Posts
It is great to hear that a compromise has been reached on the smoking ban and it has passed the Iowa House and Iowa Senate. I think Iowa's Legislators need to be thanked for passing this law, especially Rep. Tyler Olson for pushing the issue in the House.The bill is a compromise between the total ban favored by the Senate and the exception-laden version favored by the House.
The bill bans smoking in restaurants and bars, but includes a few exemptions.
The House passed the bill 54-45 after less than an hour of debate, sending it to the Senate a few minutes after noon. The Senate began debate a few hours later and passed the measure, 28-22.
Culver indicated he would sign the bill, which would take effect on July 1.
Iowans will still be able to smoke in the gambling areas of casinos, although smoke would be prohibited in casino restaurants, gift shops, bars and employee areas.This bill means that 99.9 percent of Iowa’s public places and 99.9 percent of Iowa’s work force would be protected from second hand smoke.They can smoke in the outdoor areas of bars, the outdoors areas of county fairs and the State Fair except the grandstands, in limousines and in retail tobacco stores.
Other exemptions are designated areas of correctional facilities, the state veterans home in Marshalltown and Iowa National Guard facilities.
One of the arguments that opponents of the bill say is that the bill will hurt business at bars and restaurants. I disagree. There are two restaurants that I love to eat at in town, but rarely would go to because of the smoke.
15 comments:
I like how they're all patting themselves on the back for their bipartisan "compromise". Giving casinos a smoke break is not a compromise, it's favoritism. It must be hard having an addiction to gambling revenues.
I'll check the actual bill but one red flag I noticed was the excemption for "retail tobacco stores". Considering a good many bars also sell cigarettes that might be a loophole to drive a truck through.
From the bill...
"Retail tobacco store" means a retail store utilized primarily for the sale of tobacco products and accessories and in which the sale of other products is incidental to the sale of tobacco products.
I can see the possibility for some interesting litigation about whether a "retail tobacco store" that incidentally also has a liqour license will be exempt. The argument could easily run that the purpose of the "smoking bar" is to be able to sell and comsume tobacco which is prohibited elsewhere.
People wake up!!!China owns us.Do you see our lawmakers taking away more of our freedoms everyday.Also stealing more of our money like c teck which was supposed to help us.These people are not helping us!!!
The Peoples Republic of Iowa is open.
Is the World health Organization through HIA Industry partnerships, loaning its stamp of approval to cruelty and intolerance? There are consequences to consider, not the least of which is the fact Philip Morris stock values have tripled in the past eight years as a direct result of a huge shift in responsibilities.
Anti smoking, Anti fat and Anti alcohol in their current renditions are progressing perilously close to the anti witch movement in Salem. One has to keep in mind Hitler was a staunch paternalist with all the deceptive packaging removed, and what that popular attitude empowered in what he would eventually do. I repeat; there are consequences to consider, not the least of which is the fact Philip Morris stock values have tripled in the past eight years as a direct result of a huge shift in responsibilities.
We often hear the phrases "measures which reduce tobacco use", “Those who wish to harm children” and “defenders of the Tobacco industry” as empowerment spin to legitimize smoking bans, all in a stated effort to “Help smokers to quit”
It is highly offensive and blatantly opportunistic to state; anyone who wishes to defend their own freedom. or in fact defending their own personal economy, by challenging the efforts of Paternalist Lobby groups, to inflate the value and cost of a product they know a smoker will use every day, Is a promoter of the Tobacco industry, who are doing quite well by their silence, considering.
If the truth is recognized Public Health is actually the true defender of the Tobacco Industry’s interests.
They have;
-Reduced the costs of advertising and research,
- Reduced the cost of the raw tobacco through "no safe cigarette" campaigns.
-Eliminated the costs of litigation and all responsibility.
-Increased the value of the product through deals like the MSA agreement.
-Surrendered them stability long term; in both market share and cash flow analysis.
Most significantly they have shifted the blame for costs to society associated to smoking, from the industry to the consumer, who gets to not only pay double those claimed costs, but gets to wear the Yellow Star in community perspectives, as a result of what appear to be Public Health efforts to defend Tobacco Industry interests.
All the while violent confrontations which were once rare, in resolving disputes concerning smoking are increasing, at an alarming rate within communities.
