Your Opinions; Sunday Symposium; Smoking Ban

Jan 06, 02:33 PM

I read the Jan. 2 editorial on the proposed statewide smoking ban in Wisconsin ("Take it statewide"). I am a transplant from Arizona, where a statewide smoking ban has been in place for years.

In Arizona, lawmakers and tavern owners faced the same challenges in the beginning. In a nutshell, politicians feared that smoking voters would protest at the polls; tavern and restaurant owners feared that business would decline. After the law passed and the dust settled, lawmakers retained their positions; food and spirits were still served, in a healthier workplace. In fact, what bar and restaurant owners found out was that they actually gained numbers of non-smoking patrons who previously avoided the smoky environments.

Sharing drinks and food at the local watering hole is, for many, part of Wisconsin's culture. A smoking ban in public places is not likely to change that anytime soon. I say, enact the ban - no compromises.

Don Hayward

Kewaskum

No room for compromise

A Jan. 2 editorial asked: What kind of compromise, if any, should be made by the state Legislature in order to enact a statewide smoking ban?

In my opinion, none.

John Mitchell

Public health nurse

Humbird

Such bans mean taking away rights

I am not a smoker. I do not like smoke. If I have smokers in my car or house, I choose to not let them smoke. However, if I am in their car, it's their choice; if I visit friends and they smoke in their house, so be it.

The problem with state bans on smoking is they mean taking away rights.

People who waitress or bartend and do not like smoke are in the wrong business. My brother does not care to have bad knees, a bad back and cuts and nicks, but he's a carpenter. Each job has its risks. Bartending in a place where smoking is OK is a risk. There are places people can do that job without the risk of smoke and without Big Brother stepping in.

It's bad enough the cigarette tax went up. I am waiting for Gov. Jim Doyle to start pushing a fast-food tax. Wisconsin is one of the fattest states; however, Doyle decided smoking is worse than being fat.

If I own a house, it is my right to decide if people can smoke in it. If I own a business, I should have the same right. There are bars and restaurants that are smoke-free. Those who have a problem with smoke should go there.

Jerid Bohmann

Pewaukee

Don't subject everyone to secondhand smoke

Armed with the overwhelming scientific evidence linking secondhand smoke to cancer, a burgeoning number of cities, states and even countries have rightly and courageously opted to ban smoking in public places.

Please don't ask those of us who work in the service industry to find jobs in non-smoking establishments. It's not only laughable to think that there are enough bars and restaurants currently smoke- free to accommodate us, but it glaringly misses the point.

Why shouldn't we be provided the same smoke-free work environment that employees of virtually all other businesses already enjoy?

Compromise? How? Continue to allow cancer-causing chemicals to be blown in the faces of those who work in service jobs, but make sure that no one else's workplace has to deal with such lunacy? How about allowing smoking Monday, Wednesday and Friday and hoping only half as many people develop smoke-related health problems?

The laggard Tavern League of Wisconsin, still insisting that smoke containing 43 known carcinogens, 200 poisons and more than 4,000 chemicals be legally exhaled all across the "great indoors" of our fine state, would also like people to believe that the health of their employees remains of paramount concern.

Now, that defines duplicity!

Bill Castagnozzi

Milwaukee

Consider phase-in period for restaurants, taverns

Many restaurant and tavern owners have contacted the Wisconsin Restaurant Association about the statewide smoking ban issue. Most say that they would like to be smoke-free. What's holding them back is competition - the thought of losing their smoking customers to nearby establishments if they ban smoking on their own.

The Wisconsin Restaurant Association supports a statewide smoking ban that will create a level playing field for all restaurants and taverns. To be fair, a smoking ban must be statewide and must go into effect for all eating and drinking establishments at the same time.

The association proposes a compromise with the Tavern League of Wisconsin and their advocates in the state Senate. A phase-in period for all restaurants and taverns until the summer of 2009 would give everyone in our industry more than a year to prepare for the ban, and it would be fair to all.

In the end, we all will breathe less smoke, and restaurants and taverns can compete on the basis of food, drink and hospitality - rather than smoking.

Pete Hanson

Director of government relations

Wisconsin Restaurant Association

Madison

Wisconsin should pass fair, common-sense law

I am a former Wauwatosa resident currently living in Colorado. It is time for Wisconsin to follow 22 other states and ban public indoor smoking - without loopholes.

Colorado enacted a smoking ban in July 2006. In the original Colorado bill, casinos and cigar bars were exempt and still could allow smoking. There was also a provision in the original bill that would have allowed mom and pop neighborhood taverns to allow smoking. This provision was quickly taken out of the final bill.

The result of exempting casinos was a lawsuit by tavern owners stating - rightfully so - that it was unfair to allow smoking in casinos but not in bars. On Jan. 1, 2008, Colorado put into effect an updated Indoor Clean Air bill that bans smoking in casinos.

Wisconsin should do it right the first time and fight the urge to offer exemptions to business. This is common-sense legislation that will pass when written fairly.

Tim Heimerl

Westminster, Colo.

We make our own choices; elitists can't choose for us

The Jan. 2 editorial supporting a statewide smoking ban was just plain wrong. Its arguments were that of elitists who claim to know best for all.

