State Update
Our Rights are “Slip Slidin Away”
30 October 2010
By Jim Waters
MUHLENBERG COUNTY, KY – Like school kids atop a snow-covered hill during a driving storm — oblivious to conditions around them — so health nannies stand, gleefully ready to push us and our freedoms down a slippery slope leading to a ride that might not offer so much fun.
I don’t question the motives behind a smoking-ban proposal now under consideration by the Bullitt County Health Department and its Board of Health. They and many — including me — have grave concerns about the health of Kentuckians.
Kentucky ranks as one of the unhealthiest states in the u nion. If the University of Kentucky football team did as well in polls as Kentucky does in poor health rankings, Big Blue fans would forget about basketball.
But I run into problems with how bureaucrats act on such a crisis.
C.S. Lewis once said, “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victim may be the most oppressive.”
Appointed (not elected) health-department bureaucrats see nothing wrong with pushing that sled down the hill, no matter where it may end up. Those riding the sled have a different view. At a minimum, they would like to have some notion of where it’s going to end up.
If a public health department can bypass elected officials and engineer policies that trump other important liberties — such as constitutionally endorsed private-property rights — while using claims that “we’re responsible for the public’s health,” that sled won’t stop in a good place.
I’m sure that when New York City banned smoking in 2003, many folks who like dining in smoke-free surroundings welcomed that decision. But I also suspect that many of them never dreamed the city would in only three years ban those same restaurants from using trans fats in their food.
What?! No margarine on my dinner roll?
Now the health nannies and their unsalted nuts in the New York General Assembly have filed a bill that would fine restaurants $1,000 if chefs use salt in recipes. That sled ride turned into the equivalent of skiing down Mount Everest.
Yes, the health police want to send us careening down a slippery slope toward more nanny-ism, less liberty and even less personal responsibility. They will never be satisfied until they can stand in homes throwing out cigarettes and forcing inhabitants to eat unseasoned Brussel sprouts.
Coming next: The Sugar Free Candy Halloween Ordinance.
It’s hard to stop a sled careening down a snow-covered slope.
At a forum I attended in Hillview, near Shepherdsville, some who support the proposed smoking ban repeatedly stated that they want to go to restaurants in which they breathe smoke-free air. Me, too.
But that’s a very shortsighted view — one that health-department bureaucrats count on to attack property rights in the future.
Keep in mind: Local health boards could apply their “public nuisance” arguments to private residences, too.
“If a person has rats running out of their house, the health department can move in because that’s a public nuisance,” said Harlen Compton, a local businessman and spokesman for Bullitt County Choice. “What’s to keep them from using that same argument to ban smoking in a private residence as well?”
Or if the department gets its way on smoking bans, what will it have to attack next to justify keeping so many bureaucrats on taxpayer-backed payrolls?
I bet those folks who want to use government force to ensure a more enjoyable dining experience might not smile as widely when denied margarine on their baked potatoes, salt on their Happy Meal fries or Halloween candy that tastes like wax.
If the health bureaucrats can get by with claiming that smoking bans address a “public nuisance,” who’s to say that more, much more, won’t follow — and soon?
— Jim Waters is vice president of policy and communications for the Bluegrass Institute, Kentucky’s free-market think tank. Reach him at jwaters@freedomkentucky.com . Read previously published columns at www.bipps.org.
County ‘Dons’ keep selling smoke-free agenda
By Jim Waters
July 24, 2010
A smoking-ban “family” of government officials and health nuts wants to make some Northern Kentucky residents “an offer they can’t refuse.”
Think of it as “The Godfather,” Kentucky style.
Ever since Lexington enacted Kentucky’s first government-mandated smoking ban in 2004, these “Dons” have pushed for government-imposed smoking bans on private property, primarily restaurants and bars in Northern Kentucky. They continue to twist arms to get bans in Boone, Campbell and Kenton counties.
One of their “associates,” Ellen Hahn, a registered nurse and self-anointed smoking-ban leader, even uses federal stimulus money to finance her efforts. Last year, Hahn snatched $300,000 of your tax dollars just to harass Kentucky communities.
