Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

(Heads Up VA Business Owners) Virginia Senate passes indoor smoking ban
United Pro Smoker's Newsletter ^ | Feb. 14, 2006 | Rosalind S. Helderman

Posted on 02/15/2006 6:37:23 AM PST by SheLion

RICHMOND, Va. - The Virginia Senate voted Monday to ban smoking in restaurants and virtually all other public places, an extraordinary sign of cultural change in a state that is home to the worldwide headquarters of Philip Morris and whose agricultural economy has been rooted in tobacco farming for almost 400 years.

The bill is unlikely to survive review in the House of Delegates. Yet its passage on the floor of the Senate -- where smoking has never been formally banned and lawmakers lit up openly even until the late 1990s -- signaled mounting popular support for smoking restrictions.

The chamber narrowly approved the measure after a short but intense debate over consumer choice and the public health risks of secondhand smoke.

Senate Bill 648, sponsored by a Republican from Roanoke, would make smoking illegal in all public workplaces with the exception of certain tobacco stores and offices. The prohibition would extend to bars, restaurants and bowling alleys.

"This is not about whether I prefer or do not prefer the smell of smoke," said Sen. J. Brandon Bell II, the sponsor. "This is about public health. . . . The research has come forward over the years, and it's shown us that secondhand cigarette smoke is a very insidious health problem."

The American Cancer Society said the Senate vote is a dramatic victory in efforts to educate the public about the dangers of secondhand smoke.

"This shows that Virginia is ready to move its way to where the mainstream is on health issues," said Keenan Caldwell, director of government relations for the group's regional office. "People are starting to see, even in Virginia and other tobacco-growing states, that there is proven science about the harmful effects of secondhand smoke."

Smoking limits gain popularity
Caldwell said the shift has come as lawmakers realize the growing popularity of smoking limits, especially in voter-rich suburbs. Radio ads paid for by the cancer society and several other health groups have been playing in Richmond and Virginia Beach for two weeks, urging residents to contact lawmakers to express support.

"It makes you really pay attention," Bell said. "I may have reservations about increased regulations [on businesses], but this is something that people seem to want to be regulated."

If the Virginia bill were to become law, public areas in virtually the entire Washington region could soon be smoke-free. The D.C. Council approved a restaurant ban, which is now under review by Congress. Likewise, Montgomery and Prince George's counties have eliminated indoor smoking, and the Maryland legislature is contemplating extending the rules to workplaces statewide.

The Virginia ban would include banks, bars, educational facilities, health care facilities, hotel and motel lobbies, laundromats, public transportation, reception areas, retail food production and marketing establishments, retail services establishments, retail stores, shopping malls, sports arenas, theaters and waiting rooms. Hotels could also set aside no more than 25 percent of their rooms for smokers.

House Speaker William J. Howell (R-Stafford) promised to oppose the bill. Kevin Hall, spokesman for Gov. Timothy M. Kaine (D), said the governor also opposes a statewide ban. But, he said, "it's a little soon for a veto threat."

Philip Morris stands by:
Virginia is the nation's third top tobacco-growing state, and the leaf remains the state's second-most profitable crop. Sculpted wreaths of tobacco leaves ring the ceiling of the Senate chamber in the Capitol. And just a few minutes south of the statehouse, the Philip Morris Richmond plant produces about 700 million cigarettes every day. In the summer, the smell of processed tobacco often hangs in the air of the capital city.

For years in Richmond, a single word of opposition from Philip Morris lobbyists was enough to doom a proposed bill. But as in other states considering similar bans, the company this year took no public stand on the measure and declined to work against it. "We are currently reviewing the legislation," said Jennifer Golisch, a spokeswoman for the company.

Instead, opposition has been spearheaded by the Virginia Hospitality and Travel Association, which represents restaurants. The group lobbied vigorously against an early version of the bill that would have given localities the ability to regulate indoor smoking, complaining that the option would lead to a patchwork of regulations and pit businesses in neighboring counties against one another.

So Bell moved forward with the statewide smoking ban and picked up enough support to pass the bill, 21 to 18.

Those who voted against the measure said the marketplace is already pushing many restaurants to ban smoking, without government regulation.
They said businesses should have the right to cater to their customers.

