Where there’s smoke, there’s dispute
State smoking ban passes HouseBy KURT HAUGLIE, DMG Writer
HANCOCK - The effort to create a law banning smoking in workplaces in Michigan is continuing in Lansing, but differences of opinion over how restrictive such a law should be are keeping it from happening.
On Tuesday, the House by a vote of 73 to 31 approved legislation that bans smoking in most workplaces with the exception of the three Detroit casinos and some specialty tobacco shops. Tribal casinos in the state would be exempt from any smoking ban legislation finally enacted because they are federally regulated.
Guy St. Germain, Western Upper Peninsula District Health Department health officer and administrator in Hancock, said the fact the House approved the legislation is good news.
"We're very encouraged by the action of the House, but there's still a long way to go," he said.
Last year, St. Germain said the Senate approved legislation with no exemptions, but it was not approved by the House. The two chambers were unable to find a compromise.
In 2007 and 2008, St. Germain worked to enact a local version of a smoking ban in the five counties of the health department district called the Western Upper Peninsula Health District Clean Indoor Air Regulation, which required public and private businesses with any number of employees to provide smoke-free work places. Restaurants and bars are exempted from that regulation.
"That is according to state law," St. Germain said.
The law states local entities can't regulate bars or restaurants.
In 2007, St. Germain said he made several trips to the boards of commissioners in Baraga, Gogebic, Houghton, Keweenaw and Ontonagon counties to provide information about the proposed regulation. However, only Houghton (March 2007) and Gogebic (June 2007) counties approved it. The Baraga County Board of Commissioners first approved (April 2007) the regulation, then reconsidered and opted out (April 2008). Keweenaw commissioners considered it for many months, then voted in March 2008 to opt out. Ontonagon commissioners opted out in January 2008.
The regulation was enacted in Gogebic and Houghton counties in July 2008, and St. Germain said there haven't been any problems with enforcement in the two counties.
"It's going very well in Houghton and Gogebic counties," he said.
As for the pending state legislation banning smoking in most workplaces, St. Germain said if no law is enacted, he won't try to expand the reach of the local regulation to the other three counties because he respects the decisions of the county commissioners.
"We have no plans to bring that back to the counties," he said.
St. Germain said although many opponents to smoking bans call it a freedom of expression issue, neither the local regulation or proposed state law are intended to regulate private behavior.
"It's an environmental regulation," he said. "The hazards of second-hand smoke have been well validated."
St. Germain said he's working with the Michigan Smoke-Free Coalition, which is comprised of the American Cancer Society and numerous other health-related organizations, to encourage legislators to approve a workplace smoking ban in the state.
He understands the dispute over exemptions will make a final law difficult to achieve, St. Germain said.
"That philosophical divide is still ... around in Lansing," he said. "It's anyone's guess where it will land."
Perkins Family Restaurant in Houghton went smoke-free about a year and a half ago, and General Manager Kevin Porter said the change eventually worked well for them, although some people were upset initially.
"We have customers who come here every day and thank us," Porter said. "We've had customers who said they'd never be back."
However, many of those customers did come back after a few months, Porter said.
The restaurant is owned by an individual who owns six Perkins Restaurants in Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin, where similar smoking-ban legislation was pending.
"He figured he'd have to go smoke-free eventually," Porter said.
Because he thought the states would be enacting workplace smoking bans, Porter said the owner went ahead and made all his restaurants smoke-free.
The intent of the local regulation and the proposed state legislation is to protect the health of workers, and Porter said since the restaurant went smoke-free, employees there are very grateful.
"The staff is definitely good with that," he said.
Besides not smelling of tobacco smoke when they go home, Porter said many staff members have noticed a health difference.
"They just feel a lot better when they leave," he said.
