State bill could end local smoking ban

A new bill introduced by the Kansas House of Representatives last week could overturn local non-smoking ordinances, including the smoking ban in Lawrence, and allow business owners to bring smokers back inside.

Video

State smoking ban

Smoking bans in public places is in danger of being overturned in Lawrence.

Smoking bans in public places is in danger of being overturned in Lawrence.

Members of the House Committee of Health and Human Services introduced the bill last week and will conduct a hearing on Wednesday.

The bill has drawn harsh criticism from anti-smoking organizations because it provides exemptions for businesses to allow indoor smoking and disables communities from passing local ordinances.

While the bill would outlaw smoking in enclosed areas statewide, it would also allow bars and restaurants the option to create designated smoking areas by paying an annual fee of $1 per square foot of smoking space.

Gov. Mark Parkinson, who has made passing a statewide smoking ban a priority, called the House bill a “ridiculous piece of public policy” and vowed to veto it at a news conference last Friday.

“[The bill] not only doesn’t ban public smoking, it repeals the ordinances in communities that have had the courage to actually ban public smoking,” Parkinson said.

Lawrence’s smoking ban has been in effect since 2004 largely because of anti-smoking agencies such as the Clean Air Lawrence Coalition, which strongly opposes the new bill.

Kathy Bruner, coordinator for the coalition, said she thought the new bill went against American culture’s general disapproval of public tobacco use.

“It would decrease our quality of life if it was passed, but I don’t believe that it will,” Bruner said. “I think the people in Lawrence are much more intelligent than that and I don’t think they would stand for it.”

Don Sayler, president of the Kansas Restaurant and Hospitality Association, said that a statewide bill needed to pass to ensure equal business opportunities for owners. While Sayler said his organization had taken a neutral stance to the proposed bill, he said members were submitting testimony in support of the new provisions concerning business exemptions.

“If smoking is that bad, then go after the product, don’t go after the operators,” he said. “It’s a legal product, yet the government thinks they need to intervene and tell an operator how to run his business.”

Many who oppose the bill, including Paula Clayton, at the Kansas Department of Health and Environment, have called for a statewide proposal that would allow local ordinances to remain in effective.

Clayton said her department would not support the bill because it provided no real protection from secondhand smoke.

Lawrence is one of 36 cities in Kansas with an indoor smoking ban in jeopardy of being overturned if the bill were to pass.

— Edited by Becky Howlett

 

Related articles

House passes state-wide smoking ban bill

The vote came in Thursday in favor of banning smoking in Kansas.

/news/2010/feb/26/house-passes-state-wide-smoking-ban-bill/

Changes to smoking ban could affect local ...

State law will ban smoking within 10 feet of doorways and windows.

/news/2010/jun/14/changes-smoking-ban-could-affect-businesses/

Editorial: Students should support smoking ban

Smokers and nonsmokers alike should support a statewide smoking ban in public ...

/news/2010/mar/04/editorial-smoking-ban/

Editorial: Statewide smoking ban would benefit Kansans

Health benefits alone are enough to warrant a ban.

/news/2009/apr/17/editorial_statewide/

Private clubs temporarily exempt from statewide smoking ...

Lawrence businesses must still follow the stricter local smoking ordinance.

/news/2010/jul/05/private-clubs-temporarily-exempt-statewide-smoking/

Brown: Smoking ban should pass

Secondhand smoke is especially bad for those with asthma.

/news/2009/oct/20/brown-smoking-ban/

Letter: Why I’m against the statewide smoking ...

Tactics employed by anti-smoking advocates turn

/news/2009/apr/21/letter_why_im/

Kieler: Smoking ban offers only positives

Considering the majority of Americans do not smoke, the ban offers the ...

/news/2007/feb/09/editorialsmoking/

New city law allows alcohol outside

City commissioners passed a law on Tuesday that allows patrons of Lawrence ...

/news/2008/aug/21/ne_alcohol/

Lawrence smoking ban may become statewide

Smoking ban may soon be statewide, business owners fear customer decline. Statistics ...

/news/2007/feb/06/smoking/

Local smokers face further restrictions

Bill mandates outdoor smokers be 10 feet away from restaurant doors and ...

/news/2010/apr/20/local-smokers-face-further-restrictions/

Syring: Smoking ban should be upheld

The owner of two local bars filed a lawsuit against Lawrence in ...

/news/2007/may/04/syring/

Local bars now building patios

The city commission recently approved a new patio for the Jackpot Music ...

/news/2009/jun/20/patios/

Three KU freshmen open their own shop

The new smoking-lounge business will open today and is being run by ...