But smoking-ban proponents have a particularly difficult time in the north largely because of Northern Kentucky Choice, a group that argues effectively that Hahn’s whole smoke-free house of cards is based on a shaky foundation of bad economic analysis and flawed logic.
Ken Moellman, Choice spokesman, says his group wants officials to understand that the debate on the economic impact of a government-mandated smoking ban is anything but over — as Hahn repeatedly claims.
“The quote ’science’ end quote behind the economic effect of a smoking ban is questionable at best and dishonest at worst,” Moellman said. Hahn’s research, which pro-ban officials rely upon, offers no raw data and cherry picks from research done by others, he said.
Ironically, smoking-ban proponents may become victims of their own success.
The longer bans remain in place, the more the evidence — and common sense — condemns the Pollyanna economic views of Hahn and her fellow smoking-ban worshippers.
For instance, in the St. Louis Fed, the publication of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, Michael Pakko pushes through the smoke-and-mirrors to show that government-imposed smoking bans exact a negative economic impact on businesses frequented by smokers.
Pakko cites a study of restaurant sales that spanned a quarter-century and 267 California cities, where economists Robert Fleck and Andrew Hanssen discovered government-imposed smoking bans resulted in drops in revenue by a super-sized 4 percent –a substantial decline considering most restaurants operate on a very thin profit margin.
These facts are ignored by Hahn, who must justify getting federal money by citing “accomplishments” – even those that erode freedom and small business owners’ constitutionally endorsed private-property rights. And of course, she and her fellow ban supporters deny the economic impact of a smoking ban.
What’s puzzling is why the three judge executives in these Northern Kentucky counties — all Republicans — want to climb into a black limousine loaded with junk science and bad economics thugs.
They claim to have the fiscal court votes in Kenton and Campbell counties but that Boone County holds out. Look out. The limo is pulling up.
Ralph Drees, Kenton County judge executive, wants all three counties to pass the same ban at the same time. That way, restaurant and bar owners become trapped. Otherwise, Boone County could benefit economically by attracting restaurant owners who would move businesses to a ban-free county.
This demonstrates that while Hahn may not admit the economic consequence of a smoking ban, the judge executives surely understand it.
Don Vito Corleone in “The Godfather” once admonished, “Never let anyone outside the family know what you’re thinking.” So, the judge executives have kept the proposal under wraps.
Why don’t they want the folks to see it?
Drees told reporters that he might consider a plan that would have Kenton and Campbell counties pass a ban and “maybe that’ll help push Boone County.”
It’s possible these conscientious Boone County leaders who rightly oppose the government coercion of these proposed smoking bans will interpret this as an “offer they can’t refuse.”
Perhaps they will anyhow.
— Jim Waters is vice president of policy and communications for the Bluegrass Institute, Kentucky’s free-market think tank. Reach him at jwaters@freedomkentucky.com. Read previously published columns at www.bipps.org.
Crestview Hills smoking vote close
November 13, 2009
By Cindy Schroeder • cschroeder@nky.com
CRESTVIEW HILLS – Mayor Paul Meier cast the tie-breaking vote as Crestview Hills City Council approved a resolution by a 4-3 vote urging Boone, Kenton and Campbell County fiscal courts to adopt regional legislation prohibiting indoor smoking in public buildings.
In Kentucky, 24 communities have gone smoke-free, and Northern Kentucky is the only major metropolitan area that hasn’t done so.
Frustrated by what he saw as “a vocal minority of residents” stopping action at the regional level, Crestview Hills Council Member David Kramer, a former smoker, suggested two months ago that city officials consider their own legislation. Tuesday, Council Member Frank Sommerkamp proposed the city push for action on a regional level, saying Northern Kentucky has more than 40 cities, and he wanted to avoid “a patchwork quilt” of smoking regulations.
Meier said he didn’t want to create an economic hardship for any of the cities’ restaurants, especially after officials worked so hard to develop the Crestview Hills Town Center.