As for the statement "measures which reduce tobacco use"; in theory the denormalizing strategies of making smokers “not normal”, might be believed to reduce tobacco use, however even a short term analysis indicates this has not been the case. The recent and as yet unexplained increases we see in young people starting to smoke is alarming. Public Health statements in the media grow more outrageous and demanding by the day, eventually [if not already] young people will be starting to smoke, just to spite the anti freedom attitude associated with these regressive and paternalistic campaigns. Just like the last time prohibition was deemed a noble human experiment.
Can anyone imagine the coercive value of a single cigarette for those confined inside a prison or a mental institution, where smoking is banned? What consequences from human rights violations in torturing prisoners, will we all have to bear eventually?
If tobacco “medical dependency” or “addiction” is a reality, it constitutes a disability. Dehumanization through public health is then, actually seen as a criminal act, which is an activity which could eventually require punishment, at a huge cost to society when compensation is eventually assessed and paid.
How does anyone moralize punishing an addiction, in order to force compliance to a "prohibitionist normality"?
"Helping someone to quit" is nothing more than a convenient lie, to quell the discomfort of conscience. Medical treatments which demand punishment, are not "tough love” or in any way justifiable, they are simply the stepping stones to legitimize the intolerant few among us.
Those very individuals who society used to believe were “not normal"
We can't blame the media entirely, when someone announces a long term education program to purchase hundreds of millions in advertising to warn of the "dangers of second hand smoke" in order to put a lot of pressure on smokers to "help them to quit". Ad agencies would understandably be quite enthused in competing for those large advertising contracts and want to put their best opinions forward, to suit the needs of the client.
What is truly alarming is the fact the increased violence, which is resulting from smokers wearing the Yellow Star of de-normalization, is being played down in the media, apparently in order to keep the monetary drive alive.
"Erosion of Civil Liberties is the genesis of Genocide."
Elizabeth Kirkley Best PHD; Et Al Author of the Shoa education project.
Quite frankly, I don't care what the politics of this is. When I was 21 a date would take me in Dubuque to a bar for a drink. I would sneeze, and cough and my nose would drip. I couldn't talk. It was embarrassing and no matter how hard I tried I couldn't stop the discomfort. It took me awhile then to figure it out. When the smoking ban went through in Colorado I danced in a local bar and I COULD BREATH! That is the bottom line. We have enough air pollution without adding cigarettes to the mix.
This is one more example of big government taking over the lives of individuals.
The next thing you know, you will have to lace your shoes from the left to the right, all because we are headed toward a communist nation.
The constitution is null and void in this society.
The reason behind the smoking ban is harmful second hand smoke. It has nothing to do with big government taking over the lives of individuals. It is about providing a healthy environment for citizens. If you want to smoke go ahead. Just do it in your car, your house, your garage, your basement, but just because I want to go out to dinner, I shouldn't have to have a side order of lung cancer.
That's funny, because in the county were I live radon gas kills more non smokers than anything else.
I am truly sickened by this passing! More and more rights are being taken away from the American citizens. If you don't like the smoke, patronize another location. Not another location?!? Well then, there's a great business opportunity knocking at your door. I am not a smoker and personally can't stand the smell of it. HOWEVER, I am a consumer and I choose not to spend my money at a location that allows smoking and make my purchases in a smoke-free environment. That is freedom. Another thing, if the issue is really second hand smoke, then why don't we pass a law that makes them all smoke in a bar or two of choice, instead of on the sidewalk where pedestrians will be present, maybe even a child or two!
What about the seat belt law?? I absolutely hate it. Its an invasion of privacy. This is a law that affects our personal choices. We ought to be able to make the choice whether to wear one or not. However, the gist of the law is that seat belt non usage affects other people. Smoking usage in enclosed spaces affects other people. Making smokers smoke outside is a good idea - at least there is a lot of air and open space.
I'm curious if anyone can say conclusively whether the smoking ban includes Farmers' Markets or not. Also, if it doesn't, any stories of success at engaging the already contentious question at a retail location would be appreciated.
Chantix is a fairly new drug designed to help people quit smoking. It also has the ability to help people with other addictions such as alcoholism. Chantix works by targeting nicotinic acetylcholine receptors in the brain. http://www.chantixhome.com/
Smoking can hook you because cigarettes contain nicotine which is highly addictive. But being hooked is not an excuse why you cannot quit smoking. Smoking has been proven by several researches to be great threat to one's health that is why there is no reason why one who is already hooked to it should not quit smoking. http://www.besthealthmed.com/quit_smoking.html
Post a Comment