Tobacco.org

OK State Senator hopes to give communites more control over smoking standards  

ARDMORE, OK -- An Oklahoma state senator hopes to give local communities more control over smoking standards.

Senator Frank Simpson filed a bill Wednesday that would allow each government subdivision o adopt a smoking policy they see fit for their area.

Currently, Oklahoma cities and towns are not allowed to enforce a stricter smoking ordinance than the state law.

Jump to full article »

Smoking won't stop workers from getting jobs in South Dakota, yet  

As smoking bans sweep the country, an increasing number of employers - primarily hospitals - are imposing bans on hiring people who test positive for nicotine use, whether cigarettes, smokeless tobacco or even nicotine patches. Such policies appear designed to promote health and reduce insurance premiums, and are in force or coming to Texas, Ohio and Idaho among other places.

State law in South Dakota specifically prohibits employers from firing workers "due to that employee's engaging in any use of tobacco products off the premises of the employer during nonworking hours." But James Marsh, director of Labor and Management for the state Department of Labor, said Friday that he's not aware of any state laws applying to tobacco-free hiring policies.

"We've informed people in the past that if they were to establish policies that effectively prohibit them from hiring smokers, we're not going to stop them," Marsh said. "As far as we can tell, there aren't any human rights laws being violated."

Jump to full article »

Indian Rocks Beach considers $500 fine for littering beach with cigarette butts 

Smoking and leaving your butts stubbed out in the sand on the city's beach could cost you $500.

That is the fine the City Commission wants to impose in a new litter ordinance it will consider at its Jan. 10 meeting.

The ordinance would not ban smoking. It just prohibits leaving smoking-related litter behind.

After an hour-long workshop with county and state health officials last week, commissioners appeared poised to enact a stiff fine to discourage smoking on the beach.

They stopped short of out-right banning smoking, largely because of a Florida law that currently prevents local governments from enacting smoke-free regulations.

That law did not stop Gulfport, however, which banned smoking last month on its beach, athletic fields and on playgrounds.

Jump to full article »

NOVELLO: Give local governments right to protect their citizens' health 

Despite huge strides over the past few decades, use of tobacco continues to be the nation's leading preventable cause of disease, disability and death -- and not just for smokers. According to the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, some 450,000 Americans die from tobacco use each year, with about 50,000 of those deaths attributable to secondhand smoke exposure.

The fight to protect all Floridians from asthma, lung cancer, heart disease and other health effects of tobacco is gaining momentum. Orange County is at the epicenter of that movement, with the "all in" project leading the way. The strong support from business, health, education and community groups is helping the project in championing efforts to expand tobacco-free places in our community.

However, efforts of this magnitude are not enough. Unfair language inserted into state statutes stands in the way. Florida law pre-empts the regulation of smoking to the state government, tying the hands of cities and counties that wish to enact stricter smoking policies. Shouldn't our locally elected officials be able to respond to their constituents' desires for more pro-health policies? . . .

As we mark the Great American Smokeout today, I am proud of our accomplishments in Orange County -- and believe the best is yet to come. Restoring home rule will allow Central Floridians to work and live in healthy communities, a right every citizen deserves.

Jump to full article »

Passidomo proposes allowing cities, counties to outlaw smoking at public sites  

But if legislation offered by Rep. Kathleen Passidomo, R-Naples, passes next year in Tallahassee, smoking on the pier and on other municipal properties could be outlawed.

Passidomo's changes to the Florida Clean Indoor Air Act would allow cities and counties to further ban smoking, amending a provision that gives the state top authority on smoking laws. The state's so-called pre-emptive power is believed to apply to all smoking laws, making it easy to toss out a local ordinance if contested in court.

A similar bill she proposed earlier this year never made it out of committee. . . .

For elected officials in Naples, butts are not the problem, the smoke is. For years, city leaders have crusaded for local smoke-free laws.

"My father died of lung cancer from smoking Camels from the time he was in World War II," Naples Councilman John Sorey said.

In 2009, the city's human resources department stopped hiring smokers.

Jump to full article »

• Lost in the smoke: Response to a question on a smoking ban may have statewide implications 

Mike Hanke would like the city of Chippewa Falls to adopt the state’s workplace smoking ban as a city ordinance. That way, the city could give tickets when there are violations, instead of relying on the county district attorney’s office to prosecute offenders.

“To me, that’s the easiest and simplest way of doing this,” he said.

Problem is, he’s not sure the city can legally do that. An email from an assistant attorney general casts doubt if it can be done.

Potentially, that has statewide implications for towns, villages and cities that have already created their own ordinances mirroring the smoking ban, also known as Act 12.

“I don’t know if Act 12 would allow us to enact Act 12 as a city ordinance,” he said.

Hanke, who represents the city’s First Ward, spelled out his reservations before a gathering of tavern owners at the Snout Saloon, 13 W. Central St., on Friday morning.

Several of those same owners complained at Tuesday’s city council about a proposed city ordinance that is based on one adopted in Eau Claire before the state law took effect.

Jump to full article »

• Editorial: Local governments, not state of Florida, should have final authority over smoking regulations  

The law has been on the books in Florida for 26 years.

It's time to change the law.

The state's Clean Indoor Air Act of 1985 contains a clause that "expressly preempts regulation of smoking to the state and supersedes any municipal or county ordinance on the subject." Basically, it prohibited local governments from enacting laws to restrict smoking in any indoor or outdoor setting, or to restrict the marketing, advertising and sale of tobacco products. . . .

Recently, members of Students Working Against Tobacco in Martin County urged county officials to adopt a resolution urging the Legislature to "restore the right of local governments to enact and enforce smoke-free air and other tobacco-related laws."

Martin County commissioners unanimously approved the resolution. They also approved a second resolution urging tobacco retailers in the county to stop selling and marketing flavored tobacco products.

Members of the SWAT group told commissioners their organization conducted research in 2010 and found that 75 percent of retailers located within three miles of Martin County's middle and high schools sell flavored tobacco products. . . .

All Treasure Coast governments — and others throughout the state — should follow suit and adopt similar resolutions. . . .

Each county and municipality in Florida should be allowed to decide for itself the extent of its anti-smoking laws. Reserving this right to the state — and denying it to individual communities — is ludicrous. Likewise, local retailers should be urged to stop selling candy- and fruit-flavored tobacco products — products that are putting a new generation of Americans at risk for tobacco-related illnesses.

Jump to full article »

Proposed bill would give cities say on smoking 

A bill introduced into the Florida House of Representatives may allow individual cities and counties to designate smoke-free zones or ban smoking all together on public property.

See the complete story in your e-Edition.

Jump to full article »

• State Preemption of Local Tobacco Control Policies Restricting Smoking, Advertising, and Youth Access  

Preemptive state tobacco control legislation prohibits localities from enacting tobacco control laws that are more stringent than state law. State preemption provisions can preclude any type of local tobacco control policy. The three broad types of state preemption tracked by CDC include preemption of local policies that restrict 1) smoking in workplaces and public places, 2) tobacco advertising, and 3) youth access to tobacco products. A Healthy People 2020 objective (TU-16) calls for eliminating state laws that preempt any type of local tobacco control law (1). A previous study reported that the number of states that preempt local smoking restrictions in one or more of three settings (government worksites, private-sector worksites, and restaurants) has decreased substantially in recent years (2). To measure progress toward achieving Healthy People 2020 objectives, this study expands on the previous analysis to track changes in state laws that preempt local advertising and youth access restrictions and to examine policy changes from December 31, 2000, to December 31, 2010. This new analysis found that, in contrast with the substantial progress achieved during the past decade in reducing the number of states that preempt local smoking restrictions, no progress has been made in reducing the number of states that preempt local advertising restrictions and youth access restrictions. Increased progress in removing state preemption provisions will be needed to achieve the relevant Healthy People 2020 objective.