Seven of the center’s restaurants and cafes allow smoking, and 11 are smoke-free.
Council acted after officials heard from 18 people at two meetings this week – Thursday’s council meeting and Tuesday’s meeting of the city’s zoning and economic development committee. Fifteen supported indoor smoke-free legislation for public buildings, and three were opposed. No Crestview Hills residents spoke at the meetings, and only two who spoke worked in the city.
Besides Meier, Kramer, Sommerkamp and Ralph Laird voted for the resolution. Council members Colleen Collins Bright, David Thiel and Tom Moser – all of whom said they were concerned about government interference into people’s lives – voted against it.
Moser said smoke-free workplace laws are tantamount to government “sticking its nose in and telling business owners and their customers, ‘This is not good for you. We’re going to keep you from harming yourself.’ To me, this is not the purpose of government,” he said. “We should not be involved.”
Kramer disagreed.
“As a society, we decided long ago that places that feed and house and entertain the public could be subject to reasonable regulation in the interest of public health and safety, and that’s exactly what we’re talking about,” he said.
“They cannot serve tainted meat, they can’t serve dirty water, and they can’t have a 10-year-old or undocumented worker washing dishes in the back room. And quite frankly, they shouldn’t be able to force people who come in for food or entertainment to breathe air that causes a myriad of health problems.”
November 13, 2009
By Cindy Schroeder • cschroeder@nky.com
CRESTVIEW HILLS – Mayor Paul Meier cast the tie-breaking vote as Crestview Hills City Council approved a resolution by a 4-3 vote urging Boone, Kenton and Campbell County fiscal courts to adopt regional legislation prohibiting indoor smoking in public buildings.
In Kentucky, 24 communities have gone smoke-free, and Northern Kentucky is the only major metropolitan area that hasn’t done so.
Frustrated by what he saw as “a vocal minority of residents” stopping action at the regional level, Crestview Hills Council Member David Kramer, a former smoker, suggested two months ago that city officials consider their own legislation. Tuesday, Council Member Frank Sommerkamp proposed the city push for action on a regional level, saying Northern Kentucky has more than 40 cities, and he wanted to avoid “a patchwork quilt” of smoking regulations.
Meier said he didn’t want to create an economic hardship for any of the cities’ restaurants, especially after officials worked so hard to develop the Crestview Hills Town Center.
Seven of the center’s restaurants and cafes allow smoking, and 11 are smoke-free.
Council acted after officials heard from 18 people at two meetings this week – Thursday’s council meeting and Tuesday’s meeting of the city’s zoning and economic development committee. Fifteen supported indoor smoke-free legislation for public buildings, and three were opposed. No Crestview Hills residents spoke at the meetings, and only two who spoke worked in the city.
Besides Meier, Kramer, Sommerkamp and Ralph Laird voted for the resolution. Council members Colleen Collins Bright, David Thiel and Tom Moser – all of whom said they were concerned about government interference into people’s lives – voted against it.
Moser said smoke-free workplace laws are tantamount to government “sticking its nose in and telling business owners and their customers, ‘This is not good for you. We’re going to keep you from harming yourself.’ To me, this is not the purpose of government,” he said. “We should not be involved.”
Kramer disagreed.
“As a society, we decided long ago that places that feed and house and entertain the public could be subject to reasonable regulation in the interest of public health and safety, and that’s exactly what we’re talking about,” he said.
“They cannot serve tainted meat, they can’t serve dirty water, and they can’t have a 10-year-old or undocumented worker washing dishes in the back room. And quite frankly, they shouldn’t be able to force people who come in for food or entertainment to breathe air that causes a myriad of health problems.”
Smoking controversy comes to city hall
August 04, 2008
Coalition wants help from council on proposed city-wide ban on smoking
By TRICIA NEAL, CJ Staff Writer Commonwealth Journal
Got an opinion about smoking in Somerset?
Whether you support an all-out ban or believe in smokers’ rights, your chance to speak out is coming.
Dr. Al Perkins, president of the Pulaski County Medical Society and spokesman for the Pulaski County Smoke Free Coalition, has approached the City of Somerset for help in supporting a city-wide smoking ban.
