Now
Fair
81°
High
85°
Low
66°
Full Forecast

Jobs

Cars

Homes

Rentals

Alerts

Subscribe
Home > News > Politics
Bookmark Us   •   Make Us Your Homepage

Lawmakers pass smoking ban

Comments 166 comment(s)  
E-mail Story E-mail Story
Print Story Print Story
Share  Share
Text Size: 
Tools Sponsor

BY JoANNE YOUNG / Lincoln Journal Star

Friday, Feb 22, 2008 - 05:22:31 pm CST



It’s been a long time coming for some state senators and Nebraska residents, but the Legislature on Friday gave its blessing to a statewide smoking ban.

The ban, nearly identical to Lincoln’s three-year-old ban, will go into effect June 1, 2009, if Gov. Dave Heineman signs it within five days.

Story Photo

Related Media

Smoking restrictions by state

Compare smoking restrictions in Nebraska with those in other states. (Laura Meerkatz / JournalStar.com)...

Comments: 0
Rated:
Lincoln keno revenue

Lincoln’s annual keno receipts dropped two years after the smoking ban passed Jan. 1, 2005. They rose again last year.

2003: $22.5 million

2004: $23.1 million

2005: $18.8 million

2006: $19.8 million

2007: $20.5 million

Source: Nebraska Department of Revenue

Heineman said he will review the bill and decide within that time period. The question, he said, is whether the public health issue overrides business concerns about government interfering in people’s lives.

Sen. Joel Johnson of Kearney, who has worked on passing the bill for two years, said the stage was set by many before him, including former Sen. Nancy Thompson of Papillion.

The bill (LB395) last year had been amended to allow communities to opt out of the ban, but Johnson said he decided before the end of the session he could not live with the amendment. He said he told then-Sen. Mick Mines of Blair, who opposed an all-inclusive ban, about his change of heart and gave him time to react with a kill motion.

Earlier this month, Johnson was successful in taking the bill back to its original form. Many communities and businesses that contacted him said if the state was to have a ban, it should include all communities.

“They saw the folly of all of the opt-out provisions,” Johnson said.

In the end, 14 senators continued to oppose the ban, some of them staging a filibuster for about an hour and a half.

Sen. Norm Wallman of Cortland said communities and businesses would have gradually become smoke-free on their own without the Legislature forcing them. The bill has a lot of problems, he said, including enforcement issues.

“Are we about freedom, or are we about bullying people to do what we want them to do?” he said.

Sen. Phil Erdman of Bayard likened LB395 to a vision on the wall, like the Wizard of Oz, that looked great, but when the curtain was pulled back, there was Johnson with a different bill than had been agreed upon.

Sen. Russ Karpisek of Wilber said the ban would put people out of business, especially in rural Nebraska, where communities can’t afford to lose businesses.

One of those is Rj’s in DeWitt, near Karpisek’s hometown.

Guy Mentel, a co-owner of the bar and restaurant — one that serves breakfast, lunch and dinner — said the ban will hurt business.

“People will start staying at home where they can do what they want to do,” he said.

Smoking is just a way of life for some people, he said.

Lincoln’s ban has been in effect since Jan. 1, 2005. And while the ban seemed to hurt some bars in the beginning — because smokers could find places to go in other communities — Lincoln bars seemed to rebound.

The latest report on keno money earned in the state and its cities — one indicator of the effect of the Lincoln smoking ban — showed that revenue went up about $1 million in Lincoln in the fourth quarter last year, compared with the previous quarter and to the same quarter in 2006.

The $5.8 million in Lincoln keno proceeds last quarter was the highest since the first quarter of 2004 — a year before the ban — when proceeds were $6.2 million.

Bill Harvey, with Big Red Keno, said Lincoln has about $2.6 million to make up to get to pre-smoking ban annual totals.

Keno receipts had been growing every year until the ban, and in 2005 dropped from $23.1 million the previous year to $18.8 million. Keno proceeds began growing again in 2006 and 2007, and last year were up to $20.5 million.