People are not born to be a bartender or waitress. These are choices that fit their skill sets or lifestyles. Hazards? Life is a hazard. Are we going to ban eating certain foods? Oh, that's right: New York, Illinois and California are looking into that.

If a bar owner wants his or her business to be smoke-free, so be it. Life is choice, good or bad. We all have rights, and the No. 1 right is free will and the power of choice.

So I say no state mandate.

Paul Elliott

Greendale

Yes, we should follow other states' lead

I agree that we should follow the lead of other states regarding the banning of smoking in public places. In recent months, I have forgone going to restaurants and other places where people smoke.

I also think Wisconsin should follow the other 48 states in allowing concealed-carry laws. It seems the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel wants to be like other states but not with regards to the right of one to protect himself or herself.

Gerald Sobczak

Fond du Lac

Smoke-free businesses elsewhere are thriving

This past fall, I traveled to Cleveland to visit my nephew, and we went to a sports bar to watch the Wisconsin/Ohio State football game. On the way, I mentioned that I wasn't looking forward to all the smoke. I was pleasantly surprised when he mentioned Ohio businesses are smoke-free. We had a very enjoyable time, even though Wisconsin lost.

We later attended a charity bowling event. It was great not having to inhale cigarette smoke and its lingering smell while bowling. Not to mention taking the odor home on your clothes - that's one reason I quit bowling leagues 15 years ago. I talked with my nephews friends, and they all said they tend to go out on the town more since they don't have to worry about smoke.

The next day, we went to another sports bar to watch the Packers game. We had another great time - no smoke, and, to top it off, the Packers won.

Legislators, let's get this law passed with no restrictions. And Wisconsin business owners, before you complain about a monetary loss if the law passes, check with Cleveland; it's thriving.

Jeff Blumberg

Brown Deer

This is an important quality-of-life issue

I travel to Wisconsin once or twice a year to visit family, friends and the places I miss from my childhood. I have not lived in the state since I left for college, but I read JSOnline to stay in touch with Wisconsin's current events.

Over the past year, two issues have taken up significant editorial space - a proposed statewide workplace smoking ban and concern over the state's ability to retain young, college-educated adults. These issues are not mutually exclusive.

Quality of life is certainly an important factor when choosing a place to work and live. From my experience, those with the greatest ability to pick and choose where to live - the college-educated set - will opt for a locale with a healthy, smoke-free dining and nightlife scene. Smoke-filled restaurants and bars were not the reason I left Wisconsin, but they are a reason I would not return to live.

Peter Arestides

Oakland, Calif.

Couldn't such bans be taken even further?

Wisconsin is not and should never be California, New York or Illinois. When will this "banning" ever stop? That should be the question.

It is just days after the state imposed a $1 per-pack tax increase, and now the Journal Sentinel wants to take away the ability to smoke in workplaces. Why don't we just start banning the right to free speech? How about banning the right to vote? Oh, and why not ban soda? Maybe we should ban fast foods.

Better yet, why don't we ban the use of 50-cent light bulbs because they're not environmentally friendly? We are about to effectively ban free TV viewing for people with older television sets due to the conversion to digital broadcasting. Let's just ban everything.

If people don't smoke and don't like to be around smokers, they can choose an establishment that is smoke-free. There is an abundance of establishments to choose from, even workplaces.

I hope both state Sen. Roger Breske (D-Eland) and the Tavern League stop and see all the smoke the Journal Sentinel is blowing.

Paul M. Groh

Hubertus

Actually, cigarettes should just be banned

Here's the bottom line regarding cigarettes, and get ready; it's coming from a smoker. A casual smoker - half pack a day - but still, a smoker who has listened to the inane absurdities for far too long.

Cigarettes should be banned. Outlawed. Criminalized. That's right. Prohibition of tobacco.

Here is a product that is so dangerous, so toxic, so harmful, that non-smokers exposed to the byproduct of secondhand smoke are at risk of health issues and death. Yes, death!

And what is Wisconsin's reaction? To increase the cigarette tax by $1 effective Jan. 1 - the rationale being that the funds raised from the tax hike would be used for smoking cessation programs and other smoking-related health costs incurred by the state. And the added cost would make the cigarettes prohibitive to younger teens at risk of starting up and experienced smokers fed up with the cost.

I believe many people are sincere in their concern over health issues and cigarettes. But the real picture, the ruse, the hoax, the bamboozle is that governments depend on cigarette tax revenue, and the holders of the purse strings don't want that purse to go empty. If state governments really cared, they would do what the feds have failed to do and outlaw cigarettes.

Are you looking at me? Go ahead, make my day.

Joe Felcht

South Milwaukee

Don't weaken this bill

The Jan. 2 editorial "Take it statewide" was glorious! Thank you for putting it so clearly.

Let's not dilute the bill in any way, as this is a serious, long overdue issue.

Nancy Stevenson

La Crosse

Copyright 2008, Journal Sentinel Inc. All rights reserved. (Note: This notice does not apply to those news items already copyrighted and received through wire services or other media.)

(c) 2008 Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning. All rights Reserved. Your Opinions; Sunday Symposium; Smoking Ban
Back to Current Headlines