California Bill Proposes to Expand Smoking Ban

[BigGuns]

Last week, CA Senator DeSaulnier introduced Senate Bill No. 575 to amend the existing smoking ban at places of employment to include banning smoking tobacco products inside tobacco shops and private smokers' lounges. An excerpt from the introduction:

"This bill would expand the prohibition on smoking in a place of employment to include an owner-operated business, as defined. This bill would also eliminate most of the specified exemptions that permit smoking in certain work environments, such as hotel lobbies,bars and taverns, tobacco shops, banquet rooms, warehouse facilities,and employee break rooms."

The body of the proposed amendment strikes the existing exemption of tobacco shops and smokers' lounges, thereby expanding the prohibition to include these locations:

"(4) Retail or wholesale tobacco shops and private smokers’ lounges. For purposes of this paragraph: (A) “Private smokers’ lounge” means any enclosed area in or attached to a retail or wholesale tobacco shop that is dedicated to the use of tobacco products, including, but not limited to, cigars and pipes. B ) "Retail or wholesale tobacco shop” means any business establishment the main purpose of which is the sale of tobacco products, including, but not limited to, cigars, pipe tobacco, and smoking accessories."

Here is a link to the bill:

http://www.legislature.ca.gov/cgi-bin/port...thor=desaulnier

Please contact your State Senator and politely urge him/her to vote against this proposed amendment. Here is a link to search for your Senator's name and contact info:

http://www.legislature.ca.gov/port-zipsearch.html

Please send your letters/emails/faxes as soon as reasonably possible. Action on this proposed amendment is set to take place on or after March 20. Let's defeat this thing and go enjoy a cigar at our local shop/lounge.

[snickers99]

I've taken a little flack for getting political so I'll make this one straight up the middle. Cigar, pipe, ******, and cigarette smokers (why anyone would smoke cigarettes is quite beyond me) must collectively push back against this sort of thing or ultimately tobacco and its use will be made illegal in the United States. The dope lobby seems to have found sympathy in the halls of government in California so why not tobacco? It's because stamping out tobacco is in vogue and is politically expedient. Smokers have to speak up in numbers and engage in political activity as it is practiced today. This is the only way to make the busybodies crawl back to the shadows. We have to make them uncomfortable.

[Peter11216]

I've taken a little flack for getting political so I'll make this one straight up the middle. Cigar, pipe, ******, and cigarette smokers (why anyone would smoke cigarettes is quite beyond me) must collectively push back against this sort of thing or ultimately tobacco and its use will be made illegal in the United States. The dope lobby seems to have found sympathy in the halls of government in California so why not tobacco? It's because stamping out tobacco is in vogue and is politically expedient. Smokers have to speak up in numbers and engage in political activity as it is practiced today. This is the only way to make the busybodies crawl back to the shadows. We have to make them uncomfortable.

You really should take a look at Charles Whitebread's address to the California Judges association. He was a little off in his timing, but he predicted this happening. And given his work on prohibitions against drugs in the United States, it does not look good for tobacco products. The fact is smoking is not something that college educated, rich, white people do anymore. The only constituency large enough to organize a meaningful protest against this probably consists of working class people who have other things on their mind - like making sure they have a job in the first place, not making sure they can still smoke in the break room.

I don't know when it is going to happen, but it would not surprise me if cigarettes really do become illegal.

[ahbroody]

This crap needs to stop.

Never written a letter, but I guess its time.

[Lotusguy]

This is why we all need to be members of the CRA!!

[cigcars]

*While I agree with the aforementioned statement about cigarettes, I do feel bad for the poor addicted cigarette smokers' having to put on jackets and coats, scarves and gloves to go outside and smoke, then return to their desks and so on. Whatever happened to the indoor lounges like at airports where smokers can go into their glass encased conclave and indulge their habit there?? As for places like tobacco shops with their lounge chairs and TV's cohabited by stone to the bone tobacco lovers...why should those places be banned of it (smoking) too? Yeah, you all are right, maybe it IS time for people like us who stay nice and anonymous on forum sites to write a letter...

