Tobacco.org

• Smokers in Croatia go back in bars as tobacco ban lifted - temporarily 

On April 1, Croatia banned indoors smoking in all public places, and bar owners say the restriction has halved their profits and forced many of them to close. . . .

So the government announced Friday that it will ease the ban, allowing spacious cafes and bars to have separate smoking areas, while smaller ones can decide whether to allow smoking or not.

Smoking places will, however, have to install extensive ventilation systems.

Jump to full article »

• Geneva's smoking ban returns after one-year break 

A ban on smoking in public places will return to Switzerland's Geneva canton after being approved in a referendum Sunday, a year after a court ended a first bid to prohibit lighting up.

Geneva's residents voted 81.77 percent in favour of bringing back the ban, with only 18.3 percent voting against.

A canton-wide smoking ban in public places was originally introduced on July 1, 2008, after the state government used a first referendum as grounds for pushing through the move.

But the Federal Tribunal ruled three months later that the ban should not have been passed by the canton's lawmakers before the state's government enacted legislation. . . .

The new rules allow bar, hotel and restaurant owners to fit out special smoking rooms in their establishments . . .

Supporters of the ban are opposed to this compromise, however, and said Sunday they would appeal to the Federal Tribunal.

Jump to full article »

• Dutch govt to change smoking law after court defeat 

The Dutch government vowed Friday to change the law to keep bars smoke free after it suffered two successive defeats in court against bar owners challenging a smoking ban.

A cabinet statement said the government would introduce changes to legislation in order to make sure that "a uniform obligation" applied to all.

Dutch bar owners won two victories earlier this year in their fight against a smoking ban on their premises.

Two different courts found that the law, aimed at protecting staff from second-hand smoke inhalation, unfairly discriminated against small, one-man operations . . .

The cabinet said the planned changes would make allowances for the introduction of "innovative air sytstems" if they could be proven effective enough to be an alternative to a dedicated smoking area in small bars.

Jump to full article »

• Shanghai may become China's first city to ban smoking in public places  

Shanghai may become one of the first Chinese cities to ban smoking in public places. A smoking ban is supposed to be implemented in the city by the end of the year. How strict it will be, depends on city lawmakers who are set to discuss a draft that outlines several options which could be adopted.

The draft includes four types of smoking bans: The most strict bans smoking both indoors and outdoors in kindergartens, schools and hospitals and public transportation waiting areas. Venues such as restaurants, gyms, and work places would be required to set up designated smoking areas. While owners of other public venues would be required to adopt their own smoking bans.

Officials say more discussions are needed on how to divide space in restaurants and hotels.

Jump to full article »

• Smoking debate leaves a few burning questions 

Arguments aside, the way leading lawmakers handled the issue of a potential statewide smoking ban in taverns and restaurants this week was not in the spirit of a more transparent government.

The two committee chairman handling the bill -- Jon Erpenbach and Jon Richards -- gave a just a shade more than the required 24-hour notice before holding a hearing and then voting on the bill.

With the Democrats now in control of the dome, it's expected that the ban will sail through the Legislature swimmingly, so there was really no reason for legislative subterfuge.

Republicans were in the majority and able to block such efforts last year. Gov. Jim Doyle tried to shove this policy in the budget, but Democratic leadership thought that move even less transparent and figured this would be a better dog-and-pony show.

It didn't get past Milwaukee Ald. Bob Donovan, who sent out a scathing press release about the under-the-radar hearings.

"It now seems Gov. Doyle and some state legislators are willing to throw out the constitution on their crusade to snuff out smoking," . . .

The Cigar Store Alliance of Wisconsin showed up in force, telling the committee that they have invested hundreds of thousands of dollars on ventilation and air purification systems and other amenities. They unanimously said that a smoking ban would shut down their businesses. The response to the cigar group from anti-smoking folks was that it was too bad that they made a bad business decision given the environment towards smoking.

A more interesting comment came from a women identified as "Miss Thompson." She sees the anti-smoking folks as conducting a "witch hunt" and that it's a "Nazi ideology that the individual belongs to the state" and that victims are being kept in the dark by a "censured media" while government is "totally corrupt and out of control."

Sometimes, the advocates for the ban got their facts confused, with one Lung Association representative saying that four of every five people are non-smokers and another Lung Association rep asserting that the figures are three non-smokers for every four people.

Jump to full article »

• Bill easing smoking ban passes  

CARSON CITY, Nev.--A bill that would ease the terms of a voter-approved measure that banned smoking in many bars and other public places was approved on a 6-1 Wednesday by a key legislative committee.

SB372, approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee, would soften the 2006 Nevada Clean Indoor Air Act to allow smoking in bars that serve food as long as minors are restricted from entry. Also, businesses could wall off separately ventilated smoking rooms.

Jump to full article »

• Critics Say Smoking Bill Is Weak Ban  

When Virginia Gov. Timothy M. Kaine (D) and Republican House Speaker William J. Howell announced that they had quietly brokered a compromise that would ban smoking in the state's bars and restaurants, anti-smoking advocates did not rejoice. They read the fine print.

