Advertisement

Kansas legislature

Kansas Legislature

Statewide smoking ban passes out of committee

But opt-out provision lets counties decide otherwise

January 31, 2007

Advertisement

— A watered-down ban on smoking in indoor public places hobbled out of a Senate committee today.

The measure was sent by the Judiciary Committee to the full Senate with no recommendation as to whether it should pass or fail.

The bill would impose a statewide smoking ban but allow county commissioners to opt out of the prohibition. If they do, voters would then have the ability to overturn that decision.

Cities, such as Lawrence, which already have indoor smoking bans, would not be affected if the county decided to opt out of the proposal.

Originally, Senate Bill 37 simply banned smoking in workplaces, bars, restaurants and other indoor areas.

But Sen. Derek Schmidt, R-Independence, said his provision to allow counties to opt out and then voters to decide the issue would give the public more time to consider the issue.

Public health groups, however, supported a more comprehensive prohibition.

But Sen. Phil Journey, R-Haysville, said Schmidt's approach was more politically palpable.

"Too many people in this building don't understand that a half loaf is better than none," Journey said.

Comments

hipper_than_hip 7 years, 7 months ago

Opt-out sounds more like a cop-out.

0

KS 7 years, 7 months ago

Opt-out is a cop-out, but more than that, the voters of Lawrence would not be able to decide. Done deal here.

0

budwhysir 7 years, 7 months ago

A watered down plan??? OPT out????

Politicaly speaking, I am not sure how this helps with our affordable housing solution or how it even addresses the new rec center they are thinking about.

0

budwhysir 7 years, 7 months ago

If they realy wanted to ban smoking, wouldnt they just make it illegal for stores to sell smoking products???

So they want it to be legal to buy smokes, for tax collection purposes, but they want it to be illegal for you to smoke, for revenue collections

0

Bruce Bertsch 7 years, 7 months ago

No, they simply want you to smoke in your own home so that you don't pollute the air of those around you. Your decision to commit a slow suicide should not affect me.

0

Bruce Bertsch 7 years, 7 months ago

No, they simply want you to smoke in your own home so that you don't pollute the air of those around you. Your decision to commit a slow suicide should not affect me.

0

budwhysir 7 years, 7 months ago

Actualy Im not a smoker, I just see alot of politics in this matter

0

SettingTheRecordStraight 7 years, 7 months ago

I hate, hate, hate cigarette smoke.

What I hate even more is government telling private enterprise what they can and can't do in the name of protecting me.

0

drederick_tatum 7 years, 7 months ago

Why don't all these anti-tobacco groups like "The Truth" ever tell the WHOLE truth..... like how many people per year die from cannabis? Or better yet, all the people EVER that have been killed simply by smoking too much weed?

For every new smoking ban they invent they should remove a toking ban as well, because the statistics are just as obvious.

0

budwhysir 7 years, 7 months ago

I say we need to raise the taxes to do a feasability study on this matter prior to moving forward

0

davisnin 7 years, 7 months ago

Or maybe how many people in their statistics were just old or fat. If you smoke and get heart disease or emphysema, it was caused by smoking. Even if everyone in your family drops dead of a heart attack at 36 and you get one at 59 and you smoke and they didn't... it was the smoking. Hit by a car and smoke? It was the smoking.

Give up your freedom (and more so that of others) for "safety" people... hmm, there's some saying about that

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.