[BigGuns]

This crap needs to stop.

Never written a letter, but I guess its time.

Precisely the reason I posted the information. I had/have no intent to turn this into a political discussion. I just know that regardless of political/party affiliation, I believe all of us would be on the same side of this argument. I know that a good amount of members here are from CA, so figured we need to get the word out quick and wide. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

I've not been a very active letter-writer, either, but this is motivating me to get some ink on paper.

[Jesuscookies]

Sorry I missed this post, but I was in the closet, under a blanket, with the lights off, having a smoke...

[aes8]

Thanks for the info and links. I'll be calling and writing on Monday.

[ajgagnon]

I used to be an avid non-smoker. (Edited due to dumbass comment posted in original post).

However, I've always found cigarette smokers duplicitous when it came to cigars. They would whine and cry about smelling cigar tobacco, even as they puffed in my face. And bars, for some reason, took the same position. I guess cigarette smokers buy more beer.

The kind of prohibition that is emerging in California and NY doesn't make any sense to me. I'm not American, but it seems like in the 'land of the free', people ought to have the right to create enclaves for themselves to engage in activities that aren't otherwise criminal. That seems pretty core the what it is to be American.

Where I live, the government has taken worker's compensation (workplace safety) as the route to justify banning tobacco in all public. The thought is that restaurants and such have workers who don't choose to be there, and are unduly exposed to second hand smoke.

The thing I don't get is how a regulation can purposely seek out cigar shops and clubs to stamp them out. It just doesn't sound reasonable. Those places are not exposing children to smoke. They are likely run by the shopkeep unless there is additional staff, and anyone working in a tobacco shop likely both smokes and implicitly (or explicitly) agrees to be surrounded by tobacco and possibly its smoke. Make people sign a waiver if it's a safety thing. Wouldn't that be sufficient? Make the clubs have appropriate ventilation if they aren't standalone buildings. But how in Uncle Sam's name can a state chase down and prohibit the enjoyment of fine, hand-crafted cigars (in appropriate locations and ways) by consenting adults?

[PigFish]

They won't make it illegal mates, it is a revenue stream. The point being this dope has not got the memo. Tobacco bad... tax revenue good!

They call it the Peoples' Republik of Kalifornia for a reason mates! It stands on its own merits.

Some group in Oregon is proposing banning scented body applications; soap, perfume, BO bar... the gamut. Col. Piggy says, "Tough times ahead, invest in lead!" We live in a soft tyranny and it is getting harder! No pun intended! To the poles, ye sons of liberty. -

[snickers99]

They won't make it illegal mates, it is a revenue stream. The point being this dope has not got the memo. Tobacco bad... tax revenue good!

I agree, Piggy, at least for the time being. I've seen 'em kill the golden goose before. That's what has me worried. We're all at the mercy of these dweebs whose chief occupation is dreaming up more rules for the rest of us. Their power needs to be checked. Every election is an opportunity to do so regardless of one's political leanings. It's easy enough to find out who supports this sort of legislation whether at the local, state, or federal level. Write them. Call them. Vote for the other guy and encourage others to do so. The citizens of California have gotten the government they wanted. They returned them to office year after year. Now the state is broke and they have some of the most idiotic laws in the land. Can't bring yourself to get involved? The other guys are. Just can't vote for the candidate with the uncool party affiliation? The current governing party loves it! I lived in California for many years and loved it. It's not the place I left.

[BigGuns]

They won't make it illegal mates, it is a revenue stream. The point being this dope has not got the memo. Tobacco bad... tax revenue good!

-

I agree - they will continue to allow the retail sale of tobacco products precisely for the tax revenue. But this bill irks me because, while I love my home, I also enjoy smoking at a local cigar lounge from time to time. Also, my buddy just opened a nice relaxing ****** spot - this would destroy his business (not as easy to buy ****** tobacco and smoke at home - lots of prep). It's just shitty all around.