The Pulaski County Smoke Free Coalition has already sought help from the Lake Cumberland District Health Department and the Pulaski County Fiscal Court, but, so far, no governmental moves have been made to regulate smoking in the county.
Several establishments — from government buildings to restaurants, and from the local hospital to small businesses — have voluntarily enacted smoking bans, however.
Somerset Mayor Eddie Girdler and several council members acknowledged concerns about enacting a smoking ban in the city limits when county establishments could continue to allow smoking.
“If the county doesn’t go smoke-free, would it put some (businesses) at a disadvantage?” Girdler wondered.
“If the county is not going to participate, we need to see how that impacts city businesses.”
Mayor Girdler is planning a public forum which would allow citizens, business owners, city council members, fiscal court members and local experts to express their views about the possibility of a smoking ban.
The forum would allow the public to “get all the issues out on the table,” Girdler said.
Girdler hopes to hold the forum in mid-August, possibly at the Rocky Hollow Recreational Center.
He said those who are unable to attend will be able to submit written comments expressing their views.
More details will be published when information is available.
August 04, 2008
Coalition wants help from council on proposed city-wide ban on smoking
By TRICIA NEAL, CJ Staff Writer Commonwealth Journal
Got an opinion about smoking in Somerset?
Whether you support an all-out ban or believe in smokers’ rights, your chance to speak out is coming.
Dr. Al Perkins, president of the Pulaski County Medical Society and spokesman for the Pulaski County Smoke Free Coalition, has approached the City of Somerset for help in supporting a city-wide smoking ban.
The Pulaski County Smoke Free Coalition has already sought help from the Lake Cumberland District Health Department and the Pulaski County Fiscal Court, but, so far, no governmental moves have been made to regulate smoking in the county.
Several establishments — from government buildings to restaurants, and from the local hospital to small businesses — have voluntarily enacted smoking bans, however.
Somerset Mayor Eddie Girdler and several council members acknowledged concerns about enacting a smoking ban in the city limits when county establishments could continue to allow smoking.
“If the county doesn’t go smoke-free, would it put some (businesses) at a disadvantage?” Girdler wondered.
“If the county is not going to participate, we need to see how that impacts city businesses.”
Mayor Girdler is planning a public forum which would allow citizens, business owners, city council members, fiscal court members and local experts to express their views about the possibility of a smoking ban.
The forum would allow the public to “get all the issues out on the table,” Girdler said.
Girdler hopes to hold the forum in mid-August, possibly at the Rocky Hollow Recreational Center.
He said those who are unable to attend will be able to submit written comments expressing their views.
More details will be published when information is available.
Grandmother plasters her opinions all over her van
Feb. 25, 2007
GLASGOW, Ky. – Some people wear their hearts on their sleeves. Lynda Farley plasters her opinions on her minivan.
A retired computer programmer who lives in Edmonton in south-central Kentucky has covered her vehicle in bumper stickers and opinions on everything from smokers’ rights, the separation of church and state, private property rights to diversity, troops in Iraq and animal rights.
“I call this thing the liberty van,” she told the Glasgow Daily Times.
It started a year ago when she was traveling through Illinois to a dog show when she heard about Chicago’s smoking ban.
As someone who has smoked three packs of cigarettes for 40 years, she found the news disturbing. So, she pulled over and painted on her back window “Smokers Not Wanted In Illinois; Boycott Chicago.”
She said people seem to like the fact that she expresses her views on issues by putting the signs and bumper stickers on her van.
“Ninety percent of the responses I get are positive ones,” she said. “Thumbs up.”
When visiting California once someone asked her how much she was paid by the tobacco companies to put the signs on her van in support of smokers’ rights.
“Nobody is paying me anything. I’m a ticked off grandmother from Kentucky. It doesn’t get any more grassroots than that,” she said.
Putting the signs on her van, she says, is just her way of exercising the First Amendment.
