Indiana House panel backs smoking-ban bill

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

An Indiana House committee has approved a bill for a broad statewide smoking ban that's tougher than a proposal that failed in the Legislature last year.

The House health committee voted 9-3 in favor of the bill Wednesday after adding an exemption for retail tobacco shops. The bill would prohibit smoking in most public places and workplaces, including bars. The proposal would allow smoking only on the gambling floors of casinos, fraternal and veterans clubs and cigar and hookah bars.

Its sponsors expect some legislators will try to add exemptions for bars when the bill is debated in the full House.

A Senate committee chairman says a bar exemption that the House approved last year might be needed for the restrictions to win passage.


  • What about me?
    This is such a cop-out by the State of Indiana. Because I work on a casino Floor my health doesnt matter. There are times when I literally can hardly breath because of the smoke. Once again the ole mighty dollar rules. I would love for some of these legislators to step into my shoes with a couple cigar smokers puffing away. WHAT A JOKE!!!
  • Lies....
    Anita, the problem with including casinos is that it's hard to hide the damage from the taxpayers. When the little bars close and people lose their jobs, there's no strict accounting of it: the taxpayers will pay for it in higher unemployment taxes etc, but it won't be obvious.

    Casino tax income is **VERY** well-regulated, tabulated, and reported on though. When Illinois' ban came in their casino tax income fell by 22% although other states' casino income stayed stable or rose. Anita, you say you think casinos should be included: that could easily cost Indiana taxpayers fifty to one hundred million dollars a year. Do you want to pay that?

    And are you happy with the idea that you'll be paying similar but more well-hidden amounts for the rest of the ban? Don't let them fool you when they claim it will be "cost-free." One VERY important thing to remember about antismoking advocates is this: THEY LIE. Some of them lie for what they think is a "good cause," and some of them lie simply because they don't know any better and they're just repeating what they've been told, but they're still lies.

    Check the reference link to "The Lies Behind The Smoking Bans" that I gave in my previous post below. If you think I've misrepresented things there, then show it to everyone right here.

    - MJM
    • Agree
      I agree, this should also include casinos.
      • Freedom to choose
        Why do the smoking ban advocates feel this is such a great thing. Non smokers have the freedom to choose where they go and there are plenty of non-smoking bars in this city. What they want to do is take away a smokers right to choose to go to a bar that allows smoking. I personally always choose one that allows smoking. I will quit going to bars.

        My wish and prayer is that as soon as this freedom is stripped from me that all the backers of the ban are the next targets in the governments infringement on people's right to choose for themselves. I really sincerely hope that something that you enjoy is taken from you and you lose a freedom!
      • casinos
        This should have also included the casinos. Maybe next time.
        • Air Quality
          How about part of a bar's health inspection to include an air quality test. Every bar should be required by law to have smoke eaters fully operational and inspected yearly to scrub the air quality.
        • Smoking Ban Vote:
          While the vote was disappointing it wasn't unexpected: despite all the sound arguments to the contrary, it would be VERY hard, politically speaking, for a member of a "Health Committee Panel" to vote against a smoking ban without endangering their political position. The real test will come from the full vote when all the arguments are laid out and the legislators actually have to balance the harms of such a ban against the claimed benefits.

          In terms of those supposed "benefits," the lawmakers might want to listen to what the president of the American Medical Association, Dr. Peter Carmel, had to say:

          "Despite tremendous progress in enacting smoke-free laws and higher tobacco taxes to discourage tobacco use, the United States has seen smoking rates, especially among teens, remain flat...."


          The ban will NOT stop "the children" (even the 18 - 25 year old children that are the new "target" of antismoking advocates") from smoking. Nor will it "protect employees who are begging for help": you'll notice that you will NEVER see a poll of bar/club/ restaurant/casino employees asking them if they want a ban. The Antismokers KNOW that these folks do NOT want bans that will put them out of jobs and reduce their main source of income: happy customers.

          To see how they lie in order to get these bans pushed through, read "The Lies Behind The Smoking Bans" at:


          It's openly one-sided, but its facts are accurate and their presentation is honest. If anyone has ANY specific substantive criticisms of anything it says, please feel free to expose them here. I promise I won't mind, and I'll try to stop back to respond.

          Michael J. McFadden
          Author of "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains"

        Post a comment to this story

        We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
        You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
        Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
        No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
        We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

        Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

        Sponsored by

        facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

        Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
        Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
        Subscribe to IBJ
        1. If I were a developer I would be looking at the Fountain Square and Fletcher Place neighborhoods instead of Broad Ripple. I would avoid the dysfunctional BRVA with all of their headaches. It's like deciding between a Blackberry or an iPhone 5s smartphone. BR is greatly in need of updates. It has become stale and outdated. Whereas Fountain Square, Fletcher Place and Mass Ave have become the "new" Broad Ripples. Every time I see people on the strip in BR on the weekend I want to ask them, "How is it you are not familiar with Fountain Square or Mass Ave? You have choices and you choose BR?" Long vacant storefronts like the old Scholar's Inn Bake House and ZA, both on prominent corners, hurt the village's image. Many business on the strip could use updated facades. Cigarette butt covered sidewalks and graffiti covered walls don't help either. The whole strip just looks like it needs to be power washed. I know there is more to the BRV than the 700-1100 blocks of Broad Ripple Ave, but that is what people see when they think of BR. It will always be a nice place live, but is quickly becoming a not-so-nice place to visit.

        2. I sure hope so and would gladly join a law suit against them. They flat out rob people and their little punk scam artist telephone losers actually enjoy it. I would love to run into one of them some day!!

        3. Biggest scam ever!! Took 307 out of my bank ac count. Never received a single call! They prey on new small business and flat out rob them! Do not sign up with these thieves. I filed a complaint with the ftc. I suggest doing the same ic they robbed you too.

        4. Woohoo! We're #200!!! Absolutely disgusting. Bring on the congestion. Indianapolis NEEDS it.

        5. So Westfield invested about $30M in developing Grand Park and attendance to date is good enough that local hotel can't meet the demand. Carmel invested $180M in the Palladium - which generates zero hotel demand for its casino acts. Which Mayor made the better decision?