[PigFish]

Don't get me wrong mates, I hate this **** like white on rice! I hate all moves stemming from the left! I was just considering the genesis of this and lesser so the nexus.

I often hear; but the jobs are going off shore, you guys did that cause labor is cheaper! Hogwash! This is a prime example of an industry being chased off shore. If I were a cigarette maker I would be making them in China!!! I would rob the robber Barons of DC of every thin dime!

First you must vilify the product. It starts innocent enough. We stop the commercials, then the billboards, then add the labels... Then some lefty gets the bright idea that they can use the judiciary to "tax" these companies outside of the legislative. So they find them guilty of the sin and fine them big time, not for the people, but for the bucks! Now some of these dopes, the same ones that don't want our money going offshore for oil yet won't grant drilling permits, are calling CO2 a pollutant and have denied access to every reasonable form of energy available here. You guys look at the price of crude, cotton, soy, copper, gold, silver.... lately?

Look at the ideology of the folks that bring you these laws. While they to have a dominant party (I won't go there) the progressive mindset exists on both sides of the aisle. I love when they state loudly and proclaim themselves as progressives. Look back in history and see their trail of destruction. Wilson (Grandpa progressive) re-segrigates the military! Eugenics... another progressive idea, started on the left, another protectionist measure, just like tobacco to protect society from 'bad genes', perfected by the Nazis. Once you prove to a bureaucrat that you are no service to society... you are to me removed from society and "taken out of your misery!" Again... to protect something or someone, this time the gene pool.

Want your rights back? Remove the left from office, LEGALY! -Piggy

[Peter11216]

Look at the ideology of the folks that bring you these laws.

Piggy,

I really urge you to look at the work of Charles Whitebread. I posted a link to a speech he gave above. There is a very interesting history of drug prohibitions in the United States. And as I mentioned, 15 years ago, or so, Whitebread had correctly predicted that cigarettes would eventually become illegal, while marijuana would become legal. (Regarding cigars - they will never be criminalized, because rich people smoke them.)

More than half of Californians now favor decriminalization of marijuana, and it is already legal for a poorly policed medical market. You should note that the folks driving the pot legalization movement are usually called "left," while those on the right seek to keep it illegal - and enforce harsh prison sentences on people who use marijuana. (If you think New York is harsh towards smokers, you should look at the stats of people arrested for marijuana possession.)

There's bunch of things I would respond to, but it'd bring the thread away from tobacco legislation. I'll send you a PM.

Best,

Peter

[Habanos2000]

Well I'm glad to see the California legislature has all their financial problems worked out so they can focus on stopping citizen from participating in legal activities.

[PigFish]

Piggy,

I really urge you to look at the work of Charles Whitebread. I posted a link to a speech he gave above. There is a very interesting history of drug prohibitions in the United States. And as I mentioned, 15 years ago, or so, Whitebread had correctly predicted that cigarettes would eventually become illegal, while marijuana would become legal. (Regarding cigars - they will never be criminalized, because rich people smoke them.)

More than half of Californians now favor decriminalization of marijuana, and it is already legal for a poorly policed medical market. You should note that the folks driving the pot legalization movement are usually called "left," while those on the right seek to keep it illegal - and enforce harsh prison sentences on people who use marijuana. (If you think New York is harsh towards smokers, you should look at the stats of people arrested for marijuana possession.)

There's bunch of things I would respond to, but it'd bring the thread away from tobacco legislation. I'll send you a PM.

Best,

Peter

I will take a look at that Peter, thank you, I did not before. You can email me at the link on my profile. PM system is too limited for me.

While I am not a dope smoker, nor do I support it, I did vote to legalize it. I have a wide libertarian streak and while I could likely find compelling evidence that addicted societies have problems, severe problems, I agree with you, cops have better things to do than chase people that are only doing damage to themselves. Alcohol is by far a more dangerous drug! I don't drink either but do not support a ban on that fluid.

