From: SMOKEFREE@compuserve.com
Date: Tue, 06/17/08
Smoking ban important state victory
Erie Times-News (editorial)
June 15. 2008
http://www.goerie.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080615/OPINION01/8061503
59/-1/OPINION
Forget the qualifications for a moment. The state Senate did the right
thing to backtrack and join the state House in passing a smoking ban that
will cover 95 percent of Pennsylvania workplaces.
Ninety days after Gov. Ed Rendell signed the smoking ban into law Friday,
most restaurants, workplaces and public spaces will go smoke-free,
protecting millions of Pennyslvanians from unhealthy exposure to secondhand
smoke.
It's not a perfect bill, but it's a good start.
Unfortunately, exemptions for small bars, private clubs and 25 percent of
floors in casinos will leave thousands of workers exposed to secondhand
smoke. We also remain troubled that the bill prevents counties and cities
from passing tougher bans. But it's certainly better than continuing the
status quo.
It should be noted, however, that Senate Minority Leader Bob Mellow, a
Democrat whose 22nd District includes the Scranton area, said Senate
Republican leaders, in exchange for his support, promised to allow him to
introduce legislation that would enable the city of Scranton and Allegheny
County to enact tougher smoking bans.
That makes it all the more confounding that state Sen. Jane Earll, of
Fairview Township, R-49th Dist., didn't make a similar agreement so that
Erie County could be given the opportunity to have its own ban.
Instead, Earll joined Sen. Mary Jo White, of Franklin, R-21st Dist., as two
of just nine senators to oppose the ban. All other senators, most House
members and the entire Erie House delegation, Democrats and Republicans
alike, voted for the ban. We commend them. They must now move swiftly to
join with Mellow to try to get third-class counties, like Erie County, in
position to be able to pass a ban.
It won't be easy. Allegheny is a second-class county, and Scranton is the
state's only second-class city, so allowing them to pass bans would not
help Erie's efforts.
Earll and White said the government should not have a say in preventing
businesses from allowing individuals to exercise their personal choice to
smoke or not. Earll also said she voted against the ban because it was a
bad bill with exemptions that were unfair to some businesses.
Frankly, we wholly disagree with Earll's position, especially given the
clear feelings of Erie County residents and leaders on this issue.
Erie leaders need to help make improving the smoking ban an ongoing
legislative effort. It took 18 months to get this far, which is a
significant accomplishment. But the work is just beginning.
- - -
Again, breathe deeply
York Dispatch
06/12/2008
http://yorkdispatch.inyork.com/yd/viewpoints/ci_9561701
Last week this page was praising (prematurely, it turns out) the General
Assembly for finally (at long last, no kidding, whew) coming to grips with
reality and passing a statewide smoking ban.
Things threatened to fall apart after the state Senate balked at some
Philadelphia-centered restrictions, but by gosh, here we are, with a ban
finally through both houses and awaiting the governor's pen.
What broke the stalemate was a bipartisan agreement to allow for
consideration, later in the session, bills allowing Allegheny County and
second-class A cities -- Scranton's the only such municipality -- to enact
stricter restrictions than those found in the state bill.
But now that geography and egos have been assuaged, the public at large
should be able to breathe better. Once Gov. Ed Rendell signs the bill,
smokers have 90 days to continue puffing in most places, including most
businesses.
Private clubs and some bars and taverns will be exempted along with
portions of casino floors.
The bill could have been tougher when it comes to drinking establishments;
in New York City where tougher restrictions were enacted several years ago,
predictions over the loss of customers in bars and saloons proved wrong.
Business actually increased and customers across the five boroughs can only
smoke alfresco, except in designated tobacco bars.
Pennsylvania becomes the 33rd state to institute a ban on public puffing.
It's not the nation's toughest bill, but it certainly was overdue.
- - -
Better than nothing
The Intelligencer (Doylestown)
June 12, 2008
http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/news/318-06122008-1548046.html
PENNSYLVANIA WILL HAVE a statewide smoking ban in a few days when Gov.
Rendell signs long-debated and hard-fought legislation outlawing tobacco
use in workplaces and public spaces. But Rendell's signature shouldn't be
the final act.
The bill's passage in the Senate came with a few strings attached.
Lawmakers agreed to introduce legislation allowing Scranton and Allegheny
County to enact tougher smoking bans than the coming state law will
establish. That the pending law didn't allow stricter local bans had
stalled the measure for more than a year. (Philadelphia's existing ban was
grandfathered in.)
Encouragingly, the governor has promised to support the follow-up
legislation. Lawmakers now have to hold up their end of the bargain.
Meanwhile, the new state law will go on the books, placing Pennsylvania
among the majority of states that also have smoking bans in place. The only
downside is that the measure provides an assortment of exemptions that will
make the law among the more timid in the nation.
Exemptions include bars and taverns with food sales totaling 20 percent or
less of their revenues; private clubs; cigar bars and adult-care
facilities. Also, 75 percent of sleeping quarters in hotels and motels must
be smoke-free. Likewise, 75 percent of casino floors must not allow
smoking.
