Allowing local smoking bans update
Up in smoke
April 07, 2007
By Jason Hancock, jasonhancock@bpcdm.com
By Jason Hancock, jasonhancock@bpcdm.com
Legislation that would ban smoking in Iowa’s workplaces, or at least give local communities the authority to do it themselves, will most likely fail to pass during this legislative session, putting into doubt the future of a ban in Iowa.
“If we don’t see something done with the bill this week, it will probably be a lost cause this session,” said Threase Harms, the lobbyist for Clean Air for Everyone Iowa, a group that has been pushing for a smoking ban of some sort for five years. “Next year, there will be a whole new set of obstacles, being that it’s an election year.”
The Iowa Senate passed a bill in mid-March that would allow local governments to adopt anti-smoking ordinances that are stricter than state law. Des Moines and 12 other cities have discussed the idea, according to the Iowa League of Cities. That bill offered exemptions to fraternal organizations, such as the American Legion and Veterans of Foreign Wars.
However, the House Local Government Committee has endorsed a bill that would also give local communities the authority to regulate smoking, but would exempt taverns and casinos from local bans.
“I can’t support the bill that was passed,” said Rep. Donovan Olson, D-Boone. “Pre-determining exemptions is not a good thing. We should leave that up to the local communities to decide.”
Olson said that though the bill is eligible for debate in the House, the chances of action being taken on it this session are “dwindling.”
“It’s becoming very unlikely,” he said. “But anything could happen.”
Local or state control
Smoking opponents disagree over whether they should try for a statewide ban on smoking in public places, or whether they should first seek legislation allowing cities and counties to institute local bans. Both Ames and Iowa City passed ordinances to prohibit smoking in restaurants, but those laws were struck down by the Iowa Supreme Court in 2003. The court said the local ordinances were not permitted under state law.
A bill imposing a statewide ban on smoking in workplaces was introduced this year, but it did not make it out of committee in the House and Senate, leaving only the two versions of the local control option.
“Giving local governments the authority to regulate smoking would be disastrous,” said J. Michael McKoy, who owns three restaurants and bars in the Des Moines area.
As an example, McKoy points to the Down Under Bar in Clive.
“It’s six blocks from five different municipalities,” he said. “What if Clive decides to ban smoking and West Des Moines, Urbandale and Des Moines don’t? It’s going to lose its smoking customers immediately.”
In Central Iowa, so many different municipalities are bunched together that giving local government the authority to regulate smoking would create an unfair climate for the business community, McKoy said.
“It might be different in other parts of the state, but here it would be a nightmare,” he said.
Sandra Quilty, director of government relations for the Iowa chapter of the American Cancer Society, said that though her organization prefers a statewide ban, every state that has gone smoke-free has started by first legislating at the local level.
“The public sentiment is overwhelmingly supportive, but there is still a lot of education to do in the Legislature on this issue,” she said. “So we understand the reality and are just pushing for the local-control option.”
Rep. Olson agrees, saying the impact of a local ban would be minimal, as most municipalities wouldn’t pass one.
“But those that do, we can monitor the impact it has and see if a statewide ban would be logical,” he said. “When laws pass, there are intended and unintended consequences. This is the best way to discover the effect this bill would have.”
He does have concerns about the effect a statewide ban could have on local businesses, which is why he is hesitant to support such legislation.
Quilty said research has shown that when a restaurant goes smoke-free it actually gains business.
“It is just another piece of the puzzle we have to educate people on,” she said.
Businesses respond
McKoy said one idea that he believes could put the issue to rest is to give local governments the authority to issue smoking licenses, which would work exactly as liquor licenses do currently.
“You would have to meet certain requirements, pay a fee and put up a sign to say whether you were a smoking or nonsmoking establishment,” he said. “Then you let the marketplace decide. If a smoking establishment continues to be profitable, then it’s obvious the community wants it. If they are all out of business in a few months, then the local government would have no reason not to disallow smoking.”
McKoy said his idea might sound unworkable to many, but he knows he has customers who want to smoke and he’s willing to spend money to cater to them.