Jump to full article »

• Most States Still Preempt Local Smoking Policies  

No progress has been made in the past decade toward abolishing state-level restrictions on local anti-smoking policies, one of the goals of the national Healthy People 2020 project, researchers said.

Whereas 28 states in 2000 preempted at least some types of local effort to discourage smoking, such restrictions were still in place last year in 27 states, according to Michelle Griffin, MPH, of the University of Washington in Seattle, and three CDC researchers.

They reported findings from the CDC's State Tobacco Activities Tracking and Evaluation database in the Aug. 26 issue of Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report.

Although eight states have dropped laws that prevent localities from adopting ordinances and administrative rules that limit smoking in workplaces and public gathering spots, states have been reluctant to allow local restrictions on tobacco advertising or vending methods that make tobacco products available to minors.

"Like smoke-free laws, restrictions on advertising and youth access are components of a comprehensive approach to tobacco control," Griffin and colleagues wrote, citing studies that these are effective in reducing tobacco use.

Jump to full article »

Multnomah County fights to increase cigarette tax - Koinlocal6.com 

A senate bill to allow Oregon’s counties the right to raise their own tobacco taxes is stalled in Oregon’s senate.　 Senate bill 692 would remove the preemption law that gives the state the sole authority to alter cigarette taxes.　

The bill would also require at least 20 percent of any tax imposed by county on cigarettes or tobacco products to be used for public health programs or services.

Jump to full article »

Judge promises ruling on smoking ban by Friday 

Will Springfield's smoking ban take effect early Saturday, or be delayed by a bar owner's lawsuit?

The answer Wednesday: Ask again later.

After listening to attorneys argue for and against a delay on Springfield's smoking ban --and asking several questions of his own -- Associate Circuit Judge Jason Brown took the case under advisement, promising a decision by Friday.

Ruthie's Bar owner Jean Doublin has filed a lawsuit alleging the sweeping smoking ban approved in April conflicts with a state law that allows bars and certain other businesses to make "non-smoking areas unavailable."

Jump to full article »

Lawsuit Clouds Springfield's Smoking Ordinance Launch  

Bars and restaurants in Springfield are seeking a little clarity when it comes to Springfield's new smoking ordinance.

A lawsuit challenging the law could delay the start of the implementation, which is supposed to go into effect in four days.

It could be Saturday, June 11, as originally planned, two months from now, or never.

Until then, business owners are stuck in a cloud of uncertainty.

Jump to full article »

No decision from judge yet on Springfield smoking ban 

No immediate decision came today on whether Springfield's expanded ban on public smoking will go into effect as planned this weekend.

Attorneys appeared in front of Greene County Associate Circuit Judge Jason Brown this afternoon, arguing whether the ordinance should be blocked until a lawsuit challenging the ban is resolved.

The judge is not expected to rule on a request for a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction -- which would put the ban on hold -- until he has time to digest information presented. He told attorneys at about 4 p.m. today that he would take their points under advisement and give a ruling by Friday.

Jump to full article »

Business owners await judge's ruling on proposed delay of city smoking ban  

The city-wide smoking ban that was passed by fewer than five percent of the registered voters in Springfield, Mo. is scheduled to go into effect Saturday, June 11 at 12:01 am. Whether or not that is the case will be decided by a local judge who expects to hand down a ruling on a request for a restraining order that would halt the city's intention to begin enforcing the new ordinance this weekend.

Associate Circuit Judge Jason Brown has heard motions concerning the proposed preliminary injunction to delay the enforcement of the ban until a ruling is made on a challenge to the law by a local bar owner. The assertion of the bar owner's challenge is that the local ordinance is countermanded by a state law permitting bars to designate non-smoking areas in their establishments.

Jump to full article »