The exclusions might have made the measure politically palatable, but they
leave a bitter taste in the mouths of workers who must continue to inhale
secondhand smoke. A law dedicated to protecting the health of citizens
shouldn't leave anybody out.
Still, a partial ban is better than no ban at all. And in the state of
Pennsylvania, which often trails the rest of the nation on important
issues, partial success often is the best we can get.
- - -
Hold your breath
Scranton Times-Tribune (editorial)
06/12/2008
http://www.thetimes-tribune.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=19767100&BRD=2185&PAG=
461&dept_id=418218&rfi=6
After a year of wrangling over a fundamentally simple issue, the
Pennsylvania Legislature has proved its own ineffectiveness by passing a
smoking "ban" in public places that is among the weakest of the 33 states
and scores of foreign countries that have adopted such bans.
The partial ban adopted by the Legislature is substantially weaker than a
ban that remains in effect in Philadelphia and bans in Scranton, Allegheny
County and several other places, which recognized that smoking and
secondhand smoke are hazards everywhere that they occur and, therefore,
banned them in all indoor public places.
Jurisdictions that have passed strong bans have acted on the strength of
unequivocal scientific findings that secondhand smoke is a potent
carcinogen.
The state Legislature, on the other hand, acted on the strength of some
legislators fealty to narrow special interests - the tavern, casino and
tobacco industries - rather than in the interest of public health.
Pennsylvanias ban, which will take effect 90 days after Gov. Ed Rendell
signs it, includes a broad range of exemptions - allowing casinos, for
example, to exempt up to 50 percent of their open gambling floors. That
means that casinos, in effect, will not have a ban, making breathing itself
a gamble.
State Sen. Stewart Greenleaf, of Montgomery County, who steadfastly has
championed a meaningful ban for more than a decade, held his nose and voted
for this feeble bill. He characterized it as an opening effort at a true
ban, and vowed to soon take up the effort again. Heres hoping that, in the
interim, more lawmakers decide to cast their lot with public health.
- - -
OUR VIEW
Smoke dims the vision
Centre Daily Times
Thursday, Jun. 12, 2008
http://www.centredaily.com/opinion/story/651146.html
When the smoke finally cleared, state senators who last week snuffed out
legislation that would limit lighting up in public places saw that they
werent going to get anything stronger and more to their liking. So they
inhaled deeply on Tuesday and passed the same bill they had rejected
previously.
The smoking-legislation stalemate lasted only 14 months, and the bill that
now goes to Gov. Ed Rendell for his expected signature is far from perfect
- exemptions that will permit smoking in certain bars, private clubs and
portions of casinos prompted the American Lung Association to withhold its
endorsement.
But it is better than anti-smoking restrictions Pennsylvania previously had
- essentially none. And it demonstrated that members of the General
Assembly, when faced with the reality that they will not get everything
they want, actually can compromise.
Will they continue mining that vein while working on the unfinished
business of health care, energy and the budget? Miracles do happen, but not
often enough to count on them.
After allowing Rendells health care package, overwhelmingly passed by the
House, to sit untouched since March, Republicans who control the Senate
this week introduced their own plan.
Predictably, it is less expensive, but far less extensive.
Realistic, affordable and sustainable is how state Sen. Edwin B. Erickson,
RDelaware, chairman of the Senate Public Health and Welfare Committee,
described it.
Berry Friesen, of the Pennsylvania Health Access Network, called it
something else.
"The House plan opens the door to comprehensive health care for 257,000
uninsured individuals. The Senate Republican plan opens the door to
comprehensive health care for 8,000 individuals and invites another 175,000
uninsured individuals to get in line at a community health clinic," Friesen
said.
Will backers of the two plans negotiate a compromise or take their usual
"my way or the leased or tolled highway" stance, calculating that political
pressure will force the other side to fold?
On the energy front, the Senate is sticking to its modest, pennywise
proposals while two House-passed measures - the Energy Savings Bill and the
Clean Energy Funding Bill - gather dust.
"Every day we wait to pass these vitally needed laws, great green jobs go
to other states that already have large energy funds, and our state becomes
less competitive," John Hanger, president and CEO of PennFuture, the
nonprofit, environmental advocacy group, said Tuesday during a rally in
Harrisburg. "Every day without these bills means more pollution, more
health risk to millions of Pennsylvanians and more heat-trapping gases that
cause global warming. There is simply no time to lose."
But the Senate seems to be in no hurry to abandon its no-negotiations
stance.
Meanwhile, the annual free-for-all over finances is heating up, primarily
over the Rendell administrations notice to state workers to expect
furloughs if a budget agreement is not reached by the June 30 deadline.
Republicans called the furlough notice a political ploy, which it may be.
But anyone who remembers last years debacle when the government was shut
down and state parks were closed should realize that Rendell is not just
blowing smoke.
