The Virginian-Pilot
©
RICHMOND
A statewide ban on smoking in most restaurants and bars was watered down and approved by the House of Delegates on Monday.
A series of amendments supported by Republicans and rural Democrats left the measure well short of its original aim to outlaw smoking in all eateries except those that build enclosed areas with separate ventilation systems for puffers.
Saying the measure would force many small restaurant and bar owners out of business, the House erased the separate ventilation requirement and voted to permit smoking in any room separated from the rest of the establishment by a door.
The House also approved amendments that:
- Allow smoking in any establishment during hours they do not admit minors.
- Allow smoking when an entire restaurant has been rented for a private reception - if the owner is willing.
- Defer the start date for the proposed ban three months, to January 1, 2010.
The American Lung Association, which last week gave a nod to the smoking ban, vowed to oppose the House amendments.
"They gutted the bill," said David DeBiasi, a lobbyist for the association. "This bill is a joke now."
Lawmakers who supported the original legislation, while disappointed with the House action, predicted SB1105 still would decrease the number of restaurants that allows smoking.
"It's still a good bill," said Del. John Cosgrove, R -Chesapeake.
The House passed the amended measure on a 59-39 vote. The bill now goes to the Senate, which favors tough anti-smoking bans.
Sen. Ralph Northam, D-Norfolk, who authored the Senate bill, said the House version is unacceptable.
"People would like a bill that would let them go into a restaurant as a patron or an employee and not be subjected to second-hand smoke," Northam said. "The House bill does away with all of that."
The House has long been hostile to smoking bans. Republicans have argued that government should allow restaurant owners to decide whether it is in their business interest to allow patrons to light up.
Many rural lawmakers represent tobacco-growing areas. Richmond is home to the headquarters of Philip Morris USA - the nation's largest cigarette maker - and its corporate parent, Altria.
Outright smoking bans have been approved by the Senate in each of the past two years and killed without a recorded vote by a six-member House subcommittee.
This year's bill was the product of a major compromise between Gov. Timothy M. Kaine, a Democrat who favored an outright ban, and Speaker William Howell, a Republican who had opposed government intervention.
Several Republican delegates said it was impressive that any smoking ban, no matter its imperfections, passed the House.
"This is a compromise issue, and we got a lot of support for it," Cosgrove said.
Kaine issued a guarded statement on the House action.
"The governor is glad the bill is moving forward, though the amendments run counter to the agreement that was made by the leadership," said Gordon Hickey, Kaine's press secretary. "We will continue to work on the issue."
The major amendments diluting the bill were offered by Del. Terry Kilgore, R-Scott. He cited reports indicating 68 percent of Virginia restaurants are smoke free and polls indicating 75 percent of Virginians favor bans.
"The market is working without government getting involved," Kilgore said.
Kilgore said costs of either banning smoking and possibly losing customers or building separate rooms and ventilation systems would be prohibitive to restaurant owners.
"We're in a recession, and people are having a hard time hanging on," Kilgore said. "I'm afraid a lot of the small ma-and-pa restaurants will go out of business."
Opponents of the change s said Kilgore's amendments would not protect non-smoking Virginians or restaurant employees from exposure to second-hand smoke.
"In this economy, where people are losing jobs left and right, one of the few options left to people is restaurant work," said Del. Robert Hull, D-Fairfax. "It's not fair in this economy to make people chose between a job to support themselves and their families, and their health."
Warren Fiske, (804) 697-1565, warren.fiske@pilotonline.com

Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Twitter
Google
Yahoo

smokers
this bill's a joke and it's on us for voting for this guy
Get Rid of the Clouds (By Getting Rid of the Bans!)
"Even if I choose to eat at smoke free restaurants only… I still have to walk through those awful clouds of toxic vapor"
Halie, fight the ban you will GET RID of the clouds outside your smoke-banned restaurants. Smokers will be going to the smoking-allowed restaurants and smoking inside them.
The "clouds” ONLY become a problem after bans. I talked about this in "Brains" 5 years ago, saying “Truly Affected used to have at least some venues…filled almost exclusively with nonsmokers and had no smokers clustering… outside the doorway. Nowadays those venues, being no different than others… attract a sizeable percentage of smokers and possible encounters with smoke!”