Kurt Hauglie can be reached at khauglie @mininggazette.com.
|
JTraver
|
|
|---|---|
|
06-01-09 12:35 AM
|
I really should not even respond, but I will consider it my benevolent act of the day. I promise I won't use any asterisk, as they make one sound even less educated than one who would write out profanity in the first place. Especially to express themself. Mr.Grad said, "So you are gonna tell people that they can't smoke at work. What if they work in a fabrication shop where you are breathing in welding fumes and paint fumes and probably diesel fumes from trucks". In which my point was that they should not be smoking there anyway. My opinion is based on warning stickers all over those shops, and just plain old common sense. I understand what you are trying to say, and will still refrain from stating my opinion. I simply called you a moron.
|
|
American
|
|
|
05-30-09 9:07 PM
|
We get the point---Your hurting people and you don't care!
|
|
PatriciaKorbyDickow
|
|
|
05-30-09 2:45 AM
|
UPinSanDiego, I have to agree with you! I couldn't have said it better. MTUgrad, You make me laugh! Those morons will never get the point ! adventure, I have to agree with you! It doesn't take a Brain Surgeon to figure that out!
|
|
PatriciaKorbyDickow
|
|
|
05-30-09 2:43 AM
|
"PLUS, some cities here have banned public smoking altogether." You are correct! Plus threatened smokers with a $500.00 fine.Fact,that project that never got off the ground. By the way, use to be a yooper that lives in Rancho San Diego the past 15 years. I smoke, but not in my house or car. That is my choice!!! No the government !!! I respect the rights of non smokers. But*****it I expect the same respect back as a smoker! You don't like it, stay the*****away!
|
|
PatriciaKorbyDickow
|
|
|
05-30-09 2:43 AM
|
CalifYooper I beg to differ when you say "California has done it the best - no smoking in restaurants or bars." You forgot to mention several have outdoor patios that allow smoking. Not to mention how many have gone out of business as they had no room to add on an outdoor patio.
|
|
American
|
|
|
05-29-09 7:07 PM
|
MTUgrad---you sound like you've been sniffing to many tailpipes. You can sniff all the tailpipes you want, breath all the smoke you want, it's your "Right". But I have a "Right" to clean air inside a building. It may take awhile, but it will happen
|
|
adventure
|
|
|
05-29-09 5:39 PM
|
Alcohol is ILLEGAL to consume by people under 21, Pot is ILLEGAL to use (unless you get a prescription). What you want to do is take a LEGAL product being used LEGALLY out of a business whose owner has decided that he wants that in his business. If the employees don't like it, they can get another job. What's next? Are you going to ban dust in a coal mine because it might hurt someone? Or would it be more practical for those who don't want to take the risk not to work there?
|
|
UPinSanDiego
|
|
|
05-29-09 5:01 PM
|
CalifYooper - You sound ridiculous. Let's just throw any random, extreme example out there that has zero bearing on the topic at hand. Get a clue. I have been appointed by California and the U.P. to be officially embarrassed for your naivety. If someone doesn't agree with your point of view you have to reduce yourself to such foolishness. Good luck with that - let me know where it gets you in life.
|
|
MTUgrad
|
|
|
05-29-09 11:58 AM
|
Do you morons get the point yet?
|
|
MTUgrad
|
|
|
05-29-09 11:58 AM
|
Let's put a ban on automobiles that emit noxious gases. I don't like the smell and it may harm my health.
|
|
MTUgrad
|
|
|
05-29-09 11:57 AM
|
Let's put a ban on passing gas in public. I don't want to smell someone else's crap particles when I go out to eat. The smell may harm my lungs.
|
|
MTUgrad
|
|
|
05-29-09 11:56 AM
|
I want a job in road construction but before I go into that profession I want to put a ban on smelling or smelling like asphalt because it may harm my lungs. Let's put a ban on asphalt.
|
|
MTUgrad
|
|
|
05-29-09 11:52 AM
|
American and JTraver. You simple minded people are missing the point. I am not going to waste my time trying to exlplain because you are obviously to dumb to figure it out.
|
|
CalifYooper
|
|
|
05-29-09 11:51 AM
|
Ok. I can see we have a lot of government-haters out there. So, ok - how about we ban alcohol age restrictions too. Why not? I'm sure the restaurant / bar owners would absolutely LOVE that too! (CHA-CHING!) While we're at it - when the kids walk in the door, hand them a joint..hey - it's THEIR establishment..they should be able to sell whatever, right?! OMG. Government sets laws to help keep things in order, people. I'm not saying it's perfect, because it's not. So, is it really right that I should forego a night out to eat in a restaurant because all business owners Ok smoking & I don't want that in my system? How fair is THAT? And yes - I think it's highly unfair that the employees have to breathe that in.