“We’re gratified about the fact the Legislature passed a statewide smoking ban,” Harvey said. “I think it’s going to be helpful to our business because it puts everybody on a level playing field.”

Someday, he said, business will be back on the upward curve it was on before the smoking ban took effect.

GASP of Nebraska President Mark Welsch has waited 20 years for the state to enact a smoking ban.

“Can you see me jumping up and down? Can you see my big smile,” he said. “I’m so excited.”

During the past 20 years, the state took small steps toward this, with a 1999 ban on smoking in state buildings and vehicles, then a ban for commercial daycare centers and in-home centers when the children were there.

Lincoln’s ban influenced the process positively, Welsch said. And the Nebraska Restaurant Association’s support for the first time helped greatly. And people saw how unfair Omaha’s ban was, allowing some bars to allow smoking and not others, he said.

Seventy percent of Nebraska residents want a smoke-free state, Welsch said.

“Thank God we finally have it.”

Reach JoAnne Young at 473-7228 or jyoung@journalstar.com.


$1 Sunday Delivery - Subscribe Today!
Politics > Back to Top of Story

Post Your Comment

Standards and Rules
All posts to JournalStar.com are subject to our Terms and Standards.
Your posted comment will appear after it has been approved.
Frequently asked questions about story commenting.
(optional)
   
Hide Comments Hide Comments   Newest First Newest First  
yeah! wrote on February 22, 2008 11:34 am:
" this is great! i know there are issues w/ smoking bans and often they have great merit, but i believe that a statewide ban is the way to go. this will stop the economic competition facing lincoln and omaha and improve health statewide. my only concern is enforcement in rural areas - i know where i am from there is one town bar and people smoke there. but regardless i hope governor heineman signs this bill! "

 YAY! wrote on February 22, 2008 11:34 am:
" THANK GOD! "

 Liz wrote on February 22, 2008 11:36 am:
" Woo hoo!!! Now I can go out in OMaha and still be able to breathe! This is great news. I just wish it started tomorrow instead of a year from now. "

 Tom wrote on February 22, 2008 11:40 am:
" This is a great day for the State of Nebraska and one that has been a long time coming. By passing this bill today we have continued a tradition that Nebraskans are so well known for and that is looking out for each other. This will be great for all residents in the state and since it created a level playing field there will no longer be a Waverly to go to instead of supporting your local businesses.
Congratulations to all! "

 GREAT NEWS! wrote on February 22, 2008 11:46 am:
" I am so excited!!! This is great news! It will be nice to go across the state and have smoke-free restaurants and bars. YEAH Nebraska!! "

 Travis wrote on February 22, 2008 11:46 am:
" Keep taking my rights away as a business owner. We live in a free enterprise economy. I pay taxes for my building, wages, sales tax, tobacco tax, and on, and on, and on. If I want to run a business that caters to a legal recreation (smoking), it is my customers, or lack of, that should dictate a smoking ban. There was nonsmoking establishments in Lincoln before the smoking ban. Where is this going to end? By the way, I don't smoke, but I do write paychecks. Either way, my rights are being stolen. "

 c wrote on February 22, 2008 11:49 am:
" enjoy your celebrating... good job Nebraska for tying the hands and removing the rights of business owners. I also wondered what it would like to live in Socialist nation "

 Yes!!! wrote on February 22, 2008 11:51 am:
" Finally, I don't have to worry about going to bars and restaurants and coming back with bloodshot eyes, smelling like an ash tray, and having trouble breathing, as well as having messed up ears from the smoke as well! I know people will complain about loss of their freedom to smoke. You can still smoke, you just have to smoke outside. It's not the end of the world smokers. I've been to Chicago, and right now I'm in Northern Ireland, and in both places the bars and restaurants are smoke free. It's great, I feel so much cleaner and I also know that my health has not been put at risk due to the actions of others. "

 justme wrote on February 22, 2008 11:53 am:
" that's awesome!!
now, if they can pass a law saying that you can't smoke directly outside the building. alot of times, you leave a restaurant, you walk outside you walk directly in smoke. be respectful!!
"