"We're talking about a legal product that's licensed and sold in Virginia -- that's taxed and taxed and taxed," said Sen. Charles R. Hawkins (R-Pennsylvania), who represents tobacco growers. "Now we're saying we know better than people who operate their own businesses what they can do."


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; US: Virginia
KEYWORDS: anti; antismokers; augusta; bans; budget; butts; camel; caribou; chicago; cigar; cigarettes; cigarettetax; coffinnails; commerce; fda; forces; governor; individual; interstate; kaine; kool; lawmakers; lewiston; liberty; maine; mainesmokers; marlboro; msa; niconazis; osha; pallmall; pipe; pleasurepolice; portland; potsmokerslaughing; privateproperty; prosmoker; pufflist; quitsmoking; regulation; rico; rights; rinos; ryo; sales; senate; smokers; smoking; smokingbans; smokingnazis; taxes; tobacco; vageneralassembly; winston
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 201-215 next last


1 posted on 02/15/2006 6:37:29 AM PST by SheLion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: The Foolkiller; Just another Joe; Madame Dufarge; Cantiloper; metesky; kattracks; Judith Anne; ...
"Smokers Rights neither promotes smoking nor denies the health risks of smoking. Instead, we defend the interests of adults who choose to smoke; we promote freedom of choice for employers and proprietors who wish to accommodate smokers on their premises; and we speak out against those who want to discriminate against smokers or ban smoking completely. Last but not least, we promote greater courtesy and tolerance between smokers and non-smokers. "

DON'T LET THE HEADLINES FOOL YOU
Court throws out challenge to EPA findings on secondhand smoke - (December 2002) - The ruling was based on the highly technical grounds that since the EPA didn't actually enact any new regulations (it merely declared ETS to be a carcinogen without actually adopting any new rules), the court had no jurisdiction to rule in the matter.  This court ruling on the EPA report is NOT a stamp of approval for that report. Judge Osteen's criticisms of the EPA report are still completely valid and is accompanied by other experts.

The State of Virginia is  becoming another Anti-occupied prohibition casualty,
banning smoking from restaurants and bars!!!

IF YOU CAN'T SMOKE, DON'T GO! - KEEP YOUR WALLETS SHUT!
OVER 600,000 Virginians ARE SMOKERS!

Public property: That which is purchased and maintained by tax dollars for the benefit of all people.

Private property: That which is not purchased or maintained by tax dollars and is for the benefit of the property owner.

2 posted on 02/15/2006 6:38:05 AM PST by SheLion (Trying to make a life in the BLUE state of Maine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SheLion

OVER 600,000 Virginians ARE SMOKERS!

And OVER 10,500,000 are NON-SMOKERS!

I know I'll catch heat on this thread, but I don't have any problems with the banning of smoking in restaurants and bars. I welcome it. One local restaurant here in Richmond, the Strawberry Street Cafe, went non-smoking this past year, and their profits rose because people wanted a non-smoking restaurant.


3 posted on 02/15/2006 6:51:28 AM PST by VA_Gentleman (Bush's fault pings are tiresome.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: VA_Gentleman
I know I'll catch heat on this thread, but I don't have any problems with the banning of smoking in restaurants and bars. I welcome it. One local restaurant here in Richmond, the Strawberry Street Cafe, went non-smoking this past year, and their profits rose because people wanted a non-smoking restaurant.

That's wonderful.  These bans should be left up to the business owner and his patrons.  NOT the government.  We do not need more government intervention into our personal lives.

But it looks like the beautiful state of Virginia will be over taken by the anti-smokers that have swooped in and is about to choke the states private business economy.

Pity.

4 posted on 02/15/2006 6:57:35 AM PST by SheLion (Trying to make a life in the BLUE state of Maine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SheLion
Nationwide within 10 years. West Virginia or Kentucky will be the only hold out, so it will become federal and the fedgov will withhold highway funds from states not participating.