|
|
adventure
|
|
|
05-29-09 9:01 AM
|
This is plain and simple the rights of the business owner to decide. If you don't like that a business allows smoking, then DON'T GO THERE. I don't like being around drunks, so guess what...I don't go to the bars, or even restraunts like the Ambassador, even though I LOVE their food. would it make me happy if the Ambassador decided to stop selling alcohol? yes it would. Would I ever whine to mommy government that they HAVE to stop selling alcohol because I want to eat there? NEVER. It's a businesses right to allow smoking in their business. Its a personal right whether you or I spend money there.
|
|
CCthinker
|
|
|
05-29-09 8:08 AM
|
This time kids, I have to agree with "snowhater" 100%. You got it right. I have visited Minneapolis, Chicago, Appleton...all are smoke free. Every bar and diner has a patio for smokers to use. Has it affected businesses? yes. IT GOT BETTER. Americans have unique rights, one of them is the right to inflict harm to oneself. The use of tobacco or hand gun are are equally lethal, and suicide by either is protected. Yet the use on others is a crime.
|
|
JTraver
|
|
|
05-29-09 12:25 AM
|
MTUgrad, maybe you should re-evaluate what you wrote and decide what is moronic. Would you really want to walk in to one of those shops that contain thousands of flammable things, and see a bunch of people lighting up anyway?
|
|
snowhater
|
|
|
05-28-09 6:42 PM
|
when i go into a bar they ask what i'd like to drink, not what brand of smoke i want.winter i spend in az. bar's and rest. are doing good bus.they smoke in the back or outside, best thing a state can do.
|
|
American
|
|
|
05-28-09 4:52 PM
|
What about the people that work at these places? If someone came through your place of employement with an open jar of toxic chemicals I think you would complain!
|
|
UPinSanDiego
|
|
|
05-28-09 4:29 PM
|
I don't have a problem with smoking in a bar. After all, it goes with the theme of self-indulgence and the like. I don't smoke, and I'm not a fan of smelling like smoke, but I have a choice of whether or not I enter that establishment. It should be the choice of the owner rather than the government. Don't they have more important things to worry about right now? St. Germain needs to get off his righteous kick and do something more constructive with his time. Convince people not to smoke and you'll get my pat on the back. It's never about correcting the problem; it's always about how we can make it less annoying to those that don't smoke. You know, masking the problem - kind of the way of the American health system.
|
|
Calumetnative
|
|
|
05-28-09 3:15 PM
|
Being an ex-smoker, I still don't believe that the government should be involved with smoking rights. Leave it to the busniess PERIOD. If you don't smoke and the bar/restaurant allows smoking DON'T give them your business. If the establishment doesn't allow smoking, smokers go elsewhere. It's pretty simple, but the government getting involved only makes it worse. Keep the government out of personal business. The more you allow the government to be involved, the more of your rights will be taken away. The next right to be taken away will be the right to keep and bear arms.
|
|
CalifYooper
|
|
|
05-28-09 2:41 PM
|
California has done it the best - no smoking in restaurants OR bars. Only tribal-owned casinos. It's nice to go out & eat and not choke on someone ELSE'S idea of "pleasure" or relaxation & also end up stinking to high heaven of the nasty smoke that goes with it. PLUS, some cities here have banned public smoking altogether. Your 'right' to smoke should not infringe on MY 'right' not to want to breathe it in. Period. Ruin your own health.
|
|
American
|
|
|
05-28-09 2:17 PM
|
So what are you trying to say MTUgrad---since I'm already breathing these nasty fumes I might as well finish myself off with a cigarette? You don't get it. I don't care if you harm yourself with tobaco---just don't harm me.
|
|
RabbitKiller
|
|
|
05-28-09 12:48 PM
|
If the Prez can smokes where he wants to, why can't everyone else? Discuss this and other local news items at CopperCountryWriters DOT ORG
|
|
Randy01
|
|
|
05-28-09 12:33 PM
|
I'm with you on that.
|