And Republican leaders negotiating with the governor should realize that he
has nothing politically to lose. While legislators will have to face voters
when they run for re-election, Rendell said he has waged his last campaign
for office.
But rather than making him a lame duck, his soon-to-be emeritus status has
enabled Rendell to fly. He wings from one proposal to the next - energy,
health care, education, transportation funding - driving legislators batty
as they try to calculate the political ramifications in their districts.
They still need 51 percent approval from the 28 percent who vote. Rendell
does not.
So they can posture all they want to, but knowing that Rendell wields the
hammer should drive them to good-faith, real give-and-take negotiations.
Will it? We wont know until the smoke clears around midnight, June 30.
- - -
Legislators, claiming to be interested in protecting public health, should
have voted to ban smoking in all public buildings.
OUR VIEW: Loophole-riddled smoking ban leaves public at risk
The Herald (Sharon, PA)
June 13, 2008 09:38 pm
http://www.sharonherald.com/opinion/local_story_165213803.html
The compromise bill banning smoking in some workplaces and businesses is
hailed as a step in the right direction for public health.
But if its a public health issue - which it certainly should be since it
concerns secondhand smoke - why did our state pass a watered down law? Why
compromise on protecting the public?
Pennsylvania became the 33rd state to pass a law outlawing smoking in
public places. It will go into effect 90 days after being signed by the
governor. But compared to some states, this one has a lot of loopholes.
While it should have been a ban against smoking in all public places and
should have passed that way handily if our General Assembly really cared
about public health as they claim, instead our astute leaders approved a
bill that not only is confusing, but will be difficult to enforce.
For example, the bill allows smoking at drinking establishments where food
is 20 percent or less of annual sales. Who is going to track what percent
of the bill goes toward food? In a lot of small taverns, its easy not to
ring up certain items on a register.
Some tavern owners, who do a good food business but also rely on a heavy
bar business, are upset because it will drive smoking customers to other
taverns. They claim that the current law makes it unfair to them. And they
are right. However, not having any smoking may also bring in more customers
who avoided those restaurants before because of smoke.
But once again, if you pass the law to protect the health of the employees
at all bars, why do you only protect the ones that serve more food?
It is proven that people who smoke have more health issues, which in turn
costs everyone more for health insurance for everyone. And studies have
proven that secondhand smoke also contributes to health issues.
Secondhand smoke carries a level of carcinogens which would never be
allowed if it were asbestos fibers or other harmful chemicals. Yet because
the "sin tax" on smoking is such a big boost to state revenues, legislators
allow it to continue.
One reason that smoking isnt completely banned is to cater to casino
operators. Apparently they think people wont gamble unless they can smoke..
We disagree. What it would come down to is which addiction is stronger -
smoking or gambling.
Many legislators who voted for the new law say that it is a step in the
right direction and the smoking laws can be strengthened in the future.
People who enjoy smoke-free dining will certainly approve but there is
still the health issue for people in places where smoking is still
permitted.
While compromise in government sometimes can be good, this case isnt one of
them. This vote should have been all or nothing concerning a ban on public
smoking. And as it is in more enlightened states, the vote should have been
to ban it all.
- - -
Our view: Smoking ban welcome, despite many exemptions
Public Opinion Online (Chambersburg)
June 12, 2008
C:\Documents and Settings\Bill\Local Settings\Temporary Internet
Files\Content.IE5\XSJ4138P\0227XXXXXX1X.HTM
It took a very long time to produce, and it ended up a watered-down
compromise. Nonetheless, the state Senate on Tuesday made Pennsylvania the
33rd state to outlaw smoking in workplaces and public places.
After more than a year of attempts to reconcile the competing interests of
businesses and public safety, the Senate voted 41-9 to send a smoking ban
bill to Gov. Ed Rendell, who plans to sign it as a way to reduce health
care costs.
Once signed, the bill will take effect in 90 days, and it will ban all
smoking in restaurants, office buildings, schools, sports arenas, theaters
and bus and train stations.
The ban remains far from comprehensive. A dozen exemptions ensure smoking
will continue at some bars and taverns, on portions of casino floors, in
private clubs and elsewhere. Furthermore, all counties and municipalities
except Philadelphia will be prohibited from enacting their own
restrictions.
So, it's not perfect, and it probably won't require much of an adjustment..
The only places the ban will be keenly felt will be bars and other night
spots, since most people already work in non-smoking environments.
Nevertheless, it's a progressive step forward for the state's image, and
one likely to be warmly welcomed by non-smokers who for years felt
oppressed by the murky atmosphere in many public spaces.
The economic impact remains unknown. Some businesses may suffer initially,
but we expect they'll more than rebound once non-smokers get used to the
idea of stepping out of the house again.
It's also nice to see the Legislature getting one of its most contentious
and longest-running issues off its plate, especially since it has fewer
than three weeks to hammer out a state budget.
-- By Matthew Major, on behalf of Public Opinion's editorial board
.
|