 Michelle wrote on February 22, 2008 11:53 am:
" WHOOOO HOOOOO!!!! I just did the happy dance! Come one Govener Heineman--sign that bill!! Way to go! "

 To our Senators wrote on February 22, 2008 11:53 am:
" Thanks! "

 Lincolnite wrote on February 22, 2008 11:55 am:
" Another freedom taken away. Not the freedom of the smoker, but the freedom of a business owner allowing a legal practice in his/her establishment. Where will this end. "

 David wrote on February 22, 2008 11:58 am:
" Great, now that smoking is banned, abolish the State taxes on cigarettes. If I can't smoke, you can't have the tax. "

 Big Fish wrote on February 22, 2008 11:59 am:
" As a Smoker....
Thank You Nebraska "

 Husker in VA wrote on February 22, 2008 12:06 pm:
" Thats awesome! Im so happy for the ban! "

 LD wrote on February 22, 2008 12:07 pm:
" I'm a smoker and I think this is wonderful!!!!! Can't wait for it to go into effect!
"

 Ryan wrote on February 22, 2008 12:12 pm:
" Pretty soon the Government will be telling us what time to wake up and go to sleep...because they evidently know what's best for us. I don't care one way or the other if people are smoking in a bar/restaurant, but I care IMMENSELY that the government is getting so nosy. This is not a simple case of getting rid of smelly coats after going out to eat, it is a DANGEROUS precedent introducing us to Big Brother. Sometimes if you pray for rain...you get a flood. "

 Bob wrote on February 22, 2008 12:16 pm:
" I used to smoke, I quit, I hate the smell when I go somewhere to eat or play keno. Buuuttt I hate the government telling people what to do. "

 Alan wrote on February 22, 2008 12:17 pm:
" I don't smoke but I really wonder how this is going to improve the state health much when a larger problem is just outside of the buildings, and that is all of the exhaust from cars that we breathe and the tons of chemicals that are sprayed on all of these farm fields to grow a crop that makes animals fat and us fat. "

 Neighbor wrote on February 22, 2008 12:26 pm:
" Good! Now we can start going out to the bars and restaurants in neighboring communities. "

 Disappointed wrote on February 22, 2008 12:28 pm:
" Here comes Big Brother again - might as well elect Obama for our socialistic government too...lets make drinking alcohol in public illegal too. More people are injured or killed each year by people who drive drunk than by second hand smoke. Talk about affecting someone's life...I would rather have someone blow smoke in my face than get hit by a drunk driver and kill my kids. Next thing you know they will regulate public displays of affection or how much you can drive in a week or force you to take the bus to help curb "global warming" or if youre fat how much you can eat or if youre too skinny - force you to eat or regulate how much water you use when in the shower....where does the invasion and Big Brother stop? George Orwell - you were right...its happening, and only 24 years after you said it would (1984). Maybe we need to take a step back and look at where this is all going...one step at a time...in the wrong direction...non-smokers beware - something you enjoy will soon be dismantled and "voted on" and taken away from you. I am sure you will feel like your voice was not heard either. Just get in line and follow their lead...socialism at its best. "

 mitchy_v wrote on February 22, 2008 12:37 pm:
" Where is all of this going to stop. Next you will be pushing for the smokers to be x number of feet from the front door. Many bars WILL lose money. This needs to be appealed. "

 ok wrote on February 22, 2008 12:40 pm:
" ok, now refund the tax money you get off smoking. "

 mitchy_v wrote on February 22, 2008 12:46 pm:
" Heineman is our last hope. DON'T SIGN IT. Car emissions are more harmful that smoking. "

 Oh, That's Brilliant wrote on February 22, 2008 12:47 pm:
" I'm curious here---how many people here are aware that the state is unilaterally making a choice for a million people regarding a perfectly legal action?

I don't smoke, nor do I like it when people smoke around me---but all the nonsense about a "level playing field" and "support your local business" is just ignoring the real issue, which is that we now have a state government that has now told its constituents that they can't do something that is completely legal, just because the government says so.

What a great idea! Lets just start having the government make all of our decisions for us! "

 Rob wrote on February 22, 2008 12:50 pm:
" Great. Now we have to put up with letter upon letter upon letter from smokers who are going belly ache about this for weeks and try to argue their obesity analogy to second-hand smoke theory.
"

 Yup wrote on February 22, 2008 12:59 pm:
" Good, now lets ban children from restaurants. That's another thing that irritates me. And let's ban alcohol from bars, drunks driving home are dangerous to me. "

 Randi wrote on February 22, 2008 1:00 pm:
" Say hello to Big Brother. "

 economic rights wrote on February 22, 2008 1:07 pm:
" those arguing about the economic rights of a business owner do not understand constitional law. economic profit or business rights have never received hightened scrutiny, therefore the law must only be reasonbly related to the means. banning smoking is reasonbly related to public safety and health. atleast now there is a level playing field state wide. i support this bill! "

 pac wrote on February 22, 2008 1:09 pm:
" IT'S ABOUT TIME! I think the smaller communities will be surprised to see their eating businesses INCREASE their income, as I know of a few places I'll go to when the smoking ban takes effect. "

 Joey wrote on February 22, 2008 1:10 pm:
" It isn't about going to a bar and comming out with a coat that smells like smoke. It is about people going to a bar and not having to breath in other people's smoke. Bottom line it's a HEALTH concern. This is not going to hurt any businesses in the state as everyone will be have to go by this law if it gets signed. Look at the Lincoln businesses that it hurt, there are very few that it hurt. I know some businesses got hurt at first but after awhile the business came back.
I do agree that the tobacco tax should go down if this gets passed as it takes away from you "smokers" that want to smoke in public places.

Let's hope this passes "

 Socialist Sam wrote on February 22, 2008 1:19 pm:
" Good news Comrades, we have much to celebrate!!!

We have managed to ban a legal substance from being used in private establishments that no one is required to enter. This is indeed a glorious day!!!!

I only hope when the next legal activity that some or all of you enjoy is taken away you will meet it with such joy. I don't like to stand and marinate in smoky places either, but quess what? I don't have to go to those places. Its a little thing that is called 'free choice', maybe some of you have heard of it once.

I wonder though, if smoking is so bad we must ban its use from private property state wide, why don't we just ban its sale entirely from the state?? "

 I'm with Bob wrote on February 22, 2008 1:20 pm:
" I too am an "ex-smoker" and I don't care for the smell either, BUT I care much less for the fact that the Gov. has to have their fingers in EVERYTHING! There are alternatives for me if I want to go somewhere and not smell like smoke. Just one more right that is taken away! "

 The smokers may have lost their "freedom," wrote on February 22, 2008 1:22 pm:
" but the non-smokers have gained the freedom to breathe! WOOOOOHOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!! "

 Chip wrote on February 22, 2008 1:25 pm:
" Excellent decision. This is NO different than requiring businesses to maintain foods at certain temps. It is about public safety. Period. End of story. Move on. "

 BYOB wrote on February 22, 2008 1:27 pm:
" Gov. Dave, Don't sign it, if you do, it must be along with a liquor ban, an automobile ban and a gun ban too.
This is not a level playing field, Lincoln chose the ban and now can't live with it because the small cities outside of Lincoln have all their business, please don't stuff it down the throats of out of Lincoln business'. I saw fist hand what it did to California liquor establishments, you'll lose revenue and jobs in a way you never thought possible. Sen. Joel Johnson is not doing this state any favors and is only following a personal agenda. Don't let anyone fool you, this bill was drafted in the city of Lincoln for the city of Lincoln and Joel Johnson is just an unsuspecting pawn, say no, put it on the ballot and see what the people have to say about it. "

 More exaggeration wrote on February 22, 2008 1:29 pm:
" This is not the end of western civilization as we know it. The government is no more Big Brother now than when it sets speed limits on the highways. "

 In Favor wrote on February 22, 2008 1:30 pm:
" Congrats NE for a step in the right direction. For those of you saying that your rights have been taken away why don't we get rid of all laws in general, this should solve everyones problems don't you think? "

 new to Lincoln wrote on February 22, 2008 1:30 pm:
" Smokers unite, make note of the ones that voted for the ban and let them know they will not be re-elected. Then stop going to the places that ban smoking. Hit them in the pocketbook. I get my gas and smokes in Iowa, it may be a bit of a drive but I will not give my money to a state who wants to take away my rights and tax me to death. "

 In Favor wrote on February 22, 2008 1:32 pm:
" Congrats NE for a step in the right direction. For those of you saying that your rights have been taken away why don't we get rid of all laws in general, this should solve everyones problems don't you think? "

 smoker wrote on February 22, 2008 1:35 pm:
" I smoke and do not mind going outside. That said, I do not agree with a statewide smoking ban! For one, rural towns will have enforcement problems and also economical repercussions! Second, government should not get to dictate what is right for everyone. This is getting scary, watching big and little government creep into our lives day by day!
The govener should NOT sign this! "

 no different... wrote on February 22, 2008 1:35 pm:
" If someone forced me to drink poison, they would be arrested. Making me breathe the toxins from YOUR poor decision is no different! Why should I have to stay at home to avoid someone else's addiction? Smokers, you can stay at home and poison yourselves. I'm going out dancing! "

 THANKFULLY! wrote on February 22, 2008 1:38 pm:
" I will now go out to eat in towns other than Lincoln again. It will be great to be able to taste my food, not smell terrible and not be worried about my health being impacted negatively by poor air quality. "

 Riley wrote on February 22, 2008 1:40 pm:
" Whats next fellow Nebraskans??? A ban on fast food? Alcohol? Butter? I don't smoke,,,and I don't like to be in area where people are smoking. But this is a free country, minus Nebraska. It has always been my choice if I wanted to go into a business where people were smoking. You can't take the rights away from business owners because you have an issue with smoking. I do believe its now the time to throw these bums out of office, to include the Governor if he signs this bill. Bottom line: I would rather spend an afternoon sipping a beer next to a guy that is chain smoking then sit next to a 350 lb fat McDonalds eating slob in an airline. "

 db wrote on February 22, 2008 1:42 pm:
" Hmmm.. can we make it illegal to sell cigarettes to people who use oxygen tanks? Or how about buffets too? "

 Foxy Loxy wrote on February 22, 2008 1:43 pm:
" Say "Hello" to Chicken Little for me! "

 Guru wrote on February 22, 2008 1:47 pm:
" This is good. Until you have seen your 96lb Mom on oxygen, have 60% of her lungs removed and watch a slow death, then you will never understand the stupidity of smoking. "

 Way to go, voters wrote on February 22, 2008 1:49 pm:
" I'll be happy about this ban when they put in a drinking ban in any establishment that serves food. I'm tired of going out for a bite to eat and having to hear some drunken fool cursing like a sailor. It's as much an assault to my senses as smelling like cigarettes ever was. Not to mention banning screaming kids from WalMart. I can't go in there without having to listen to some little brat squalling at the top of his/her lungs. I know it gives me a headache and raises my blood pressure too- so the health effects from that are probably just as bad as breathing occasional second-hand smoke. Ban that too.

I don't care about smoking outside- I smoke outside all of the time anyway. What I DO care about is our legislature making this decision FOR us. But what do you expect, Nebraska. Keep voting Republican (or worse, not vote at ALL), and you'll keep dealing with a government that'll make any decision it can for you. "

 Legal activity? wrote on February 22, 2008 1:50 pm:
" Sex is legal too, but I can't enjoy it in the park. Since the government restricts where I can engage in THIS legal activity, does this mean the government is turning into Big Brother. Geesh! "

 Interested wrote on February 22, 2008 1:52 pm:
" To those of you worried about the goverment interfering too much in our lives--how many of you voted to ban my daughter from getting married? How many of you would vote to ban my daughter or me from having an abortion-- even to save our lives? "

 mitchy_v wrote on February 22, 2008 1:53 pm:
" If it is all about public safety, when are they going to regulate what we can and can't eat because it isn't healthy for us??? "

 Enough Said... wrote on February 22, 2008 1:53 pm:
" In December 2006, indoor air quality was assessed in 28 location in Lincoln and Omaha by Roswell Park Cancer Institute (13 in Lincoln and 15 in Omaha). Key findings from the Air Monitoring Study include:
-> The average level of fine particle indoor air pollution was 96% lower in Lincoln, where all venues are smoke-free, compared to Omaha, where smoking is allowed.

-> Employees in Omaha establishments permitting indoor smoking are exposed to levels of air pollution 5.6 times higher than 24-hour fine particle standard established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Oh, and for the outdoor car exhaust is worse argument... Omaha's smoking establishments had an indoor air pollution level of 365, Lincoln's non-smoking establishments had a level of 17, and the average outdoor air pollution level was at 9. "

 Petey wrote on February 22, 2008 1:54 pm:
" Sweet! I can't wait. Sign that baby Governor! "

 Socialist Nation? wrote on February 22, 2008 1:59 pm:
" Lets look at a definition of Socialism:

"A general term for the political and economic theory that advocates a system of collective or government ownership and management of the means of production and distribution of goods."

For some reason I didn't read that this law was a state take-over of the ownership and management of the means of production and distribution of tobacco products. It just dictates where they can be used.

Also, if this is striping you of your "Freedom", why is the ACLU not on your side?

"The ACLU does not oppose smoking bans in public buildings, in the workplace, or in other locations where non-smokers may be subjected to second-hand smoke." "

 LOL wrote on February 22, 2008 2:00 pm:
" new to Lincoln, you drive to Omaha to get your smokes?! LOL! Have fun with that! "

 Seriously? wrote on February 22, 2008 2:05 pm:
" "No different," I can't imagine that you are old enough to go out dancing because that is an argument befitting a 3rd grader. Someone forcing you to drink poison is no different than you potentially breathing some second-hand smoke when you go out? If you, and the likes of you, and the legislators you've elected, really don't see the flawed logic in that argument, then I completely understand how this ban passed. "

 El wrote on February 22, 2008 2:06 pm:
" Another freedom denied and that's too bad. Just as no one is forced to smoke, no non-smoker is forced to go into a business establishment that allows smoking. You want to go sit in a bar that doesn't allow smoking? Then buy one and start up your own or get a friend to do it or ask your local bar owner to ban smoking. It shouldn't be a state law!! Frankly, I am exposed to smoke more often and for longer periods by going to work everyday where four of the six people who sit nearest me take no less than 6 smoke breaks a day then come back in reeking of smoke, making my eyes water and my nose run. I know some smart poster is now going to suggest I quit my job but I don't want to. I choose to sit here, day after day, at my well-paying job and deal with this inconvenience. Just as I choose not to sit night after night in a smoky bar. My choice, my freedom. Smokers don't deserve any less.

And one more thing: when this smoking ban helps people kick the smoking habit (and there will be some who will stop), who do you think is going to have to make up for the shortfall from the cigarette taxes? Yep, all you non-smokers who are, at this minute, doing your happy dance. "

 Cyndee wrote on February 22, 2008 2:08 pm:
" Yes, I do feel that they should ban smoking in public. If a person doesn't care enough about them self to quit smoking, why put the public in harms way. Second hand smoke is very dangerous. I have been around people that never smoked, yet died or dying from Lung cancer. Please give us that care enough to about our selves and others to have quit smoking. And VERY proud of it. "