We've lost the fight. But at least they are coming after fat people next.
5 posted on 02/15/2006 6:58:28 AM PST by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SheLion
"The bill is unlikely to survive review in the House of Delegates. Yet its passage on the floor of the Senate "

It failed in the senate this time last year. Here's the break down

* YEAS--Bell (r), Blevins (r), Colgan (d), Devolites Davis(r), Edwards (d), Herring (d), Howell (d), Locke (d), Lucas (d), Marsh (d), Miller (d), Norment (r), Potts (r), Puckett (d), Puller (d), Quayle (r), Saslaw (d), Stolle (r), Ticer (d), Wagner (r), Whipple (d)--21.

NAYS--Chichester (r), Cuccinelli (r), Deeds (d), Hanger (r), Hawkins (r), Houck (d), Lambert (d), Martin (r), Newman (r), Obenshain (r), O'Brien (r), Rerras (r), Reynolds (d), Ruff (r), Stosch (r), Wampler (r), Watkins (r), Williams(r)--18.

RULE 36--McDougle(r)--1.

NOT VOTING--0.


Break down by party

r 8 (yes) 14 (no)
d 12 (yes) 4 (no)


* I got the stats from here But i had to add the R's and D's so expect a couple of typo's ;)
6 posted on 02/15/2006 7:04:37 AM PST by tfecw (It's for the children)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mysterio
Nationwide within 10 years. West Virginia or Kentucky will be the only hold out, so it will become federal and the fedgov will withhold highway funds from states not participating.

We've lost the fight. But at least they are coming after fat people next.

We haven't lost the war yet though.

If smokers stop going out to private businesses that can no longer accommodate them, and if smokers started rolling their own cigarettes which is quite legal.  (All cities and towns have a Smoke Shop for the supplies), then the lawmakers WILL have to go after someone else to make up for all the lost revenue that the smokers have dumped into the economy all these years.  The states are going to lose big time!

And believe me, they will go after someone else.  Like you said:  overweight people are already on the chopping block.


7 posted on 02/15/2006 7:07:35 AM PST by SheLion (Trying to make a life in the BLUE state of Maine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: tfecw
"The bill is unlikely to survive review in the House of Delegates. Yet its passage on the floor of the Senate "

It failed in the senate this time last year. Here's the break down:

Thank you!  I didn't have time to look this part up! :)

8 posted on 02/15/2006 7:11:45 AM PST by SheLion (Trying to make a life in the BLUE state of Maine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SheLion
"But it looks like the beautiful state of Virginia will be over taken by the anti-smokers that have swooped in and is about to choke the states private business economy"

Hey, government knows best don't you know. How can you go wrong when a republican is sponsoring the bill. /disgust
9 posted on 02/15/2006 7:12:52 AM PST by tfecw (It's for the children)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: VA_Gentleman

As long as it is voluntary, it's cool with me. But someone wants to start a cigar bar, they should be allowed to do so.


10 posted on 02/15/2006 7:13:09 AM PST by AppyPappy (If you aren't part of the solution, there is good money to be made prolonging the problem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SheLion
Sunday night I was watching on the history channel a show titled "Hitlers technology". In one sequence they had medical research done by the Nazi's. The campaigne and actions that they used as far as smoking laws and such are no different than what we are seeing now.

History repeating itself. Too bad that the same technique tying the Nazi movement in to current rabid hysteria could not be used to expose exactly what this crap is. PEOPLE/Property control.
11 posted on 02/15/2006 7:13:10 AM PST by beltfed308 (Cloth or link. Happiness is a perfect trunnion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VA_Gentleman

"One local restaurant here in Richmond, the Strawberry Street Cafe, went non-smoking this past year, and their profits rose because people wanted a non-smoking restaurant."

As a smoker, I would still frequent a non-smoking eating establishment. I go in, order, eat and leave. With less people hanging around after a meal smoking, table turnover is greater and more meals are sold. Thus, higher profits. Fair enough, good business move.

That said, I will NEVER go to a non-smoking drinking establishment. The problem lies in restaurant/bars. Those restaurants that depend on a good bar income will feel a hit. Bars are going to be hit hard. If some enterprizing person wants to open some non-smoking bars, more power to them. If there is a market that needs filling, fill it! That's how these issues should be solved in a capitalist society, not by government, IMO.


12 posted on 02/15/2006 7:15:34 AM PST by L98Fiero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: tfecw
Hey, government knows best don't you know. How can you go wrong when a republican is sponsoring the bill. /disgust

I don't know what disgusts me more........the forced smoking bans or a damn RINO that promotes them.

