in this country, and even in this state, to try and affect those freedoms."
The bill now moves to the full Senate, where even legislators who want to defeat it acknowledge they may have problems. "That just means ... we have to fight harder to protect the communities' rights to make their own decisions," said state Sen. Ernesto Scorsone, D-Lexington.
Lexington vice mayor and smoking-ban proponent Mike Scanlon rejected any notion that the bill was a compromise, calling it a "common-nonsense" measure and "political window dressing."
Businesses are already perfectly free to post signs, and the bill would do nothing to level the playing field, ban advocates argued.
"It's a sham," said Scanlon, a restaurant businessman. "They're pretending to do something so they can say they did something and really do nothing. It's the ultimate political magical trick."
Many committee members prefaced their votes by explaining they would normally support the decisions of local governments. But public smoking bans are "trampling on the private property rights" of business owners, said committee chairman Sen. Ernie Harris, R-Crestwood.
The bill's sponsor, Seum, R-Louisville, pointed to oversize examples of signs that businesses would purchase for less than $25. A green light indicated smoking was OK; a yellow light stood for designated areas; and a red light indicated no smoking.
The hearing at times bordered on theatrical. Public health advocates repeatedly cheered Scanlon.
Harris quieted the outbursts: "This is not the House of Commons."
Scanlon got a frostier reception from Thayer. Scanlon's Georgetown Applebee's restaurant, Thayer contended, was one of the smokiest restaurants he has ever set foot in. That led to a rapid-fire exchange.
Thayer: "I'm guessing you allow smoking in Georgetown because there's an O'Charley's across the street, right? Dictated by market factors?"
Scanlon: "Dictated by, 'I've got to be even with the competition, or I can't -- '"
Thayer: "So you as a private business owner are letting the marketplace dictate to you, your business policies? Yes or no?"
Scanlon: "I'm being trapped by --"
Thayer: "Yes or no? You're letting the marketplace decide."
Scanlon: "Your honor, I'm not going to let you trap me into an answer I don't mean."
Thayer: "Well, then you've answered my question."
Lexington's wide-ranging law, which was passed in July but has been put on hold by the Kentucky Supreme Court, would prohibit smokers from lighting up in bingo halls, bars, restaurants and other indoor places open to the public.
The court will hear arguments in the case March 10.
But legislators said Lexington's ban sounded too harsh and could hurt businesses. If a farm housed an office where the public was welcome, smoking would be prohibited in that office, testified Gene McLean, a lobbyist for a group of business owners suing the city.
Many local businesspeople fear customers will take their money elsewhere. A mid-size city like Lexington could lose out on groups looking to hold national conventions, said Gwen Hart, event manager for Marriott's Griffin Gate Resort.
Ellen Hahn, a tobacco-control expert at the University of Kentucky, was outraged by the vote. Over the past few years, agricultural and health forces have united for a common purpose: a federal tobacco buyout.
"And in return, we get this?" Hahn said. "If the agricultural community thinks they're going to get the public health community's support on a federal buyout, they'd better think twice."
McLean called her position "sick and vindictive."
Sen. Tom Buford, R-Nicholasville, who did not sit on the committee but represents southern Fayette County, is leaning against the bill. But he said he thought it would likely pass in the Senate if it comes up for a vote.
"I'm not getting really anxious to support the bill," Buford said. "I don't like dictating to private businesses, but we as Republicans have always taken the stand that local control is what we always strive for."
State Sen. Alice Forgy Kerr, R-Lexington, did not respond to a message left with her Senate office. A spokeswoman for her congressional campaign said she could not reach Kerr, who was at a dinner event, for comment.
Although the bill is several steps away from final passage, many observers already are looking to Gov. Ernie Fletcher, who has the power to make any passed bill moot.
Fletcher spokeswoman Jeannie Lausche said he has yet to review the bill that was debated yesterday.
"But generally, in the past, he has said decisions like this are best left at the local level," she said.
To think she gets paid by our taxpayers to be a 'tobacco-control expert.' I wonder how many other positions like this the university system employs? They are complaining about budget cuts, but if they have positions like this it sounds like they already have more money than they know what to do with.
Ironically, in this case it's the nanny state telling the nanny local government not to be nannies to the individual.
I don't smoke, nor do I go into smoke-filled rooms, although I think a smoking ban is (to say the least) idiotic.
However, I do not like this kind of federal meddling in local laws. There is nothing in the Constitution that would prevent cities or states from issuing smoking bans.
Outraged?...by the VOTE??...TOUGH!...control expert indeed.
FMCDH
I hope that smoking restaurants will in the near future be treated with the same disgust as a restraurant which openly allowed chewing tobacco and spitting. But since I don't own the restaurants, my only moral option is to choose not to patronize them, not threaten them with government violence if they don't do what I want them to.
Right, but this is a state law, not a federal law. So, under the Tenth, the Kentucky legislature is passing a law restricting smoking bans.
Oops.
I wish that the TX legislature would pass a law like this - and I have never been a smoker, and never will be. I simply object to the assault on personal liberties (and wallets, because they're after the contents thereof as much as they're after the controlling people's actions).
Hmmm... I'm starting to think this guy has a horse in this race and sure enough:
Scanlon got a frostier reception from Thayer. Scanlon's Georgetown Applebee's restaurant, Thayer contended, was one of the smokiest restaurants he has ever set foot in. That led to a rapid-fire exchange.
Thayer: "I'm guessing you allow smoking in Georgetown because there's an O'Charley's across the street, right? Dictated by market factors?"
Scanlon: "Dictated by, 'I've got to be even with the competition, or I can't -- '"
Thayer: "So you as a private business owner are letting the marketplace dictate to you, your business policies? Yes or no?"
Scanlon: "I'm being trapped by --"
Thayer: "Yes or no? You're letting the marketplace decide."
Scanlon: "Your honor, I'm not going to let you trap me into an answer I don't mean."
Thayer: "Well, then you've answered my question."
Bwahahahaha! A non-smoking "level playing field" advocate gets exposed as a hypocrite! Delicious.
Well, ain't that the truth.
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.
