Actually I not only think this - I know it for fact.
It is other citizens who are driving their political leaders to give them a rest from all of the smoke in various establishments
Actually you are wrong. There are numerous organizations, many of which get much in the way of public funds (read taypayer money) that are fomenting all of this dissent. These people make nice salaries doing this. The article you posted previously quotes one of them.
I have email from one of these organizations encouraging their members to call, write, email or fax their legislators, the governor and the newspapers to express their opposition to any measures that will weaken Delaware's statewide smoking ban. In the email they are specifically told to NOT disclose their memberbership in an organization that is based through the Delaware Department of Health and Social Sevices...........
Another email from this organization includes an email to them by a Delaware State Senator. I've got no problem with that in general. What bothers me is that this Senator is promoting this group and it's founder as some grass roots group of people who don't like smoking. That is so far from the truth that it is more than just a simple white lie. In a 3 year period (1990-92) the founder of this organization received more than $20 million in state grants in California. Every penny of it was for his anti-smoker "research" and every penny of it was funded by a cigarette tax increase on the smokers of California.
But let me take this even further. The other heavily funded group the good Delaware state Senator is in contact with is in New York. He's in direct contact with the founder and head of that group. And as you seem to be such a rah-rah supporter of what these organizations are doing all over the country I'm sure you're truly going to like this - he is an out of the closet homosexual and he and his partner are the daddies to 2 teenage girls.
I actually videotapped their appearance on CBS Sunday morning a year or so ago. What a fabulous roll model he is for his daughters, a former stock broker who (allegedly)gave up his career to be an (highly paid) anti-smoker advocate. The CBS profile had nothing to do with smoking - it was solely centered on "alternative" families.
Apparently it is better "for the children" to be an anti-smoker than it is to be a NORMAL family.
If you haven't gotten the idea yet - anti-smokers, in my opinion, are no better than anti-gunners. They all make me equally ill.