If the lawmaker can't be trusted to stand up for 25-30% of his constituents, then how can he ever be trusted with anything else?  If he screws some, he will screw them all!

13 posted on 02/15/2006 7:19:48 AM PST by SheLion (Trying to make a life in the BLUE state of Maine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: L98Fiero
I agree that government shouldn't force a business to go non-smoking; perhaps they could incent restaurants to go non-smoking through tax cuts.

Go to California some time. It's amazing to get home after a night at the bars and not smell like an ash tray. Unless you've been out there to experience it, you don't realize how nice it is.
14 posted on 02/15/2006 7:21:49 AM PST by VA_Gentleman (Bush's fault pings are tiresome.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: beltfed308
Sunday night I was watching on the history channel a show titled "Hitlers technology". In one sequence they had medical research done by the Nazi's. The campaigne and actions that they used as far as smoking laws and such are no different than what we are seeing now.

History repeating itself. Too bad that the same technique tying the Nazi movement in to current rabid hysteria could not be used to expose exactly what this crap is. PEOPLE/Property control.

I was given heads up on that Hitler documentary.  But I didn't have the stomach to watch it.  And yes, the forced smoking bans ARE shades of Germany past.

Scares me to death to think of what the lawmakers will/who they will go after next.  Doesn't it you?



15 posted on 02/15/2006 7:22:34 AM PST by SheLion (Trying to make a life in the BLUE state of Maine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: VA_Gentleman
"I agree that government shouldn't force a business to go non-smoking; perhaps they could incent restaurants to go non-smoking through tax cuts."

You are contradicting yourself. Perhaps we can let the market entice restaurants and keep the government's nose out of private affairs. As you pointed out it, it worked out well for this restaurant in Richmond

"Go to California some time. It's amazing to get home after a night at the bars and not smell like an ash tray. Unless you've been out there to experience it, you don't realize how nice it is."

Start your own bar and make it non smoking. No need to go to CA or ask the VA government to trounce private business rights.
16 posted on 02/15/2006 7:26:32 AM PST by tfecw (It's for the children)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: VA_Gentleman

Then explain why so many restaurants go belly up because people can't smoke there? If you don't like smoking that is well and good, but can't you please just avoid restaurants that allow smoking?


17 posted on 02/15/2006 7:30:44 AM PST by Sunshine Sister
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SheLion

It's not a pity at all the way I see it! Then anti smokers are going to be paying a LOT more in taxes to make up what the smokers pay. I'm lovin' it. I can't wait to hear all the complaints from non-smoking tax payers. What excuse to complain do you think they will use?


18 posted on 02/15/2006 7:32:51 AM PST by Sunshine Sister
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: VA_Gentleman; L98Fiero
I agree that government shouldn't force a business to go non-smoking; perhaps they could incent restaurants to go non-smoking through tax cuts.

Go to California some time. It's amazing to get home after a night at the bars and not smell like an ash tray. Unless you've been out there to experience it, you don't realize how nice it is.

Think about this:

You'll be next on something you like that is legal...  you wear cologne?  Packing a few extra pounds?  Enjoy a drink now and then?  Tag...  you're it.  You are next.

19 posted on 02/15/2006 7:35:18 AM PST by SheLion (Trying to make a life in the BLUE state of Maine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: VA_Gentleman

Go to California some time. It's amazing to get home after a night at the bars and not smell like an ash tray. Unless you've been out there to experience it, you don't realize how nice it is.

CALIFORNIA: 5-year-old ban in bars leaves owners, customers fuming

5 January 2003

"I think if the government helps me one more time I'll be out of business," Newlove said as most of his customers nodded in agreement.

article here

California Smokers Use Prohibition Tactics to Get Around Ban

While cops try to sniff out the worst offenders, in many cases they're butting up against organized opposition. Bartender phone trees warn each other of impending busts, powerful fans blow away tell-tale scents of "smokin' in the boys room" and tin cans double as ashtrays in case of an unexpected visit by police.

click here

20 posted on 02/15/2006 7:41:33 AM PST by SheLion (Trying to make a life in the BLUE state of Maine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 201-215 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson