Tobacco.org

• Calif. group pushes for $1 tobacco tax increase for cancer research 

Smokers in California will have to dig much deeper into their pockets to buy a pack of cigarettes next year if a proposed ballot measure passes.

The Californians for a Cure plan is aimed at raising millions of dollars for cancer research, smoking prevention programs and to help bankroll anti-tobacco smuggling efforts. The measure is backed by, among others, cancer research and health advocates.

Their plan calls for a buck increase in the state's excise tax on tobacco, to $1.87 per pack. The money raised would flow into a trust fund. Sixty-cents of the dollar raised from a pack of smokes would to go to fund research on cancer and other smoking-related illnesses.

Under the plan, 20 cents would go to fund smoking cessation and tobacco use prevention programs, 15 cents would go to help fund research facilities, while three pennies would go to fund tobacco smuggling enforcement.

The plan calls for about two percent of the revenue to go for administrative costs.

How the money would be spent would be overseen by a nine-member oversight committee.

Jump to full article »

Smoking Ban May Impact Voter Turnout 

South Dakota's voter turnout for next November's election could be a lot different than past years.

A local political science professor says a smoking ban on that ballot would likely lure more people to the polls. He says that could have an impact on other initiatives and political races.

Both supporters and people against a statewide smoking ban have worked hard to let their opinions be heard. And many of the arguments boil down to an issue of public health versus personal rights. Political science professor Jay Newberger says strong beliefs on both sides could spark a surge of voters who might not otherwise make it to the polls.

"I think it's gonna bring out a whole lot of voters, people I think generally in South Dakota, all the polls indicated South Dakotans very much, accept the smoking ban," Newberger said.

Jump to full article »

BOGUS BAN? Opponents take unprecedented approach to restore smoking 

Groups opposing the state smoking ban have taken the fight up a notch, citing evidence of ballot fraud -- more than three years after voters approved the ban.

Opponents of Ohio Bans said the petition that placed the smoking ban on the 2006 statewide ballot was tainted by numerous irregularities, such as 46 convicted felons gathering signatures. The group claims the petitions should have never been certified.

Nearly 59 percent of voters approved the ban in 2006. The ban prohibits smoking in most public places in Ohio, including bars and restaurants.

According to an Ohio News Network report, members of Buckeye Liquor Permit Holders Association want the U.S. Department of Justice to investigate the fraud claims. They want family-owned businesses and private clubs exempted from the ban.

Under ban rules, "private residences; family-owned businesses without non-family employees; certain areas of nursing homes; outdoor patios; and some retail tobacco stores are exempt."

Association officials also are threatening a class action lawsuit for the hundreds of bars they claim went out of business because of the ban.

Jump to full article »

Vote on smoking ban OK'd 

Opponents of the state's smoking ban secured enough good signatures in a petition drive to put the issue before voters next November, Circuit Judge Kathleen Trandahl ruled Friday.

After hearing testimony in a two-day trial, Trandahl found that opponents of the ban collected 2,244 more signatures than they needed to force a public vote. She granted the opponents' request to order Secretary of State Chris Nelson to place the smoking ban on the November 2010 ballot.

Now proponents of the ban, including the American Cancer Society and the state, are weighing a decision to appeal.

The Legislature in March passed a nearly comprehensive ban on smoking in public places, and Gov. Mike Rounds signed it into law. It was supposed to have gone into effect in July, but implementation has been delayed as opponents mounted a referendum petition drive. The American Cancer Society challenged the validity of about 10,000 of the signatures, and the matter went to court, where Trandahl heard it this week in Pierre.

Trandahl noted that the secretary of state must decide whether to count signatures based on strict compliance with laws and regulations, but the courts have the discretion to decide when those who have gathered petition signatures have complied substantially with the laws and rules.

In her ruling from the bench Friday, Trandahl said that petitioners had gathered 19,020 valid signatures, 2,244 more than were required to meet the referendum threshold.

Jump to full article »

• Challenge fires up smoking-ban debate again 

Opponents of Ohio's indoor-smoking ban said yesterday that they have uncovered evidence of "massive" voter fraud on the part of ban proponents, more than three years after voters approved the curbs on smoking.

The group, Opponents of Ohio Bans, said the petition that placed the smoking ban on the 2006 statewide ballot was tainted by numerous irregularities, such as 47 felons gathering signatures and signature-gatherers in 77 counties wrongly listing the American Cancer Society as their employer.

The new allegations mirror claims raised during the 2006 campaign. However, opponents of the ban say there's now even stronger evidence of wrongdoing.

"What we found is astonishing," said Pam Parker, co-owner of Parker's Tavern in Grove City and co-chairwoman of Opponents of Ohio Bans. "There are petitions that never should have been validated."

Parker spoke yesterday at a news conference with Pat Carroll, president of the Buckeye State Liquor Permit Holders Association.

Even if the bar owners persuade authorities to investigate their allegations, and even if the authorities find merit in their claims, there's no clear path to overturn the smoking ban.

Nearly 59 percent of voters approved the ban in 2006. Officials in Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner's office said there's no precedent to invalidate a law passed by voters on the basis of problems in the petition process. In fact, Ohio law makes that impossible.

Jump to full article »

Reaction To Smoking Ban Ruling  

ling was exactly what businesses who count on smoker clientele were hoping for. They believe they'll have enough support at the polls to stop the ban from going into effect.

The judge's ruling in pierre, took the smoking ban out of the courts and into the hands of voters.

"Let's vote on it and see what happens and it's going to wind up being whatever the voters decide. Very simple," said voter Dale Wilber

Bar and restaurant owners who oppose a statewide ban aren't asking for anything more.

Jump to full article »

• STATE: Smoking ban can go to vote, judge rules  

South Dakota's new smoking ban will remain on hold until voters decide its fate next November.

That's where the issue stands for now after Circuit Judge Kathleen Trandahl ruled Friday afternoon there are sufficient valid signatures on petitions to refer the ban to a statewide vote next year.

After a two-day trial, Trandahl restored a net total of 2,261 signatures which Secretary of State Chris Nelson previously ruled were invalid. Before that, the petitions had stood 17 signatures short of the 16,776 minimum needed to make the ballot.

Her decision remains subject to a possible appeal to the South Dakota Supreme Court by Nelson or the American Cancer Society, which lobbied for the law and intervened in the lawsuit.

Nelson and a cancer society official each said no decision has been made yet regarding an appeal.

The judge said Nelson properly did his job in reviewing the signatures. She said state law gives the secretary of state “no discretion” regarding validity of signatures.

Jump to full article »

Ruling Means Voters To Decide Smoking Ban 

It's been nearly a year since South Dakota lawmakers approved a smoking ban in the state, but it could be another year before we hear the final word on the issue. A circuit court judge's ruling will allow the voters of South Dakota to decide the fate of the smoking ban.

Judge Kathleen Trandahl's ruling Friday afternoon gave opponents of the ban more than 2,000 signatures. The major ruling came when Trandahl said the petitions that contained notary errors were valid.

It's a ruling that's considered a victory by one side and may be challenged by the other. Allowing South Dakotans to vote on a statewide smoking ban is what opponents have been fighting for since the ban was passed by the legislature this spring.

Jump to full article »

VIDEO: American Cancer Society Could Appeal Smoking Ban Decision 

Judge Kathleen Trandahl ruled that petitioners do in fact have enough valid signatures to send the issue of smoking in bars, restaurants, and casinos to a vote come next November.

The American Cancer Society may appeal the decision.

The battle over the smoking ban continued inside this courtroom today as each side tried to convince the judge about petition signatures.

The state says many of the 25,400 signatures are invalid but petitioners disagree. It was a numbers game in court today with Judge Trandahl saying the petitioners have 2,244 more signatures than required to put the issue of lighting up to a vote.

Bob Hartford, Director of the South Dakota Music and Vending Association is happy with Judge Trandahl's decision.

Jump to full article »

Judge rules SD smoking ban goes to public vote  

Opponents of South Dakota's new smoking ban have gathered enough petition signatures to put the measure to a statewide public vote next year, a circuit judge ruled Friday.

After hearing testimony in a two-day trial, Circuit Judge Kathleen Trandahl found that opponents of the ban had collected 2,244 more signatures than they needed to force a public vote. She granted the opponents' request to order Secretary of State Chris Nelson to place the smoking ban on the November 2010 ballot.

Nelson and officials of the American Cancer Society, who argued the measure should not be on the ballot, said they will decide whether to appeal Trandahl's ruling to the South Dakota Supreme Court.

Trandahl noted that the secretary of state must decide whether to count signatures based on strict compliance with laws and regulations, but the courts have the discretion to decide when those who gather petition signatures have substantially complied with the laws and rules.

The judge counted more than 2,000 signatures Nelson had thrown out because the notaries public who witnessed the signatures of those who circulated those petition sheets had written incorrect or incomplete dates for when their notary commissions expired. She also counted hundreds of signatures with other technical errors.

In some cases, Trandahl said the challenged signatures met legal requirements. In others, she said signatures would count because circulators and notary publics had substantially complied with the law.

Jump to full article »

Circuit Judge in Pierre Says Smoking Ban Will Go to Public Vote in 2010 

A circuit judge in Pierre says a proposed state-wide smoking ban will go to a public vote in November of 2010.

The decision came down after the judge heard closing arguments from the American Cancer Society and a group of bar and casino owners who gathered signatures.

Jump to full article »

• Voters Will Decide On Smoking Ban 

A judge has ruled that a law which would ban smoking in South Dakota bars and casinos will go to a public vote in November 2010.

Circuit Judge Kathleen Trandahl made her ruling shortly after closing arguments wrapped up Friday afternoon.

Jump to full article »

Smoking ban could be changed or put to voters  

Island voters may get a chance to decide during the May election where smoking should be allowed.

Dissatisfied with the smoking ordinance they adopted earlier this year, city council members voted unanimously to consider four options for changing it.

The ordinance, which takes effect Jan. 1, bans smoking in restaurants, bars, outdoor seating areas, tobacco stores and private clubs.

During their Dec. 3 meeting, council members will talk about amending it to allow smoking in tobacco stores and bars. They also will consider either rescinding it permanently or rescinding it and putting it on the May ballot.

Complaints from business owners, including the bar and restaurant owners who initially supported the ban, prompted the council to reconsider the changes.

The ordinance as adopted is one of the strictest in the state. But as it was proposed, the ordinance was more consistent with regulations in other cities, allowing smoking in outdoor seating areas and tobacco stores.

Jump to full article »

Smoking ban could go to vote  

A judge began hearing testimony Thursday on whether the South Dakota secretary of state properly excluded signatures from a petition to bring the smoking ban issue to a public vote.

The testimony began after Circuit Judge Kathleen Trandahl ruled that the smoking ban passed by the Legislature is eligible to be referred to voters. The opposite ruling would have settled the case, but now the court system must determine whether opponents collected enough valid signatures to put it on next year's ballot.

The ban was to become effective in July, but a group of casino and bar owners submitted about 25,400 petition signatures seeking a public vote. Nelson invalidated almost 9,000 of the signatures, leaving opponents short of the referendum threshold.

Jump to full article »

Smoking Ban Decision Expected Soon 

After months of delays, testimony in South Dakota's smoking ban trial has wrapped up.

Closing arguments will get underway at 1:15 p.m. Friday and then the judge is expected to make a decision on whether the ban will go to a public vote.

Jump to full article »