Information from: Glasgow Daily Times, http://www.glasgowdailytimes.com
Information from: Glasgow Daily Times, http://www.glasgowdailytimes.com
Ohio smoking ban lights up discussion in N. Ky.
December 26, 2006
LINDSAY KOTTMANN AND PAUL MCKIBBEN
LINDSAY KOTTMANN AND PAUL MCKIBBEN
The statewide indoor smoking ban approved by Ohio voters in November is prompting discussion on whether such a ban would be welcome locally.
An increasing number of restaurants in Northern Kentucky are already banning smoking on their own, according to the Northern Kentucky Health Department, and Boone County Judge-Executive Gary Moore said he receives plenty of messages from residents asking the county to consider a smoking ban.
John Binder, owner of Flanagan’s Front Porch on Turfway Road, said the ban has been discussed frequently in his bar.
“Smokers think it’s unfair, non-smokers say ‘it’s about time,'” Binder said. “Everybody’s opinion has to do with whether they smoke or not smoke.”
However, Binder is a non-smoker and is “up in the air” about the ban.
“I think in certain cases it goes a little overboard,” he said. “I think there’s a middle ground that could be reached.”
Such a middle ground could possibly be a separate smoking room with separate air circulation, he said, although that wouldn’t be possible at the Front Porch.
Although Binder is afraid a ban would hurt his business, he thinks one is inevitable.
“I always say, in the state of Kentucky tobacco is considered a vegetable,” Binder said. “If they can get Lexington to stop smoking, nobody’s safe.”
Lexington enacted an indoor smoking ban in 2004.
Ken Zang, part owner and operator of the Skyline Chili on Mall Road, said his decision to ban smoking in his restaurant five years ago hasn’t hurt sales.
“We were scared at the time that we might lose business. We weren’t sure how it would affect us, especially being in the middle of tobacco country,” Zang said.
The positive comments since have outweighed the negative comments by a landslide, he said; most people don’t want to smoke at the table with their friends anyway.
However, that doesn’t mean that Zang is for a countywide ban.
“I think it should be left up to each individual (business) owner,” he said. “I’m pretty staunch on people being able to do what they want on their own properties.”
Moore said that although he knows support for a ban is growing and as a non-smoker he wouldn’t personally mind one, he’s a conservative who thinks the government has limits. He is undecided on the issue.
Eva Chamberlain of Hebron, who works at Wally’s Sports Bar & Grill in Hebron, said she would support banning smoking in restaurants but not bars.
Restaurants are family environments, she said, and she can understand people not wanting to smoke around children.
A bar, on the other hand, is a place where adults “can come to kick back, relax, smoke cigarettes, smoke cigars, have a beer,” she said. “I think beer and cigarettes go together.”
Smoking bans in Kentucky
Dec. 11, 2006
Lexington: On April 27, 2004, implemented a ban on smoking in enclosed public places, including all buildings open to the public, including but not limited to bars, restaurants, bowling alleys and bingo halls.
Georgetown: On Oct. 1, 2005, implemented a ban on smoking in workplaces and all enclosed public places.
Louisville: On Nov. 15, 2005, implemented a smoking ban in most buildings open to the public. Bars and restaurants with at least 25 percent alcohol sales and enclosed smoking areas were some of the exceptions to the ban. That ban was amended, and beginning July 1, only those public places regulated by the Kentucky Horse Racing Authority are exempt from the ban.
Daviess County: On Jan. 1, 2006, implemented a smoking ban in all enclosed public places that allow people younger than 18 years old to enter.
Letcher County: On July 1, 2006, implemented a smoking ban in all public buildings.
Morehead: On Aug. 1, 2006, implemented a smoking ban in all enclosed public places and places of employment.
Frankfort: On Aug. 22, 2006, implemented a smoking ban in all public buildings.
Ashland: On Oct. 1, 2006, implemented a smoking ban in all enclosed public places and places of employment.
Henderson: On Oct. 1, 2006, implemented a smoking ban in enclosed public places and places of employment, with the exception of charitable gaming events in licensed charitable gaming facilities, outdoor arenas and stadiums.
