News
Illinois says ‘Yes’ to smoking ban
Looking for a print version?
Simply use your browser’s ‘Print’ command and a printer-friendly document will be generated automatically.
Also by Keegan Kyle:
- Bringing it all together (December 13, 2007)
- Recruiting isn't easy on campus (December 7, 2007)
- Doyle set to sign off on ethics (February 2, 2007)
- Volunteerism on the road (October 19, 2007)
- Down and dirty on campus sanitation (October 11, 2007)
Sharing tools:
E-mail this article:
Advocates for a statewide smoking ban in all public workplaces said Wisconsin should be inspired by the regulation expected to pass in its neighbor to the south, Illinois.
The Illinois Legislature approved a complete smoking ban on most workplaces Tuesday — including taverns and restaurants — and the governor has said he eagerly looks forward to signing the bill.
Maureen Busalacchi, executive director of Smoke Free Wisconsin, said the Illinois bill, and similar efforts in Minnesota, should place additional pressure on legislators to pass Wisconsin's bill. Specifically, she said tourism may play a larger role now.
"If they have smoke-free (workplaces) in their own state, they'll want it here," Busalacchi said. "I sure hope it's an inspiration (to legislators)."
Smoke Free Wisconsin held its annual Tobacco Control and Prevention Conference in Madison this week, and some of the 300 participants headed to the Capitol Wednesday to meet with legislators.
Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle opened for the conference, reinvigorating support for his $1.25 tax increase on cigarettes proposed in the state budget and his call for a statewide smoking ban.
Earlier this year, Senate Pres. Fred Risser, D-Madison, answered the governor's call and re-introduced his complete statewide smoking ban legislation. The ban has met opposition, as some legislators and interest groups have called for an exemption for taverns.
The Illinois smoking ban, though it includes taverns, does provide exemptions for tobacco stores, senior citizen homes and hotels.
Mike Prentiss, a spokesperson for Senate Minority Leader Scott Fitzgerald, R-Juneau, said support for a complete ban in Illinois would have limited impact on Wisconsin lawmakers.
"This bill will be determined by individual legislators and their views," Prentiss said. "It might have a marginal effect on those districts boarding Illinois, … but (it is) not a major factor."
Prentiss said he thinks the Democrat-controlled Senate does not have enough supporters to pass a complete smoking ban and said the tavern exemption is more likely.
Carla Vigue, a spokesperson for Doyle, said Illinois' comprehensive ban — which would be the 19th in the country — is another example of "the way things are going to go."
"The governor has said many times a statewide smoking ban is important to the health of Wisconsin," Vigue said.
11 Comments | Leave a comment
Leave a comment
Herald Blogs
The Beat Goes On
Brother Ali makes an ‘Exclusive’ stop
Muckrakers
Report: Barrett to make decision by the end of the week
Extra Points
Top Classified Ads (view all)
HOUSES FOR Fall 2010. All houses are on W Dayton or N Bassett. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, or 8 bedrooms. All have parking. madisoncampusrentals.com
If the Tavern League doesn’t buy their way out of this one, I hate to say it, but I think our democracy is doomed. - Germain Q. Stemme
For once im on Doyles side on the smoking ban. I hate smokers!!! scrubs…
i really do love going to taverns here. i avoid going to taverns outside of Madison because of the smoking. it’s disgusting!
I think the Wisconsin Legislature should pass a bill requiring Wisconsin citizens to only eat 2,200 calories a day, this way the high health care cost can finally begin to go down. Please government save me from myself! - Germain E. Stemme
There is really no such thing as ‘smokers rights’. Smokers have the same rights as the rest of us. We all have rights. Our behaviors are rights when they do not interfere with other’s rights. Smoking in public is not a right. When a smoker smokes in public he exposes others to a substance that they may not want to be exposed to. This is why we have a government that regulates our behaviors so that they do not unreasonably interfear with the rights of others. There are many behaviors that we cannot do in public but can do in private. Think about it. As a non-smoker I have had to walk through clouds of smoke when smokers congregated around the entrance of a non-smoking building to smoke. These smokers were more concerned with their comfort of standing by the door in the shade than with my rights not to breath or have my clothing smell like their tobacco. This is just one of many examples. Smokers are addicts. When you try to regulate or change an addicts behavior you will meet resistance, denial and unreasonable logic.
Its ILL to be from Illinois!
I’m in the Dells for the weekend and there are no smoke-free bars to go to! I can’t wait for WI to go 100% smoke-free!
Everyone has their rights, and regulating where someone chooses to smoke, in areas where smoking has been a legal endeavor in indoor public places, we need to realize that smoking is smoking. If you do not want to be exposed to it, then don’t put yourself in the position where you are exposed to it. I was born into a family of smokers, and it doesn’t bother me. However, if it does bother you, maybe you should relocate yourself to somewhere you’d be more comfortable. To regulate where someone chooses to smoke is the same thing as exposing people who do not smoke to tobacco smoke.
It’s about time we don’t HAVE to be subjected to others smoke to go out and have a drink or shoot a game of pool.
smoking sucks
Being a non-smoker from Illinois who goes to bars on a regular basis, here is an interesting observation that I have noticed since our ban went into effect. There are certainly fewer people in the bar we go to and fewer staying for the duration of the evening.
I mentioned this to one of the bartenders at our place and she said, “what is happening is that people are coming in for a drink or two then move on to another place, these patrons smoke in their cars in-between bars.” (The Illinois ban went into effect in January) Rather then stand outside, they go to their cars.
So, now what we really have are people on the roads going from place to place, drinking at each place and getting in their cars to drive to the next to drink more. Seems like an increase in drivers that have been drinking on the roads is much worse then some second hand smoke one might be exposed to once or twice a week. Unexpected consequence, or ban drinking too? Warmer weather has not seemed to have changed this pattern of bar hopping.