“And this way, legislators and local officials wouldn’t have to take the heat,” he said. “I know most businesses don’t want to have to pay another tax, but this would allow us to continue to cater to a specific customer base that, quite frankly, is being vilified right now.”
Quilty said everyone deserves to breathe clean air, whether that means customers or the workers in an establishment.
“Secondhand smoke is a health hazard,” she said. “That is fact. This is a public health issue.”
McKoy counters that if smoking is so bad, why not outlaw it completely?
“Because the state can’t afford to,” he said. “If you’re not bold enough to outlaw it, then you have to allow it. We have to stop passing feel-good laws and do something that is meaningful. Customers and workers have the right to walk into a place, and if it’s too smoky for them, to walk right back out. That’s how it is supposed to work.”
In a previous interview, Doni DeNucci, president and CEO of the Iowa Restaurant Association, said 80 percent of the restaurants and bars in Iowa are already smoke-free, proving the current laws are working and consumers already have the option to avoid smoking.
“A majority of businesses are already nonsmoking,” McKoy said. “That makes sense, because a majority of people are nonsmokers. But private establishments should have the right to make those decisions on their own based on their own experiences and their own customers.”
Fighting the inevitable
Despite his criticisms, McKoy said he believes that one day smoking in public places will be banned.
“Sooner or later, we will see a statewide ban,” he said. “I think that’s wrong, but with so many people lobbying for it, I’m not sure we can avoid it. And that is about as un-American as you can get.”
If the decision was left up to the market, he said, eventually it would demand that restaurants go smoke- free, without government interference.
“I just think when you start making things illegal, you’ve started down a slippery slope,” he said.
Quilty said even if smoking-ban legislation doesn’t make it out of the Legislature this session, 2007 was a great year.
“We got a significant increase in the tobacco tax passed, which will have a huge impact for many years,” she said. “We know we will win this fight one day, so we have to just keep on pursuing what we know is right.”
Though the increase in the tobacco tax was a victory, Harms said it serves a much different purpose, smoking cessation, than a smoking ban would.
“A smoking ban is about workplace safety,” she said. “Everyone is exposed to secondhand smoke when smoking is allowed in the workplace. That is unacceptable.”
Harms said her organization must now regroup and see how to go about getting anti-smoking legislation passed next year.
But the session isn’t over until April 27, which still leaves a window of opportunity, however small, to finally find success, she said.
“We’re not giving up hope this year,” Harms said. “We’re going to keep pressing leaders in the House to get this thing done. It’s all just politics as usual.”
Senate votes to allow local smoking bans
March 14, 2007
By JONATHAN ROOS, REGISTER STAFF WRITER
By JONATHAN ROOS, REGISTER STAFF WRITER
Cities and counties would be permitted to enact public smoking bans under a bill that won Senate approval today.
At least 13 Iowa cities including Des Moines are interested in adopting anti-smoking ordinances that are more strict than state law, according to the Iowa League of Cities.
The Senate approved the bill on a 30-20 vote that followed party lines. Members of the Democratic majority cited the hazards of second-hand smoke in voting for the measure.
Republicans said local businesses should be free to operate under the current state law that restricts smoking in public places.
The debate now shifts to the House.
Debate Delayed on Smoking Ban Bill
Mar 8, 2007
AP – The Senate has postponed debate on a bill that would allow local governments to institute smoking bans. The proposal was scheduled for debate Thursday night but was shelved until at least next week.
The bill addresses a 2003 decision by the Iowa Supreme Court, which ruled that local bans and regulations were illegal under current Iowa law. Two medium-sized cities in Iowa, Ames and Iowa City, had passed smoking bans before the court’s ruling.
The bill would allow local governments to decide their own policies on smoking. It would go to the House if approved by the Senate.
Some GOP senators say they support the bill, while other Republicans are opposed because it would take away control from local businesses.
Democrats say the public is on their side with the smoking issue. They cite local polls that showed an overwhelming percentage of Iowans favor a smoking ban.
