On second reading, there was a lot of chatter about how the amendments made HB 1149, the smoking ban statute worthless. I decided to go through the amendments and see how bad they were. They weaken it, sure, but honestly it still looks like an o.k. bill in my subjective opinion. Here is what went in on second reading.
Senator Leising: A health facility, a residential care facility, group home, retirement community, state hospitals, community mental health centers, and community mental retardation and other developmental disabilities centers; and: Bars and taverns that open after June 30, 2012; and facilities hosting bingo, raffles or other charity events.
Sen. Alting: Cigar or hookah bars that are open and allow smoking prior to July 1, 2013. (Previously the grandfather clause was cut off at June 30, 2012.) Sen Alting also clarified that the statute wouldn’t supersede a more restrictive ordinance already in place; also non-profit clubs.
Sen. Nugent: Local organizations can’t impose more restrictive requirements on gambling establishments.
Sen. Young: A business located at the owner’s residence. Local organizations can’t impose more restrictive requirements on this one either.
Here is the version now being considered by the Senate on third reading. It prohibits smoking in a public place (structure in which the public is invited or permitted), place of employment, state owned vehicles, and 8 feet of the entrance to a public place or place of employment.
The exceptions, generally speaking are: gambling facilities, non-profit clubs that serve food and/or alcohol to only its members, tobacco stores, hookah and cigar bars, over-21 bars and taverns, churches and the like when they’re holding bingo or raffle type events, and residential health care facilities of various kinds.
My preference is to be in a bar that’s smoke free; but I can’t get too upset at an exception for those locations. I don’t go to all that many bars anymore; and, if I do, generally I’m with people who share my aversion to cigarette smoke.
The problem with this bill is exactly what does it change for cities/counties that have already passed comprehensive/non-comprehensive bans? Nothing. In fact it loosens the 12-ft restriction and prevents local municipalities from banning smoking on gambling facilities within their jurisdiction.
Smoking is already prohibited on state property (i.e. state-owned vehicles).
My personal hope for the pending House-Senate committee is a ban with no exceptions except cigar/hookah bars and fraternal halls that do not allow children (if they vote to be exempt). Fin.
Doug: The US Surgeon General has said that NO amount of secondhand smoke is safe, and NO air filtration system can remove the carcinogens and toxins. Given that:
Is it okay for kids, teachers, clergy, janitors etc. to breathe the air in a school or church that’s hosted a smoke-filled charity gaming event the night before?
Is it okay for the nurse, orderly, janitor or old lady next door to deal with the smoke, ashes and residue from the patients in the nursing home/mental health facility/state hospital “smoking room”?
Is it okay for uninsured bartenders, card dealers, waiters and waitresses in 1500 taverns and casinos to inhale proven carcinogens every shift every day and then fund their own medical care for cancer, heart disease, asthma, etc.?
Smoking kills 10,000 people a year in this state. Secondhand smoke kills 1,000 people a year. We hear the excuse that all this should be hands off because tobacco is a legal product.
But …
So are cell phones and cars, and the state regulates when and how I may use the two together.
So is Claritin D, and the state regulates how much my wife may buy for her allergies.
So’s the crowded theatre, and the state says I may not endanger everyone around me by yelling fire there.
The fact is, the state protects us when our bad behavior endangers others. There is NOTHING more dangerous than smoking and secondhand smoke. Nothing. It’s the leading preventable cause of death in this country. What 70 percent of Hoosier citizens say they want is a smokefree workplace law that protects every worker in every workplace. This one does little to advance that protection, but creates the illusion that it ill.
THAT’s what’s so bad about this exemption-riddled “Smokers’ Right to Kill” bill that emerged from the Indiana Senate.
Bruce,
Your data is incorrect. Obesity called and it would like an apology from you.
Obesity doesn’t endanger the health of those around the obese person.
Doug, does the bill allow local governments to pass more restrictive smoking bans or is it only for gambling locations? Not that I don’t care about a statewide ban, but I’d really like to know how this affects Indianapolis’ current ban. Also, is there a grandfather clause for existing bans if it does prevent tighter restrictions locally?
Can’t be more restrictive on gambling. And, as written, can’t be more restrictive on churches or other non-profits while they’re holding a bingo event, raffle, some other similar events specified in IC 4-32.2-2. Otherwise, the statute allows localities to impose more restrictive conditions in an ordinance.
Honestly, this is disgusting. We’re inching backward toward the Neanderthal age. My old church hosted bingos several times a month in the cafeteria to help support the school (like many do, I suspect). To walk into that room the next day made me gag, and the children had no choice but to report there before school started and at lunch and after school for Scouts and clubs. Isn’t there a disconnect here — taking care of the spiritual being while harming the physical? How refreshing it was to move to a new church and find that they didn’t host bingos.