Elizabethtown: On Dec. 1, 2006, implemented a smoking ban in all enclosed public places and all enclosed facilities within places of employment, including seating areas in all outdoor arenas, stadiums and amphitheaters.
Oldham County: On Feb. 1, 2007, will begin a smoking ban on all enclosed public places and places of employment.
Paducah: On April 1, 2007, will begin implementing a smoking ban in buildings open to the public or in an enclosed area.
A hazy future
In Northern Kentucky, the movement to restrict smoking is gaining less traction.
September 2, 2006
By Dan Hassert
Ohio voters may help determine the future of smoking in Northern Kentucky.
Read
In Northern Kentucky, the movement to restrict smoking is gaining less traction.
September 2, 2006
By Dan Hassert
Ohio voters may help determine the future of smoking in Northern Kentucky.
Read
Push for smoking bans is building
Kentucky’s legacy faces health issues
Kentucky’s legacy faces health issues
August 27, 2006
By Laura Ungar, lungar@courier-journal.com
By Laura Ungar, lungar@courier-journal.com
Kentucky has a strong tobacco legacy and the highest adult smoking rate in America.
But it also has a growing number of communities enacting smoking bans. And many public health experts say the smoke-free movement is gathering momentum with each new ban and every new study that points to the dangers of secondhand smoke.
Consider last week’s news:
Henderson passed one of the most restrictive smoking bans in the state.
Ashland passed a similar ban.
Frankfort’s restrictions against smoking in public buildings went back into effect after a judge lifted a restraining order.
A member of the Louisville Metro Council began pushing a proposal to strengthen Louisville’s partial smoking ban.
In total, nine Kentucky communities have passed full or partial smoking bans and about 30 others are considering proposals to do so, said Amy Barkley, state advocacy director for the Washington-based Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. And last month, Gov. Ernie Fletcher signed an order making thousands of state buildings smoke free.
Robin Alecia Roth, a 43-year-old Louisvillian with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease who has never smoked, said such efforts will help her and many others breathe more easily.
Bans “have a great impact” on people with lung diseases, said Roth, who blames her condition partly on exposure to secondhand smoke in restaurants and nightclubs. “We’re the ones who have to suffer.”
Public health officials say the emphasis on secondhand smoke changes the smoking debate because, as Jessica Cobb of the Lexington-Fayette County Health Department, puts it: “You’ve got to consider where your rights end and where somebody else’s begin.”
But not everyone supports these bans.
Past efforts to strengthen Louisville’s partial ban have met with resistance from some Metro Council members and business owners. Businesses also pushed for the restraining order against the Frankfort ban.
Ban opponents also include smokers like Shirley Pontrich, a 74-year-old Louisvillian who has been smoking since she was 17 and whose husband retired from Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp.
“I think people that smoke deserve to have a place to go so they don’t have to go out in the cold,” she said.
Early warnings
Researchers knew about the dangers of secondhand smoke as long ago as 1986, said Dr. Alex Prokhorov of the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center in Texas. But the information took years to trickle down to the public.
Researchers knew about the dangers of secondhand smoke as long ago as 1986, said Dr. Alex Prokhorov of the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center in Texas. But the information took years to trickle down to the public.
It got a boost earlier this summer, when the U.S. Surgeon General issued a landmark report that compiled years of research showing cigarette smoke can make nonsmokers sick.
The report said that living with a smoker increases a nonsmoker’s chance of getting lung cancer 20 percent to 30 percent and exposure to secondhand smoke increases the risk of heart disease 25 percent to 30 percent.
The only way to end the harmful effects is to ban smoking in public places and urge parents to stop smoking around their children, the report concluded.
“It was kind of like an authoritative voice saying the debate is over,” Barkley said. “This is a serious health threat and has to be considered as such, beyond a shadow of a doubt.”
Closer to home, a recent Paducah study by local ear, nose and throat physician Dr. Shawn Jones showed that public places that allow smoking, even just in certain areas, have much higher levels of indoor air pollution than places where smoking is not allowed.