Michael J. McFadden
Author of “Dissecting Antismokers’ Brains”
Comment
I am a non-smoker. I don't like being around second-hand smoke. For the life of me, I cannot figure out why those of you who don't smoke can't figure out how to avoid it. I patronize smoke-free restaurants and avoid those that allow smoking, both locally and in any city I travel to. After years of this practice, I have yet to "walk through a vile cloud of smoke" to get to a restaurant. I don't allow smoking in my car or my house. I don't consider making these and similar choices an undue burden. As Kevin alluded to, if "most Virginians" are truly in favor of a ban than I suspect "most Virginians" would not be patronizing smoking-allowed establishments and the market place would respond as it already is.
hey haliehovenga
No one is forced to breathe second-hand smoke in a restaurant; you choose to breathe it when you walk in the door. If you don't want to breathe it, turn around and walk back out.
kstwk
I want you to enjoy dining, I want you to live a long and happy life, I just don't understand why you don't get help to stop smoking. And if you are unwilling to stop, why can't you limit smoking to your own home where the tobacco pollutants do not hurt others?
Smoking Ban in Virginia
There is a simple answer here that is so obvious, it should bite you where the sun don't shine.
Don't go into a restaurant if it allows smoking if you don't want too, find another job. 93% of restaurants are smokefree only 7% allow smoking.
All you anti's are whining over nothing, do you have to be such piggies that you can't allow 7% of the restaurants to be smoking for your fellow American's so they can enjoy their dinners too?
jeaniem
We non smokers will chill out on you smoker's when you refrain from smoking in public places, dispose of your nasty cigarette butts in proper receptacles and pay more taxes for your filthy addiction so that the rest of us don't have to care for your prolonged death!
Thanks, Kevin
Thanks for your last response Kevin. I really appreciate your rational argument about personal freedom. I think, though, government has a responsibility to not only protect our freedoms but also to protect our safety. The question would then seem to be whether this is a safety issue or an issue of personal freedom. (thinking here). I do believe that in the end, with or without the laws, restaurants will opt to go smoke free because consumers will demand it. It's likely that smokers would even get sick of a smoke-filled restaurant deemed "smoker friendly." So perhaps the legistlation simply is unnecessary. But this doesn't answer my question ("What is a girl to do?"). Even if I choose to eat at smoke free restaurants only, letting my pocketbook do the voting, I still have to walk through those awful clouds of toxic vapor, sending me into spasms. Kevin, thanks again for your rational response. I appreciate it especially because I was being sarcastic, and I really expected more of the same in response.
Tax Woes, it's your duty as a citizen to smoke
I wonder, what will happen once all the smoking penalties have their desired effects? Like the raising of taxes stating that it is there to deter people from smoking by making it more expensive. So what happens when they get what they want? Will this be like the gas thing during the middle of last year. You know, they wanted us all to drive less, so with the cost of gas going sky high we did. How did our local and federal officials thank us for lowering our driving habits? They threatened to raise taxes on gas. Funny, we do what they want and we get slapped around for doing it.
I no longer care about the smoking bill but I do wonder how they will justify higer income and property taxes when they start getting less and less people smoking. So remember people, light up, it's your civic duty to provide for health care for all and infrastructure improvements by paying the sin tax on smokes. While we're at it take up binge drinking to add to the state and federal coffers.
Summarizing the arguments...
Pro-ban arguments & responses:
1) "Smokers poisoning people." Wrong. Smoke levels in well ventilated places have never been shown to harm anyone. Studies justifying bans are based on long-ago unventilated conditions or test-chambers with crazy smoke levels.
2) "Bars do fine elsewhere with bans." Wrong. Those bars are the SURVIVORS. Many close after a ban: the ones left do ok. In Britain post-ban pub closures shot from 3/wk to 39/wk.
3) "Clouds of smoke outside!" Yep, that's what you'll get if you pass a ban. Fight the ban so smokers will be inside smoking allowed businesses and those not liking smoke will have nonsmoking ones without smokers on the sidewalks!
Michael J. McFadden
Author of "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains"