Kansas.com - Rhonda Holtman - 02/29/2008

More than 30 states and many countries already have found the political will to pass public smoking bans. Oklahoma and Colorado did it. Nebraska Gov. Dave Heineman signed that state's comprehensive ban Tuesday.

This week Mexico also banned public smoking, with a law under which violators could face fines of up to $40,000 and even jail time. Mexico City went even further, banning smoking in any office, mall, restaurant or bar. Mexico City.

Also this week, a French study reported a 15 percent decrease in the hospital admissions of patients with heart attacks since France's public smoking ban went into effect early last year.

Meanwhile, witness what's playing out at the Kansas Statehouse and Wichita's City Hall, where proposed smoking bans are being amended, compromised and weakened to appease smokers and some business owners.

The long-awaited local proposal that could go the City Council next month is expected to exempt bars, as well as restaurants that offer supposedly isolated smoking rooms. True, it's probably better than nothing. But rather than serve business rights, it would uneven the business playing field and force bar employees to sanction their own workplace endangerment in writing. Is that really the best the City Council can do for public health?

In the case of the sound Senate proposal that would have had all Kansas counties vote on a ban in November, even some of the sponsors say they won't vote for their now-unrecognizable bill. That one may prove dead for the year, but another, sponsored by state Sen. Laura Kelly, D-Topeka, deserves passage. It would apply uniformly to restaurants, bars and nearly all other public places and workplaces statewide, with only legislative approval required.

Physician and state Sen. Jim Barnett, R-Emporia, no longer supports the Senate proposal he championed but still seemed hopeful Thursday that Kelly's comprehensive bill could pass this session. Barnett views it as a "major public health issue.... I think the people of Kansas will support this," he told The Eagle editorial board.

It's frustrating that business groups equivocate on an issue so tied to insurance rates and other health care costs -- for example, the Wichita Independent Business Association membership is split 50-50.

Barnett suggested that businesses also should be concerned about the potential to be sued for knowingly exposing their employees to secondhand smoke.

Of course, just as the smoking habit dies hard, so does opposition to smoking bans in Kansas.

On their face, the arguments about business rights and personal freedom have appeal, but the debate is over -- settled by science, health care costs and common sense. At this point, public smoking bans are not matters of liberty but of leadership. So what are our leaders waiting for?

For the editorial board, Rhonda Holman