And they didn't like what they found.

They said vague language in the ban allowed restaurants to create separate ventilated rooms for smokers but didn't define the standards for such a room. And they said the fine for ignoring the ban was tiny -- $25 for a violation. . . .

Tobacco industry lobbyists weren't happy, either. Glynn Loope, executive director of Cigar Rights of America, said that when the Internet lighted up with news of the ban, he was so mad he "almost threw the computer across the room."

For years, critics of Kaine and Howell (Stafford) have argued that the two showed a striking lack of interest in brokering legislative deals. Now, they have brought the General Assembly closer to passing a restaurant smoking ban in Virginia, a significant political and cultural shift for a state whose history has been intertwined with tobacco for centuries. The deal they struck is taking heavy fire from advocates on both sides.

As Kaine and Howell have pushed to win final approval of the ban, mistrust has pervaded the state Capitol. . . .

Loope began shopping around ideas of acceptable smoking restrictions, borrowing on legislation enacted in other states. In Oregon, for example, workers in smoky environments can sign waivers indicating they have been warned of the risks but opted to ignore them. In New York, cigar bars thrive, an exception to the city's smoking ban, because patrons go there explicitly to buy and use tobacco products.

Loope said he shared some of his research with Del. David B. Albo (R-Fairfax). Albo spent November and early December crafting his own version of a bill that attempted to address the concerns of the tobacco industry and the anti-smoking advocates.

"We basically came up with what we thought was a fair compromise," Albo said.

Jump to full article »

• Smoking ban amendments dismay Virginia governor 

Democratic Gov. Timothy M. Kaine said amendments that substantially dilute a compromise bill to sharply curb smoking in Virginia restaurants breached a deal he made with House Republican leaders.

The House, meanwhile, voted 61-37 for its identical version of the watered-down Senate bill it approved Monday. That puts both bills before the Senate where the House amendments face a challenge.

Kaine wouldn't commit Tuesday to vetoing the measure if the House amendments remain, but he was clear that they are unpalatable. Neither measure passed with the 67-vote majority necessary to sustain a veto in the 100-member House.

''We made a deal,'' Kaine told reporters Tuesday morning. ''Folks said we're going to stand up and support a bill that has some very defined provisions in it, and we need to get the bill back to the deal. The advocacy community feels strongly about it and so do I.''

Jump to full article »

• Smoking ban advances 

VIDEO: Legislators discuss smoking ban

The Republican-controlled House of Delegates -- the last barrier to a further clampdown on smoking in public -- could vote as early as Monday to ban lighting up in restaurants and bars across a state built in part on the riches of tobacco.

Heralded by a bipartisan group of lawmakers as an advancement for public health, the proposed smoking prohibition -- already favored by the Virginia Senate -- would represent an expansion of restrictions enacted more than a decade ago that were written largely by tobacco interests.

The new rules, however, and their narrow limitations quickly drew fire from health advocates as weak and from restaurateurs as government meddling in the marketplace.

"This is a political issue, not a health issue," said Thomas Lisk, a lawyer-lobbyist for the Virginia Hospitality and Travel Association.

The prohibition would make exceptions for private clubs and restaurants with a designated smoking room that is physically separated and independently ventilated . . .

High-dollar restaurants and chains may be able to meet all the stipulations, but new walls and air systems could push mom-and-pop shops out of business, critics argue.

Jump to full article »

• Lightening up on smokers? 

To smoke or not to smoke - at least in cigar lounges and similar businesses - is the question going before the City Council on Tuesday night.

In December, the council approved amending Long Beach's ordinance that bans smoking inside public places and workplaces, as proposed by Councilwoman Tonia Reyes Uranga of the 7th District.

City Attorney Robert Shannon has rewritten the law for the council, though the amendment is broader than the council's original direction of allowing smoking only in "cigar lounges."

Under the proposed law, smoking would still be illegal in most public places, but an exemption would exist for "smoking lounges," which are defined in the proposed amendment to include "cigar shops, cigar lounges, hookah lounges, or tobacco shops."

The council meets at 5 p.m. Tuesday in City Hall, 333 W. Ocean Blvd. . . .

In 1993, Long Beach was one of the first cities in California to institute a citywide smoking ban that even outlaws cigar lounges, which state law permits. Since then, however, many cigar, hookah and other smoking lounges have operated illegally, and city health officials say they have only taken action when they received complaints about the businesses.

Now, Uranga and cigar lounge owners say the businesses should be brought into the fold of legality so they may practice what many see as a sophisticated pastime that doesn't harm others so long as it is controlled. . . .

Gallegos and other opponents of the new law say there are still too many unknowns, that they doubt the effectiveness of ventilation systems to keep the smoke away from others and that the council is rushing to a decision. At the very least, Gallegos said, the city's health experts should weigh in before a decision is made.