About the residential health facility: This is also a shame. I heard Sen. Whoever on TV last night saying if you don’t like smoke in a bar, don’t patronize that bar. Well, is she applying that to a “residential health facility”, too, where someone’s quality of life could be literally ruined by the odor and presence of smoke and they would have very little of the physical and financial power to “take their business elsewhere”.
I guess it’s too much to ask of our legislators, smokewise, that people get to grow up in a healthy atmosphere and die in a comfortable one.
The explanation on the floor is that the amendment exempted ALL bars and taverns – not just new ones. That is the major amendment causing all the trouble.
Sadly, this bill is not worth passing since it will not protect all workers from exposure to secondhand smoke, a known carcinogen. Excluding bars is no longer the norm; in fact, it’s archaic. And 19 states include casinos/gaming establishments in their smokefree law. It would be a shame if the Legislature passed this loophole ridden law that is weaker than some of the local laws in the state, and certainly far weaker than most states with smokefree laws. Stripping away local authority to pass stronger laws at the municipal level is pretty sneaky, and right out of the tobacco industry’s play book.
Can’t be more restrictive on gambling. And, as written, can’t be more restrictive on churches or other non-profits while they’re holding a bingo event, raffle, some other similar events specified in IC 4-32.2-2. Otherwise, the statute allows localities to impose more restrictive conditions in an ordinance.
My recollection is that the nursing home OBRA regulations require that nursing facilities designate a place where residents can smoke.
I think the more it’s restricted, the less socially acceptable smoking becomes wherever it happens — legal or not. So, passing it like this, I think will make its prevalence decrease even in places where it remains permitted.
“Sadly, this bill is not worth passing since it will not protect all workers from exposure to secondhand smoke, a known carcinogen. ”
Sadly, this bill is not worth passing since it will not protect all citizens from exposure to the public consumption of alcohol, a known intoxicant.
My drinking doesn’t enter your bloodstream.
I am just not seeing the vast spectrum of life in which smoking is permitted that detractors seem to be seeing. I hate having to deal with smoke, and I prefer that this not be allowed in bars, but bars are kind of a place devoted to vice so the exception makes a kind of sense to me.
I say pass it. If anti-smoking advocates want to keep narrowing the places in which bystanders are subjected to second smoke, that’s fine. Go to work in the towns and cities for a few years with more restrictive ordinances. Then come back in 3 or 4 years and press for a narrowing of the exemption for bars and taverns.
Agree 100%. This is exactly what should happen. I too would rather bars be non-smoking, but little by little I’m finding some that are (for example, the incredible Three Floyd’s brewpub.) Perhaps a law isn’t even necessary.
NOTHING is more dangerous than second hand smoke? That seems a bit hyperbolic, no? I mean, let’s be honest here…ricin exposure kills a much higher percentage of people exposed to it than does cigarette smoke…and faster too! I just had a friend die of cancer who was exposed to second-hand cigarette smoke for her entire adult life (she was in her sixties at T.O.D.), and the way statistics are generated on the topic, well-meaning busy-bodied smoke nazis would call that a “second hand smoke related death.” They generally overlook the fact that she was also exposed to first hand smoke for better than 40 years…but that little detail gets buried in the tidal wave of uproar about the 2nd hand smoke.
Don’t get me wrong, I quit smoking 4 years ago and I’m not looking back…and the bars here in Fort Wayne are way more enjoyable now than they were before our smoking ban was instituted. I’m all for it, but basically for the children. If there are gonna be kids there: no smoking. If it’s adults only, well, adults can make the choice to stay or go. It’s a free country (for now).
From the Centers for Disease Control:
Tobacco use is the single most preventable cause of disease, disability, and death in the United States. Each year, an estimated 443,000 people die prematurely from smoking or exposure to secondhand smoke, and another 8.6 million live with a serious illness caused by smoking. Despite these risks, approximately 46.6 million U.S. adults smoke cigarettes. Smokeless tobacco, cigars, and pipes also have deadly consequences, including lung, larynx, esophageal, and oral cancers.
The harmful effects of smoking do not end with the smoker. An estimated 88 million nonsmoking Americans, including 54% of children aged 3–11 years, are exposed to secondhand smoke. Even brief exposure can be dangerous because nonsmokers inhale many of the same poisons in cigarette smoke as smokers.
Secondhand smoke exposure causes serious disease and death, including heart disease and lung cancer in nonsmoking adults and sudden infant death syndrome, acute respiratory infections, ear problems, and more frequent and severe asthma attacks in children. Each year, primarily because of exposure to secondhand smoke, an estimated 3,000 nonsmoking Americans die of lung cancer, more than 46,000 die of heart disease, and about 150,000–300,000 children younger than 18 months have lower respiratory tract infections.
Coupled with this enormous health toll is the significant economic burden of tobacco use—more than $96 billion a year in medical costs and another $97 billion a year from lost productivity.