KHI News Service - Sarah Green - 02/13/2008

TOPEKA, Feb. 13 — The bill that would ban smoking in workplaces and public places is well-intended but too restrictive, opponents said Wednesday.

“This is a compromisable issue,” said Ron Hein, who testified against the bill on behalf of the Reynolds American tobacco company and the Kansas Restaurant and Hospitality Association.
 
Only the following workplaces are allowed to permit smoking in Senate Bill 493: 20 percent of the state’s hotel rooms, and the cabs of commercial trucks and freight trains that travel through the state.

The bill, sponsored by five Republican senators, instructs counties to add a question to the general election ballot in November asking its residents whether it should “opt-in” to the new smoking ban.

Opponents of the bill made their requests during the second day of hearings on the bill in the Senate Judiciary Committee to include more indoor places that could allow smoking.

Among those who asked for exemptions:
• Owners of tobacco shops that mostly sell high-end cigars. Allowing customers to taste the cigars before they buy them is a main selling point. Frank Naylor, owner of Churchill’s in Topeka, described such stores as “destination shops” that only attract current smokers.
• Hein suggested looking at the smoking bans in cities such as Hutchinson, where establishments that sell more alcohol than food are exempt, and Salina, which allows smoking after 9 p.m.

Others said they approved of the idea of the statewide smoking ban, but asked for modifications.

Sandy Jacquot, general counsel of the League of Kansas Municipalities, said she understood that the bill would render useless the 26 cities that have passed their own smoking bans.

“They’re the ones that worked hard to get the community buy-in,” she said. “They bit the bullet and did the hard thing. Those would be repealed if this passes.”

Jacquot asked that language be added that would make clear the status of existing bans; another option might be to “grandfather in” those cities, she said.

And others registered their disapproval of any law that would limit smoking.

Father H Setter, a Catholic priest from Wichita who hosts cigar dinners each year that benefit Wichita charities, told the committee that a smoking ban would eliminate the dinners, which raise about $20,000 each year.

He called the smoking ban “political hypocrisy,” citing the state’s use of tobacco taxes to fund other projects. A separate bill heard last week in the House Taxation Committee would raise the tobacco tax by 50 cents in 2008, and the money would be earmarked for the health reforms outlined by the Kansas Health Policy Authority in November. 
 
“You want me to buy the product so you can gain my tax dollars, but you want to deny me the rights of a place where I can consume the product you are benefitting from,” he said.

Tim Shallenburger, a former Kansas House Speaker who represents Penn National Gaming, an applicant to operate casinos that will be built in Cherokee and Sumner counties, said the smoking ban would significantly impact business in those locations.

Both counties share a state line with Oklahoma and are “not miles, but feet” away from casinos operated on Native American reservations that allow smoking, he said.

“Tribal casinos already enjoy a major advantage in that they pay little or no taxes,” Shallenburger wrote in testimony to the committee. “To subject potential lottery gaming facility managers in Kansas to a smoking ban would be detrimental not only to the companies involved but would severely detract from the revenues to be realized by the State of Kansas and local governments.”

The committee plans to discuss the bill further next week.

-Sarah Green is a staff writer for KHI News Service, which specializes in coverage of health issues facing Kansans. She can be reached at This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it or at 785-233-5443, ext. 118.