I heard a very compelling speech about the war on drugs and race. I don't often jump on those bandwagons but there was a lot of sense and facts built into the man's argument. Regardless the angle, I have been for legalization for a long time. Way too many resouces wasted on the wasted!

On the other side of it, tobacco is not mind altering. With the litigious society that we have, who is to blame if the machine operator kills himself and others why under the influence? Something would have to give and empowerment of the employer would probably be a part of it. Where would the unions land in this? Another problem! How about tort laws? The fact is that the addictive minority is easy to step on with your "right or left" foot. My comment was generalized. Look at where these laws often start. Look at the prevailing forces in their government (who has been in control) and you will get your answer.

Banning transfats! Taking salt off tables! That is not a conservative push, look at who is doing it.

I will save additional comment until after I view the link.

Here is a link to the Cato speech: http://www.cato.org/dailypodcast/podcast-a...podcast_id=1315

[khomeinist]

I think political coalitions dealing the smoking bans are necessary and require broad-based support.

The ideological finger-pointing is not useful. Partisan rhetoric (the thin veil is transparent) gets tiring.

[PigFish]

I think political coalitions dealing the smoking bans and such need broad-based support.

The ideological finger-pointing is not useful. Partisan rhetoric (the thin veil is transparent) gets tiring.

While it does get tiring mate I have to disagree with the usefulness point. I can agree that perhaps this is not the venue to vent, but again we are talking smoking laws. While we disagree on topics that we have previously discussed if you think differently here, feel free to chime in! We don't have to get nasty about it (I am not saying you are) but apparently others, myself included do believe that it is worth discussing, trite as it may be.

Do you have some input as to what the root causes are? Can government be changed from your perspective or should it not, when it comes to smoking laws? Do you not care?

I have found that sometimes the vail is concealing those who simply wish to not hear what they themselves might know about a subject. Do you like anti-smoking laws and taxes? If you do just say so. I won't bite your head off. If you think I am partisan that is okay... I admit it openly. The "need to protect society movement" the nanny state as I call it, is, in my humble opinion generally partisan!

While I don't know if it is true, I have read much of the link by this man Whitebread and if you follow his steps into the approval of the drug statutes that he speaks of, the broad based support theory is blown to hell! Broad based support is what you make of it, at least in the case of these drug bills.

I could go on and on. I am sorry that you don't like my partisan rhetoric, it is noting personal against you, so please don't take it that way. -Piggy

[khomeinist]

Essentially, I do not agree that restrictions on individual behavior are specifically associated with either side of the political spectrum.

There are certain issues that require broad-based support to effect resistance. I don't think that blaming one group or another is useful. The restrictions are annoying and need to be fought regardless of whether or not you might agree with the entire philosophical approach of your brother or sister standing next to you.....

I am a fan of pragmatism..... particularly as I age. What needs to get done to gain the desired effect? I think political discussions get weighed down by non-essential categorization and demonization.

I understand the desire to place all of human existence under some unifying meta-theories.... I just don't know how useful it is anymore. Not everyone is going to think like you on every issue. It just isn't going to happen...... Find allies on specific issues. Find other allies for other issues.

Enjoy life..... damn the torpedoes....

[Habanakane21]

Here's an update

Take Action

California: Important Legislative Notice

We are closely watching SB575

California Customers and Premium Tobacco Retailers: We wanted to take this moment to update you on Senate Bill 575. SB575 proposes to strip important exemptions from the state's public smoking prohibitions--simply put, if approved, SB575 would ban smoking in retail tobacco shops, among other places.

Presently, SB575 looks to lack the support to ultimately make it to the governor's office. For now, we will not initiate any Legislative Action Alerts regarding SB575. Working closely with our allies, we continue monitoring the bill and will take the appropriate action, including launching an Action Alert, when the time warrants.

Thank you for your attention in this important matter.

Chris McCalla

IPCPR Legislative Director [/i]