Smoking Ban Protesters Gathering for Ceremonial Signing in Salina
Print This Article
When Governor Mark Parkinson holds a ceremonial signing for the statewide smoking ban in Salina Monday, he’ll be met by as many small business owners and other protesters as Sheila Martin can muster.
Martin owns the Top Hat, a private bar in Hutchinson, and has been active in fighting the statewide smoking ban that she and many other business owners see as a threat to control of private property and personal choices. They also say the ban will cause financial harm to many bars.
Martin’s bar is exempted from the ban for now but she said she’ll fight on for other business owners believing that at some time in the future the ban may be applied to her business too. The state-owned casinos, 20 percent of hotel rooms, certain types of private clubs, VFWs and a few other businesses are currently exempted. The law’s exemption of state-owned casinos has drawn criticism and ridicule from many.
Parkinson’s office issued a press release after the formal signing of the ban Friday.”The governor will also be holding ceremonial bill signings on Monday, March 15th in Kansas City and Salina. The Kansas City signing will be held at the University of Kansas’ School of Nursing Atrium at 1:30 p.m. The Salina signing will be at the Salina-Saline County Health Agency at 3:30 p.m.”
The protest Martin’s organizing will be in Salina at 3:30 p.m. Monday at the Salina Public Library, 125 W. Elm (map), just down the street from the Governor’s signing. In an email notice of the rally Martin said, “We’re going to mosey over and tell the Governor and his paid off flunkies what we think of the smoking ban in small businesses.”
Posted under Breaking News, Governor, Health Care.
Tags: Governor, Mark Parkinson, Sheila Martin, Smoking ban
12:12 am on March 14th, 2010
VFW’s are NOT exempt in Newton, Topeka, Salina, Emporia, Garden City, Derby. I sure hope I’m not the only one mustering folks to come! These people OWN their property, and have families to feed and payments to make. They provide jobs in their communities. The Governor of Kansas should NOT be selling nicotine replacement for Johnson and Johnson and Pfizer. And he and the State Democratic Party and politicos should NOT be taking campaign donations from them either!
6:54 am on March 14th, 2010
A letter from a cancer researcher at the ACS
I’m Robert E. Madden MD, FACS. I am also a non-smoker. HOWEVER I am a passionate opponent smoking bans. Most of the opposition to the smoking bans has been based upon economic factors such as loss of business revenue, even closings. My opposition is due to loss of individual freedom and abuse of scientific fact.
I am a practicing chest surgeon, a teacher and a former cancer researcher. I am also past president of the NY Cancer Society. I will not tell you that smoking is harmless and without risk, in fact one in eight hundred smokers will develop lung cancer. Asthmatics should avoid tobacco smoke. What I will say is: 1) it’s a personal choice and 2) so called second smoke (ETS) is virtually harmless. One may not like the smell but it has not been shown to cause cancer, even in bartenders. If people do not like the odor then they may go elsewhere. Those who support the ban have no right to deny 24% of the adult population their enjoyment of a popular product based on dislike, possibly hatred of smoking. This attitude is that of a bigot, akin to anti-Semitism or racism.
To me the most offensive element of the smoking bans is the resort to science as “proving that environmental smoke, second hand smoke, causes lung cancer”. Not only is this unproven but there is abundant and substantial evidence to the contrary. It is frustrating, even insulting, for a scientist like myself to hear the bloated statistics put out by the American Cancer Society (of which I am a member) and the American Lung Association used to justify what is best described as a political agenda. Smokers enjoy smoking. Most non-smokers are neutral. Anti-smokers hate smoking. It is this last group that drives the engine of smoking bans. Smoking sections in restaurants, ventilated bars and the like have been satisfactory and used for years. To those who choose to smoke they do so at their own risk. To those eschew smoking let them patronize establishments whose owners prohibit smoking. To impose a city wide or a state wide ban is to deny people of their rights.
Respectfully,
Robert E. Madden, M.D
9:23 am on March 14th, 2010
Here in Chicago, after the first winter, many neighborhood bars (not family restaurants that also serve alcohol) had to make a decision to either allow smoking, or close. All those new customers never showed up. The only complaints are from neighbors of the bars that comply, who can vote their precint dry. These bans are more of an effort to legislate morality than anything else. I can’t use links here, but the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, who is behind these bans using tax exempt political action committees (charities) already has a movement going to repeat prohibition.
4:08 pm on March 15th, 2010
As a resident of Richmond, VA, home of the world’s largest cigarette plant (Philip Morris), and a restaurant critic, I can tell you that the non-smoking ban in restaurants that went into effect last Dec. 1 is winning over even the smokers. For every hard-case smoker who has complained–many of those are the guys who sit at the bar all day nursing beer–there are more who praise the move. One neighborhood place that was so smoky that non-smokers avoided it, now is full every day with families who enjoy the fresh small and look (the place was painted to remove smoke stains). And the staff, including the smokers, are happy too. I also live part-time in New York City, where even the bars, which do not serve food, are doing a brisk business. The Virginia law contains a loophole that permits restaurants to have a smoking room if it has its own ventilation system and entrance, but even some of hose few places that made that costly conversion are having second thoughts. If a state like Virginia, where tobacco is the number one cash crop and a leading employer of manufacturing, can ban smoking in most restaurants, so can Kansas. Finally, I know it’s a freedom issue for some, like motorcycle helmets and seat belts, but smoking is different, no matter what one doctor says. You can also find “scientists” who don’t acknowlege global warming or evolution–just go to your friendly local Tea Party,
12:25 pm on April 20th, 2010
We, as business owners are oppoing the smoking ban.
What has happened to freedom of choice?? It is legal to smoke .
We, the people should have the right to smoke or not. the state wants us to buy cigg. for tax purpose, but htey do not want us to smoke.
We sell retial cigg. As of July 1st we will be sending our license back to the state, our customers won’t be allowed to smoke , so why should we sell them??
Our business will be one at high risk to close once the smoking ban goes into effect.
Most of our customers smoke and if they can’t come in have a meal, drink a beer and smoke then they will stay home.
Our business is located in a small rural town of about 298 people.
we offer retail items for sell as well as food. we sponsor 2 different pool leagues and have pool tournaments, these tournaments help bring in revenue neede to continue to keep us open.
If we are forced to close due to the smoking ban, then our rural area town will once again be withhout a business in town.
Not that the state seems to care, but if we and other small businesses are closed due to lack of income, then the state will alos be losing their sales tax money that all businesses pay them. The state will lose more revenue.
I say it should be the peoples choice. If you are a non smoking and do not want to be subject to the smoke, you do not have to enter our business, you can go to a business that is no smoking.
what is the state thinking ?? We are not hurting them by alllowing smoking.
But it will hurt the state money wise, when they have less sales tax to collect from businesess, because they have been forced to close due to lack of customers and income .
Change the law, let us the business people decide!!!
Does the state pay our bills or our property tax?? NO! of course not.