Here’s the poll: Most Illinoisans want a statewide smoking ban.
Now, who is going to get this into law? Seems like we have a couple of people running for governor who might want to get behind a popular idea. Any takers? It might even get you some points in the Race for the Mansion.
And this is interesting:
A statewide smoking ban cleared a House committee last winter but has never gotten a vote in either chamber of the General Assembly. [Kathy Drea, public policy director for the American Lung Association of Illinois and Iowa] hopes a ban will get a vote when the new General Assembly is sworn in in January.Hooray for Springfield; leading the way to a statewide ban.
"It's a non-election year, so it'll be more positive for a vote," she said. "(The ban in) Springfield was so important because all of the legislators live here six months out of the year. They will be able to see people still go out, still want to be with their friends."
Oh, and by the way, for you who continue be confused as to whether smoking bans can work without destroying business, consider this:
Fourteen states - California, Delaware, New York, Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, Hawaii, Montana, Utah, New Jersey, Colorado - have enacted comprehensive indoor smoking bans, which include bars and restaurants.I’ve not heard of any widespread economic destruction in any of these states. The “it’ll hurt business” argument is all the pro-smoking folks have and it’s bogus.
3 comments:
It is a bogus argument -- four different studies of the economic impact of Twin Cities smoking bans had the same conclusion -- that smoking bans do not cause significant damage to the hospitality industry. In fact, several studies showed significant growth.
None of these studies were conducted by, sponsored by, or funded by a pro-ban group or organization. Three were conducted by local governments, the fourth by a daily newspaper.
I am against the ban.
Well although I can see the benifit's of a ban on smoking in a public place, and the economic thing is a total joke (I live in California were we have the ban and the economy is great) but I still don't agree. My reasoning is simply however. In my mind to tell a private business owner that they cannot allow something in their place of business is not right.
If the state wants to make it illegal to smoke in any state area fine. If they want to make it illegal in any city area, fine. And it should be perfectly legal for a business to make it illegal to smoke in their business, but it should be their choice. The simple fact is that they pay for the place, it's theirs to make the decisions with. And if a non smoker does not want to be around the smoke it is their right to not shop in that place. If the ban is as popular has it seems then I am sure most places would quickly institute it anyway as people quit going to places that allowed smoking. But the bottom line is that it should be their choice.
www.americanpatriotlegion.org
Post a Comment