news-record.com

GOVERNMENT

Senate bill favors a limited ban of smoking

Article
Comments (6)

Thursday, May 7, 2009

(Updated 11:43 pm)

By Mark Binker
Staff Writer

RALEIGH — Senators have given tentative approval to a ban on smoking in bars and restaurants, a weakened version of what had been a much more sweeping bill.

The 26-18 vote must be confirmed Monday before the measure is sent back to the House, where representatives passed a different version of the bill.

Neither the House nor Senate legislation meets the goals of anti-smoking advocates, who had hoped the state would enact a sweeping ban that would have eliminated smoking from virtually all workplaces.

That strict version of the measure — opponents likened it to policies in New York City and California — had been headed to a Senate vote earlier this week but was pulled back when supporters realized they would lose.

“This version was much less restrictive than the original bill,” said Sen. Don Vaughan, a Greensboro Democrat who voted for the ban. He was one of a number of Democrats who had sided with a majority of Republicans against the strict measure.

Michael Shannon, a lobbyist for Greensboro-based tobacco manufacturer Lorillard, said he was “disappointed with Sen. Vaughan,” saying the company and its employees had lobbied against any sort of smoking ban.

Other Guilford County lawmakers split on the bill. Sen. Katie Dorsett was absent but used a parliamentary procedure known as a “pair,” meaning her would-be yes vote for the bill canceled out another senator’s no vote.

And Sen. Stan Bingham, a Denton Republican, also voted yes. Both said they would have supported the most strict measure.

Sen. Phil Berger, an Eden Republican, voted against the measure.

“There are thousands of jobs that are dependent, continue to be dependent, on the tobacco industry,” Berger said, adding that private business owners should be able to decide for themselves whether to allow smoking or not.

If the Senate gives the measure final approval next week, it would return to the House where members would have the option to accept the Senate version of the bill or send the measure to a conference committee.

“We’ll probably go to a conference,” said Rep. Hugh Holliman, a Lexington Democrat and the bill’s primary author. He said there were “issues” with the Senate version.

In particular, Holliman’s bill was offered as a way to protect the health of workers throughout the state, not just patrons of bars and restaurants. However, the House version of the bill included a loophole that would have let almost any business that didn’t employee people under age 18 — mainly bars — exempt themselves from the law.

A conference committee would work out a final measure that would be sent back to both the House and Senate. Members would then vote the bill either up or down.

Contact Mark Binker at (919) 832-5549 or mark.binker@news-record.com

Accompanying Photos

File photo (News & Record)

How they voted

Local members of the Senate split over the bill.

Voting yes: Stan Bingham, R-Denton; Tony Foriest, D-Graham; Don Vaughan, D-Greensboro.

Voting no: Phil Berger, R-Eden; Jerry Tillman, R-Archdale.

Absent: Sen. Katie Dorsett, D-Greensboro, “paired,” meaning she was absent but her would-be yes vote for the bill canceled out another senator’s no vote.

Comments

View Comments

This article has been closed to new comments. Comments are generally closed after 14 days. However, comments may be closed earlier at the discretion of the News & Record.

Inappropriate content? Please report abuse.

Mshannon

May 7, 2009 - 7:44 pm EDT

I appreciate Senator Don Vaughan's support and hard work. Senator Vaughan has proven responsive to the concerns of the people and businesses of Greensboro. Senator Vaughan played an important role in forging the compromise that the Senate voted on today. I had hoped that an amendment would have been included to preserve the ability of restaurant and bar owners to accommodate their smoking customers. I was disappointed that the Senate voted down this amendment. I believe that a more reasonable solution can be achieved to balance the rights of business owners, smokers and non-smokers. Michael Shannon

DuaneG3

May 7, 2009 - 9:17 pm EDT

This should be up to the business owners. The government shouldn't have authority to dictate how businesses accommodate their patrons. This is still a quasi-free country. If customers don't like it, they should go to a non-smoking bar/restaurant. There are plenty. Doesn't our legislature have more important things to spend time on?

<--------can't believe this

greeneyes03

May 7, 2009 - 9:28 pm EDT

I completely agree! I have read other comments regarding this issue on other sites, and I could not believe how people are acting about this ban. The non smokers are saying things like it should be banned everywhere and how they did not want to smell "our" smoke when they go out to eat or drink. Well it is the same way when I choose where I want to go out. If I want to go to a club, I am not going to go to one that only plays country line dancing if that is not what I like. It is common sense!! Please, give me a break. This is a pretty sick world, and if these people spent more time reading what is really going on in the world (like people going on shooting rampages, bombing buildings, shooting kids at school, killing their babies, or holding their kids captive for 24 years). Then they might would think about something else that our Senators and Congressmen need to be addressing!

greeneyes03

May 7, 2009 - 9:22 pm EDT

I am a smoker, and I can say that I understand both sides of this. When I go out to eat, I do not like to smell smoke, especially when I am trying to eat. I do not even smoke around anyone when they are trying to eat, especially when they are a non smoker. But, I do occasionally like to smoke when I have a "drink" with my meal, but not while I am eating. I can understand peoples concerns about the dangers of second hand smoking and keeping the air clean. But I think that it should be up to business owners, and let it be at their expense. I have been in a situation before where I was on my lunch break and decided to eat somewhere I could smoke afterward since it was my break. I think that some people might feel the same way when they go out. I think that it is absolutely crazy to hear some of these "non smokers" talk about how they can not stand to smell smoke when they go somewhere and they should ban it all together. To be quite honest, it shouldn't be up to those people to accommodate them, but rather be up to the business owners. There are tons of things in this world that I do not like or agree with, but I deal with them because it is just LIFE. I think we should respect the non smokers as well as the smokers too. I also feel that when you go into a restaurant and you have the choice of smoking or non, then the non smoking area should be well away from the smoking section. I have been to several places and sat at the non smoking section and the smoking is right next door and smoke is just rolling in the air. I think that if you are going to have a place of business and allow smoking, then the sections should be separated enough to respect the other parties. Not every place is going to be accommodating, but not every place is, no matter what the situation is. If you are legal age, you do have the legal right to smoke, drink, or whatever, as long as you are not breaking the law. It is human right. I think that Congress should be concentrating more on other important issues in the world rather than banning smoking. Let the business owners choose how they want to run their own business. More importantly, our economy is at the worst it has ever been and people are concerned about smoking at bars. Bottom line, even though I am a smoker, I think that as a respectful person, you should respect other people when you are out in public. Simply "respect", nothing more or less.

eclipse3

May 7, 2009 - 10:08 pm EDT

I can't believe that the owners of businesses in our state has allowed the government to have control over what they can and cannot do in their establishments. I really can't. So, I say let's do our own ban. Ban every establishment that don't allow smoking. I will not patronize any business that allows the government to rule their place in this regard. Maybe it will come down to failure/success of the sheep that continue to hand over our rights.

I bet alcohol sales will boom since bars will be allowed to accommodate their patrons. Which is good, more revenue for our state to take up some of the slack lost to tobacco products. Oh, but wait, Ms. Perdue fired our alcohol director because he read an Obama cartoon didn't she? Oh well. Maybe the Wild West will make a comeback.