/news/2006/oct/19/smoke/

Editorial: Tobacco tax, decrease deficit

Editorial board discusses the benefits of raising the tobacco tax.

/news/2009/oct/08/editorial-tobacco-tax/

Legalizing Love: the state of same-sex marriage ...

A look at the battle for marriage equality.

/news/2011/dec/08/legalizing-love/

Businesses get smoking decks

/news/2005/jan/21/news_lawrence_smoking/

City commission? What?

Within the last six years, the Lawrence city commission banned three unrelated ...

/news/2007/apr/03/voting/

City adopts registry service for same-sex couples

The city commission became the first in Kansas to create a registry ...

/news/2007/aug/13/registry/

New law targets local retailers

Beginning last week, paraphernalia that may be used for illegal drug use ...

/news/2008/jan/17/paraphernalia/

City debates approving a law to liberalize ...

City staff members are debating lowering the food sales threshold to 55 ...

/news/2008/jan/31/downtown/

Occupy movement gains local support

Occupy Lawrence demonstrators set up a permanent camp downtown for rally organization.

/news/2011/oct/16/occupy-movement-gains-local-support/

Editorial: New panhandling law isn’t necessary

/news/2008/nov/17/editorial_panhandling/

Editorial: Ban Targets Wrong Group

The ban on drug paraphernalia is detrimental to local businesses and artists, ...

/news/2008/jan/18/editorial/

E-cigs provide no-smoke option

Electronic cigarettes use a liquid nicotine and offer a variety of flavors.

/news/2010/may/05/e-cigs-provide-no-smoke-option/

Bars’ owner contests ban

/news/2005/feb/11/news_lawrence_ban/

Shorman: Smoking ban strips student rights

Banning sale of tobacco on campus is about more than blowing smoke.

/news/2010/feb/03/shorman-smoking/

Editorial: Ban on K2 premature, more research ...

Lawmakers should reconsider bill on marijuana-like substance.

/news/2010/feb/08/editorial-ban-/

Court fines increase

The cost of many fines with in the Lawrence Municiple Court will ...

/news/2007/jul/19/court_fines_increase/

Health Authority wants state smoking ban

The Kansas Health Policy Authority proposed a 50 cent per pack user ...

/news/2007/nov/06/health_authority_wants_state_smoking_ban/

Graphic labels for tobacco products blocked by ...

An anti-smoking initiative by the Food and Drug Administration was blocked by ...

/news/2011/nov/07/graphic-labels-blocked/

Downtown meters will allow quick shopping

City commissioners voted 4-1 to approve 15-minute meters in each block of ...

/news/2010/apr/28/Downtown-meters-will-allow/

Liquor laws expand in towns across state

Cities across Kansas amended liquor laws last week. Mulvane will allow sales ...

/news/2007/apr/11/liquor/

Hookah could be on its way out ...

Studies squash long-time myths about shisha smoke.

/news/2009/oct/08/hookah-out-door/

Marijuana bill reaches House

Pending state legislation calls for medicinal marijuana.

/news/2010/feb/16/marijuana-bill-house/

Ordinance would make domestic registry in Lawrence

The Lawrence City Commission will discuss a new city ordinance that would ...

/news/2007/jun/19/ordinance_would_make_domestic_registry_lawrence/

Editorial: Fine hurts downtown employers

New $50 parking fine means downtown businesses need to better help employers ...

/news/2010/apr/13/editorial-fine-hurts-downtown-employers/

City Commission passes domestic registry ordinance

The Lawrence City Commission approved a new city ordinance that gives gay ...

/news/2007/jun/20/city_commission_passes_domestic_registry_ordinance/

City debates new business ordinance

Commissioner Mike Amyx proposed a disorderly business ordinance in order to improve ...

/news/2007/aug/16/downtown/

Drinking in the streets

/news/2005/apr/29/news_lawrence_sidewalks/

Comments

Brilliant! All one has to do is look at all the other states and see how broke they are going to see what is going to happen here. Half the counties in Ohio are NOT going to enforce a ban anymore because they are going broke. Thousands of small bars that used to pay taxes are not there anymore. Tens of thousands of newly unemployed due to bans. Just brilliant!

Note that the EPA report of 1992 on second hand smoke was tossed out as junk science by federal judge osteen. Followed by 2 congressional comittees with henry waxman in attendance,both comittees also tossed the epa report as junk science.........yet these same smoke free and govmnt health groups continue to make claims shs/ets harms people. Sg general carmona was asked to provide some names of the dead he claimed of 50,000 deaths to shs a year........yet he couldnt name one and he declared the number was computer generated on the sammac system..........to this date there still are no names.........note this too the relative risk factor of second hand smoke is a 1.1 while tap waters is a 1.24 and milks is a 2.4 yet we dont call these things carcinogens as the epa study of 1992 tried to claim.......then when we find not one smoke free group lists the true major component in second hand smoke is water vapor and air at nearly 94%.....surgeon general report of 1989 pg 80.

