Poll shows push for 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 Beth Mueller:
- The Age of the Volunteer (January 22, 2009)
- Yes, he can? (January 20, 2009)
- University committee to see new leadership (December 1, 2008)
- Vendors on Frances may get boot (October 30, 2008)
by Beth Mueller
Wednesday, April 9, 2008 01:44
More than two-thirds of Wisconsin voters are fired up for a statewide smoking ban, and more people support the change now than last year, according to a poll released Tuesday.
The survey showed 69 percent would favor a law prohibiting smoking across the state in “most indoor public places, including all workplaces, public buildings, offices, restaurants and bars.” That number is up 5 percent from last year’s survey.
The proposed law, which drew heavy debate in the state Legislature this session but never reached resolution, drew consistent support, averaging 65 percent in favor in most areas of Wisconsin. In the Madison and South Central Wisconsin region, where local bans like those in Madison and Fitchburg have already taken effect, support jumped to 85 percent of respondents.
“I think it shows that the public is moving on this issue, and they’re moving in the direction that they want Wisconsin to be smoke free,” said Maureen Busalacchi, executive director of Smoke Free Wisconsin. “I think people are experiencing in their travels what it’s like to be smoke free. … Half the country is covered by smoke free laws now.”
Busalacchi blamed the proposal’s lack of progress in the Legislature on special interests like the Tavern League, which has staunchly opposed the ban.
“We firmly believe the votes are in the Legislature, and if it got to the floor it would go through,” Busalacchi said. “We’re hoping [the results] will embolden local officials.”
Among the 21 percent of respondents who said they were current or occasional smokers, 45 percent favored the law and 49 percent opposed it. Among former smokers, 67 percent were in favor and 32 percent in opposition.
“I think they’re finding is that all they really have to do is step outside. This isn’t a law set up to make their lives difficult, and I think they’re finding it’s really not that hard,” Busalacchi said of current smokers. “We’ve found that smokers do understand that secondhand smoke is a moderate to serious health hazard, and they’re trying not to harm other people.”
The poll also revealed that preferences on the ban generally don’t vary between Democrats and Republicans, but there is a gender split: 79 percent of women favor the smoking ban compared to 58 percent of men.
The poll was sponsored by a variety of organizations pushing for the ban but conducted by one self-proclaimed left-leaning poll agency and one self-proclaimed right-leaning poll agency.
These new numbers from the pro-smoking ban camp come less than a week after the Tavern League lauded the results of another study that showed fatal accidents involving alcohol increased in ban areas and along their borders after smoking bans are enacted.
Pete Madland, executive director of the Tavern League, did not return requests for comment as of press time Tuesday.
Thirty-four Wisconsin communities have some sort of ordinance banning smoking, while Madison, Appleton, Shorewood, Shorewood Hills, Eau Claire and Marshfield have comprehensive workplace smoking bans. A plan is also in the works in Middleton’s City Council.
Feedback
Anonymous (April 9, 2008 @ 6:57am):
Where is this poll? How many were polled? Where did the poll take place?
If these people are so certain that the majority of people in Wisconsin want a ban, we should be able to see the particulars.
Anonymous (April 9, 2008 @ 3:53pm):
Smoking is an unhealthy, smelly addiction with absolutely no redeeming features.
It should be taxed out of existance.
mandy vincent (April 9, 2008 @ 5:25pm):
If it is anything like the the Poll done in the UK it will be a lie. We are losing so many pubs and bingo venues because of the smoking ban. Have a choice and let the buisness owner decide. It is they who lose out.
The antis were never bannned from opening their own venues, so why don't they?
freedom2choose.org for tolerant non-smokers and smokers alike who think these bans are wrong! please join us
Bill Hannegan (April 10, 2008 @ 2:04am):
The best way to avoid smoking ban economic harm is to keep the decision to ban smoking in any bar the choice of the owner of that bar, not the government. People forget that the bar owner can ban smoking in his establishment any time he likes, according to his own desires, or in response to the demands of customers or employees, for all or part of the time the business is open. The overwhelming majority of bar owners currently choose to allow smoking in their establishments and want to keep that freedom to allow smoking. The dangers of secondhand smoke in bars and restaurants would have to be both very large and established beyond a reasonable doubt for the government to justly override the decision of the bar owner to allow the use of a legal product by informed adults on his property and so threaten his business.