Jump to full article »

• Foxwoods union criticizes governor over smoking settlement with Mohegans 

Organized table-games dealers at Foxwoods Resort Casino told Gov. M. Jodi Rell Wednesday that the second-hand smoke they breathe on the job every day can’t be removed by high-tech ventilation systems.

In a letter hand-delivered to the governor’s office, the UAW at Foxwoods Organizing Committee expressed “grave concern” that Rell has reached an agreement with Mohegan Sun, Foxwoods’ competitor, to address secondhand smoke through the installation of ventilation systems.

A spokesman for the Mohegan Tribe, which owns Mohegan Sun, confirmed that the tribe and the governor concluded discussions on the matter months ago and that the tribe was planning an announcement this week.

“We already began implementing the results of those government-to-government discussions,” Chuck Bunnell, the Mohegan Tribe’s chief of staff, said. “We’ve already started banning smoking on the Mohegan (Sun) campus, with the exception of the gaming floor …”

Bunnell said that no less than 20 percent of the casino’s gaming area would be smoke-free, the result of a near doubling of the existing smoke-free space there. He said equipment is being installed in smoking areas to blow smoke away from employees and guests and into the casino’s existing ventilation systems.

For its part, the state has agreed not pursue attempts to impose a total smoking ban at the casino, Bunnell said.

Jump to full article »

• Smoke-free Hong Kong may allow hi-tech smoking rooms in bars 

Hi-tech smoking rooms may be allowed in Hong Kong bars when a total ban on cigarettes in places where food and drink are being served comes into effect in 2009, a news report said Monday.

Officials are examining a 40,000-US-dollar smoking room partly funded by British American Tobacco at a Hong Kong bar to see if exemptions should be granted to bars with hi-tech facilities.

The tobacco company claims the room removes and recycles smoke fumes safely and argues that it could save bars with high percentages of smoking customers from going bust.

However, the city's leading anti-smoking campaigner Anthony Hedley told Monday's South China Morning Post that allowing smoking rooms would be 'nothing short of a scandal.'

Jump to full article »

• Casinos going green to save energy, money, but smoking can get in the way  

Even in an industry closely identified with devil-may-care gluttony, going green makes business sense as consumers increasingly demand sustainable products and services . . .

The trend is reaching even casinos in Las Vegas, long criticized by environmentalists for its extravagant use of natural resources.

In April, the Palazzo Las Vegas resort became the world's largest building project to receive a Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, or LEED, certificate from the U.S. Green Building Council. . . .

Casinos typically face a big obstacle to LEED certification: the need to satisfy customers who smoke. LEED requires separate smoking areas and systems to contain and remove smoke and monitor air quality, said Ashley Katz, spokeswoman for the green building council.

Absher said those requirements make the casino the only section of the 76-acre, mixed-use CityCenter project that MGM doesn't expect will qualify for LEED certification, despite the casino's other sustainable features.

"We will meet all the other standards," he said. "But we cannot overcome this. Smoking is something that is very important to our customer base at this point."

It's especially hard to limit tobacco use in a tribal casino, given its iconic status in American Indian culture. But Turtle Creek developers tried to do the next best thing by installing a purifying system.

Jump to full article »

• Casinos trying to clear air of cigarette smoke 

But in an age when an estimated 80 percent of Americans don't smoke, tribal casinos are investing in smoke-clearing equipment to keep non-smokers happy and playing the slots.

"It's a business decision casinos are making," said Sheila Morago, executive director of the Arizona Indian Gaming Association.

"People say they don't want smoke in their faces. And engineers keep coming out with newer and better (smoke-removal) systems."

The Gila River Indian Community is spending approximately $500,000 on a state-of-the-art smoke-clearing system at a casino under construction south of Chandler. . . .

Retired Tempe physician Leland Fairbanks, now president of the Mesa-based Arizonans Concerned About Smoking Inc., explained that toxic particulates from tobacco smoke may remain in the air after the smoke itself is blown out of a room.

"And it isn't the smoke that kills anyone; it's the toxins," he said.

Jump to full article »

• Ansonia Smoking Lawsuit Is Settled  

The war of the cigarettes is over at the Ansonia. The lawyer-couple who sued their neighbor at the historic Upper West Side apartment building because, they claimed, she was jeopardizing the health of their 4-year-old son with her smoking, have agreed to drop the lawsuit.

Jonathan Selbin, the class-action lawyer who, with is wife, Jenny, also a lawyer, sued their neighbor, Galila Huff, confirmed the settlement.

"True," Mr. Selbin said.

"She agreed to use the donated air filters and a smokeless ashtray, which is all we ever asked her to do," he said. "Period." . . .

Within days of publicity over the lawsuit, a company called Aerus, formerly known as Electrolux, offered to install a free air filtration system in both the Selbins’ and Ms. Huff’s apartments that the company said would clear the smoke.

Joe Urso, CEO of Aerus, said that the filtration system had been installed and that he believed it was instrumental in driving the settlement.

Jump to full article »