Then we have OSHA not making a rule of limits...........why because nano grams and femptograms are not going to harm anyone.........what we have here is a lie and mass propaganda by health officials andnon-profits out to secure profits for big pharma elling the cessation drugs....the guilty parties are the robert woods johnson foundation aka johnson and johnson along with the american cancer society ,hired out by RWJF to lobby for smoking bans.......note also that all state wide bans include tax dollars for smoke free droups and 300-500 million dollars for purchasing and paying for quit lines and buy cessation drugs from big pharma............This story is bigger than the global arming hype from the climategate emails...........follow the money and you will find the world health orginization is heavily financed by big pharma and lets not forget the world anti-tobacco treaty where countries were blackmaled to sign the treaty or lose world bank loans.............Even the tobacco companies had there hands tied by the MSA deal to stay shut up about anything tobacco control may say in the future..........leaving tobacco control prohibitionists the ability to make any claim they so desired and see it rubber stamped by government agencies staffed with people from the same non-profit groups...look at obamas hhs secretary or the cdc director all from tobacco control back grounds even the new surgeon general comes from tobacco control in mississippi................colusion you bet.

The latest junk science, smokefree scientists produce another 3rd hand smoke nut study..............they tried the same trash science a year ago and was quickly laughed off by the whole world..this latest is just as comical about n-nitrosomines and nitrous acids.......when you see it refer back to this:

Just a little bit more about the N'-nitrosonornicotine found in SHS/ETS.

"Thus, non-smokers can be exposed to highly carcinogenic TSNA."

However, the dose makes the poison!!

This stuff is NOT present in quantities known to be hazardous!!!

The concentration of N'-nitrosonornicotine (NNN) ranged from not detected to 23 pg/l, that of N'-nitrosoanata-bine ranged from not detected to 9 pg/l, while 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanone (NNK) was detected in concentrations ranging from 1 to 29 pg/l.

Thus, non-smokers can be exposed to highly carcinogenic TSNA.

NNN = 0 to 23 picograms per liter

NNK = 0 to 29 picograms per liter

1 cubic meter = 1,000 liters

1 nanogram(NG) = 1,000 picograms

Thus, NNN of 0 to 23 picograms per liter is the same as 0 to 23 nanograms(ng) per cubic meter

NNK of 0 to 29 picograms per liter is the same as 0 to 29 nanograms(ng) per cubic meter.

The question is whether or not 0 to 29 nanograms(ng) per cubic meter of a carcinogenic substance is a dangerous level?

The Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) has concluded that inorganic arsenic is known to be a human carcinogen.

The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) cites sufficient evidence of a relationship between exposure to arsenic and human cancer. The IARC classification of arsenic is Group 1.

The EPA has determined that inorganic arsenic is a human carcinogen by the inhalation and oral routes, and has assigned it the cancer classification, Group A.

http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprof...iles/tp2- c6.pdf 6.4.1 Air

Mean arsenic levels in ambient air in the United States have been reported to range from 20 to 30 ng/m3 in urban areas (Davidson et al. 1985; EPA 1982c; IARC 1980; NAS 1977a).

NOTE: 20 to 30 ng/m3 is NOT stated to be a hazardous level of exposure to this known human carcinogen.

Levels of arsenic in the air generally range from less than 1 to about 2,000 nanograms (1 nanogram equals a billionth of a gram) of arsenic per cubic meter of air (less than 1–2,000 ng/m3), depending on location, weather conditions, and the level of industrial activity in the area. However, urban areas generally have mean arsenic levels in air ranging from 20 to 30 ng/m3.

Both inorganic and organic forms leave your body in your urine. Most of the inorganic arsenic will be gone within several days, although some will remain in your body for several months or even longer. If you are exposed to organic arsenic, most of it will leave your body within several days.

http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp2-c1.pdf

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has set a permissible exposure limit (PEL) of 10 micrograms of arsenic per cubic meter of workplace air (10 μg/m³) for 8 hour shifts and 40 hour work weeks.

so thats 10,000 nanograms per cubic meter of air per 8 hours

1 cig gives 29 nanograms per cubic meter

so we take 10,000 divided by 29 = 186,000 cigs burning simultaneously to meet oshas pel of 10ugs per 8 hour shift in a 20x9x9 sealed room.

cotton contains the same stuff from insecticide spraying,so your clothes and underwear will have this tnsa's in it too!

Glad to see all of you from the LJWorld!

Sign in to comment