Any bar can hugely reduce the secondhand smoke exposure of both its patrons and employees by installing air filtration machines. These affordable and readily available machines not only remove tobacco smoke, but also all other toxins, pathogens and irritants from bar air, including viruses, bacteria, chemicals, pollen, dust, mold, fungi and, most importantly, radon decay products, which the EPA claims causes 21,000 lung cancer deaths per year, seven times more than secondhand smoke is reputed to cause. I believe air filtration constitutes the best solution to the secondhand smoke problem in bars.
Bill Thompson (May 18, 2008 @ 5:16pm):
I think we should just throw the doors wide open and let all the businesses regulate themselves: let the ignorant business owners decide how many rats can run through the kitchen, how much salmonella can be in the food and how many cockroaches can infest the dining area! Meanwhile, toxic tobacco smoke kills 65,000 INNOCENT Americans every year and must be banned everywhere, indoors and out. Only the tobacco pushers and their "friends" (mouthpieces) are still arguing this issue of life and breath. Then, the tobacco drug must be banned. It's not legal; it's never been legal to poison people, no matter how slowly you do it!
Anonymous (May 18, 2008 @ 5:32pm):
Bill Hannegan, you must be getting your lies and erroneous information from the tobacco pushers! Tobacco smoke kills more than 60,000 people in this country each year, far more than "radon" or anything else. (Incidentally, tobacco smoke CONTAINS radon as one of its 4,500 toxic and poisonous chemicals). The "ventilation systems" you mention are really nothing more than fans that do practically nothing. Even ASHRAE (the experts on air quality) now certify that nothing can deal effectively with tobacco smoke except a complete and total ban. Smokers are down to about 10-12% of Americans. This addicted minority suffers from the mental illness that is tobacco use. Are you one of them?
M Bakken (May 29, 2008 @ 12:02am):
In Kalamazoo Michigan there is a poll going on as I write this. So far the results are:
Would you like to see a workplace smoking ban in Michigan?
Yes, but with some exemptions
2%
Yes, but with no exemptions
18%
I don't know
2%
No, leave it up to business owners
76%
Created on May 28, 2008 Total Votes: 38
Seems like a poll that tells the true story regarding what real people want!
Bill Thompson, nowhere can you find even one name of anyone killed by second-hand smoke. That is a scare tactic and is totally false. If you take the time to find a true study not paid for by the big pharmacuetical standing to gain billions of dollars from their smoking cessation products, yes tobacco is their competition, you'll find all of their studies have been proven false.
The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation's website will tell you they are going after alcohol and obesity next. There is a bill in the Mississippi legislature banning restaurants from serving anyone appearing obese. This is where allowing smoking bans is going to lead, taking away liberty and freedom. The nazi's tried to ban smoking, is this what you really want?
C N (August 11, 2008 @ 2:12pm):
Hmmmm, don't believe that second hand smoke is dangerous huh? Ever read the British Journal of Medicine, American Journal of Medicine, American Journal of Public Health? I could go on and on. These are not "tabloid" publications, don't care about ratings, and publish the scientific data weather it is positive to their, as you would probably term, "cause", or not. Do a bit of research on Scotland or France or any of the other multitude of states who have gone smoke free in the workplace. Not the blogs, personal web sites or web opinions, but the actual scientific data.
Add a comment
We welcome your thoughts, but please keep your feedback thoughtful, on-topic and respectful. Offensive language, personal attacks, or irrelevant comments may be deleted.
Login...
Not registered? Sign up now.
It's quick, free, and the email address you provide will not be sold or solicited.
...or Post Your Comment Anonymously
Herald Blogs
The Beat Goes On
Muckrakers
The Passion of C-FACT, or ‘What Happens When You Lose Your Papers’
Extra Points
Football recruiting: Two under-the-radar prospects commit
Simply Sumptuous
Development Weblog
Top Classified Ads (view all)
Place your classified ad online and have it show up here. Your ad will hit thousands of viewers a day!
DON'T READ ME! Too late. If you're reading this, guess how many other people are reading it. See... advertising in The Badger Herald does work!


