Efforts to broaden Indianapolis' workplace smoking ban came up short Monday night as members of the City-County Council
voted to table the proposal.
The ordinance would have prohibited patrons from lighting up in bars, bowling alleys
and nightclubs, expanding an existing law that prohibits smoking in most public places, including restaurants that serve minors.
Council members were split on the issue, with 12 members voting for the proposal and 13 against; the measure needed
15 votes to pass.
Council members could resurrect the ordinance at a future meeting.
Bill sponsors Angela
Mansfield, a Democrat, Republican Ben Hunter and other proponents were unable to rally sufficient support for the proposal,
despite a 4-2 community affairs committee vote Oct. 14 that advanced the ordinance to the full council.
Before
the vote, councilors on both sides of the issue voiced concerns.
“We know for certain second-hand smoke
is not an annoyance,” said Democrat Brian Mahern. “It’s a health risk. There is no such thing as safe second-hand
smoke.”
Mahern’s appeal to the council drew the most spirited reaction from Smoke Free Indy, the advocacy
group that came dressed in green shirts to show support for the proposed ordinance.
On the other side of the aisle,
an alliance of bar owners and other opponents sported red shirts and stood in ovation upon Libertarian Ed Coleman’s
remarks to the committee.
“Adults can make decisions,” Coleman said. “They choose to work [in
smoking environments]. They choose to walk in there.”
Hunter introduced the proposal by citing non-smoking
workers in smoking establishments as having no choice in their working environment. The councilor also said the proposal would
help get Indianapolis up to speed with other communities that have banned smoking.
“There’s no doubt
we need to move forward and join 70 percent of the rest of the nation,” he said.
on Facebook & Twitter
Back to Top
IBJ Conversations
12 Comments
Add Comment
Ryan, I'm sorry, but that will never fly. You don't understand what drives these bans. The goal is to reduce smoking by making it as inconvenient, uncomfortable, unaffordable, and undesirable as possible. Providing comfortable, pleasant, separately ventilated or well-filtrated areas for smokers and their friends to enjoy themselves simply does NOT fit that agenda.
"Protecting the workers" or "Saving the children" are simply tools being used by a very powerful, 800 million dollar a year lobby to ram smoking bans down the throats of legislators and a public that generally doesn't have the time or interest to actually read the medical studies and their criticisms for themselves.
The IndyStar and pro-ban legislators have been challenged to survey the workers themselves to see what THEY want, and to stand behind their claims of no-business/jobs loss with their own money... and that challenge has been ignored.
If that makes you angry, go to the council hearing tonight and let them know. And if the IBJ is willing to stand up against a powerful lobbying force, call upon the IndyStar to stand behind its words and support that challenge!
Michael J. McFadden
Author of "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains"
Adults on the other hand are free to patronize or work at a bar and can make the decision to patronize or work in a smoking establishment. Leave that decision up to the bar owners.
The current compromise is the right answer.
Additional information: 2/3 of alcohol serving establishments are non-smoking. Most bar workers are smokers themselves.
Self responsibility is the issue here. Can the city and its people decide what is best for them or do they have to be told to follow the lead into gay marriages, legalized pot and whatever else someone from California thinks is great!
The truth about second-hand smoking is finally out.
http://www.spiked- online.com/ index.php/ site/article/ 7626/