A recent study of Louisville by the University of Kentucky came to a similar conclusion, showing that overall air quality in Louisville bars, restaurants and entertainment spots hasn’t improved since the city’s partial smoking ban took effect in November, providing ammunition for those who want to see the law strengthened.
Nationally, Barkley said, hundreds of bans have been passed. Fourteen states have enacted smoke-free laws including restaurants and bars, her group said.
“This movement is a serious one,” Prokhorov said. “If anything, it’s going to increase.”
Joyce Grunder, 71, of Louisville, would like to see that. Her husband died of lung cancer and had developed chronic obstructive pulmonary disease after a pack-and-a-half-a-day smoking habit that lasted 40 years. Although she quit smoking more than a decade ago, she is on oxygen, often in the hospital and gets winded just doing chores around her house.
“Nobody, but nobody, wants to live this way. My life is nothing anymore…due to cigarettes,” Grunder said. “I don’t think people ought to be able to smoke anywhere.”
Industry speaks out
Even some in the tobacco industry concede smoking should be restricted in certain cases.
Even some in the tobacco industry concede smoking should be restricted in certain cases.
Bill Phelps, spokesman for Phillip Morris USA, said business owners should be allowed to determine their smoking policies. But he also said smoking should be banned at playgrounds, schools and day-care operations, and the government should require public places that permit smoking to post warnings about the dangers of secondhand smoke.
“We understand and agree people should be able to avoid secondhand smoke,” Phelps said.
Cathy Cunningham, owner of Cathy’s Bait & Beer and the lead plaintiff in the Frankfort case, said the ban caused her to lose customers.
“Our rights have been violated,” said Cunningham, a smoker. She said people who don’t want to be around smoke could avoid it by choosing to visit businesses that don’t allow smoking. “I have a beer joint,” she said, adding that most people expect smoking in such establishments.
Dean Wallace, executive director of the growers’ group Council for Burley Tobacco, called secondhand smoke “a tough issue.”
“We believe in the freedom of choice,” he said. “But if there’s evidence it’s hurting others, we do not want to jeopardize other people.”
He said changing sentiments on smoking have exacted a price: Reduced demand for cigarettes has affected growers and led to the loss of family farms. There are 73,000 acres of tobacco in Kentucky this year, compared with 240,000 in 1997.
Some said there’s another price — the convenience of the 28.7 percent of Kentucky adults who are smokers.
Public health officials said that in the long run, they hope smoke-free laws not only protect nonsmokers but also encourage smokers to quit. “It’s becoming more and more difficult to be a smoker,” Cobb said.
When it gets harder to smoke in Kentucky, health officials said, that says something about the nation as a whole. Lexington’s ban, in particular, has gained lots of national attention because it was enacted in a region where thousands of acres of tobacco are grown.
“This makes a statement,” said Dr. Adewale Troutman, director of the Louisville Metro Health Department. “It says even in a state like Kentucky, which has this very long history with tobacco, there’s a recognition that this is the direction we need to go.”
Reporter Laura Ungar can be reached at (502) 582-7190.
********************
Comment:
********************
Comment:
| Non-smokers who do not like smoke do have a choice, they can simply avoid restaurants and bars that allow smoking. Non-smokers are just as capable of finding smoke free venues as smokers are of finding smoker friendly places. Perhaps that would take some initiative from non smokers to simply look for the ones available in their area. If this does not meet with a smoke hater’s criteria, he/she should let the PRIVATE business owner know how he/she feels. Free market will determine that business’ choice. Signs posted outside private businesses, stating smoking policies are an excellent idea. Government mandated smoking bans are still in contradiction with our Constitution and Bill of Rights.
The Surgeon General’s report was an exercise in junk science, and the claims he made have already been widely rebutted by many reputable sources. http://www.illinoissmokersrights.com/sg_report_rebuttals_2006.html There is still significant debate over the real health effects of exposure to SHS and wide spread doubt as to the altruistic motives of those who promote its dangers. We do not have conclusive proof, though that doesn’t stop the “save the children” crowd from pretending we do. |