 Nebraskan wrote on February 22, 2008 2:16 pm:
" I am not a smoker and I think this ban is ridulous to say the least. Before this we all have the right to go places that have smoke and go to places that do not have smoke. Why take away the right to choose that we now have. Don't give me the health bull. Non-smokers have just as many places to go. I am from outside Lincoln and quite frankly if you are for the ban I don't want you coming to my community for services anyhow.---if you do leave your kids at home because they stress me out which causes a health risk. "

 Re: Riley wrote on February 22, 2008 2:21 pm:
" Take a step back here. This is not an all out smoking ban. Your post suggest we should ban alcohol, fast food etc. This law is not an all out ban on smoking it just restricts where you can smoke. Remember that alcohol can only be legally used in specified places too. In Nebraska you can not legally walk down the street and consume alcohol. Heck, you can't even consume alcohol legally at a state park. So, the restriction of use is not an exclusive issue to smoking tobacco. "

 Chip wrote on February 22, 2008 2:29 pm:
" They already regulate what you eat! Ever heard of the FDA? By the way, your choice to eat french fries doesn't directly affect MY health. "

 Realist wrote on February 22, 2008 2:32 pm:
" I don't understand the "give the tax money back" comment.

Does this ban mean that you smokers are going to some how miraculously quit smoking? No way! We all know you smokers are going to continue to kill yourselves. Because of the ban, you don't think you should have to pay for your nasty habit anymore? LAUGHABLE! You don't want to pay taxes on tobacco... QUIT SMOKING! Duh. "

 DR wrote on February 22, 2008 2:37 pm:
" At least I can still get over easy eggs and greasy bacon here in Nebraska! Kinda funny how this state will have a smoking ban but no emmision test on automobiles. Look at the states that have the ban in effect. They have emmision laws also. So if Nebraska is worried about our health the state needs to look around. Be careful driving by fields of crops when pestisides are being sprayed. "

 Yes, yes, yes!!! wrote on February 22, 2008 2:40 pm:
" Way to go Senators!!! Hopefully Gov. H. will sign it and we can breathe easy- definate pun intended! On a side note- I personally love the comment comparing sex in the park and the smoking ban. That comparison is much more reasonable than those that try to compare smoking and food! What a great analogy. "

 Huh wrote on February 22, 2008 2:41 pm:
" Somehow the argument that a non-smoker shouldn't go into a business is somewhat like arguing that we should get rid of speed limits and then say, "It is your choice to drive on the highway. Stay off the highway if it is too dangerous." Or, it is kind of like telling a person of color, "If you don't want to get beat up, don't walk in this neighborhood." Wrong is wrong. Dangerous is dangerous. The fact that so many people can't regulate their own behavior or can't see past their own selfishness to see the value of this ban is an argument FOR the smoking ban. "

 YES!! wrote on February 22, 2008 2:42 pm:
" I grew up in a house where my parents smoked and as a non smoker I could not be happier. If the smokers did not make life so miserable for the rest of us by the way that they smoke there would be no need for a ban. For example, leaning just enough outside a door to get the cigarrette in their mouths but still alowing the smoke to woft into a building rather than completely going outside far enough away from the door to keep the smoke from invading others breathing spaces. "

 Paul Pocock wrote on February 22, 2008 2:46 pm:
" Where can we find out how they voted? Great Day for ALL Nebraskans!! "

 Todd wrote on February 22, 2008 2:51 pm:
" Question for the people against this bill.. Why should you keep your rights to smoke in public places and take away my rights of not having to take in the second-hand smoke? I'm a huge advocate for less government, but this is a nobrainer. "

 Lincoln Neo-Con wrote on February 22, 2008 2:54 pm:
" I love the sex in public places comparison
Thank You NE

Now just Sign it!!!! "

 Jan wrote on February 22, 2008 2:55 pm:
" I am also a smoker & don't mind going to an establishment that has no smoking but I am very concerned about the personal agendas of those that govern our state. Those that are contributing to the economy of our state should be able to run their businesses the way they like as long as it's legal. I'd like to challenge every smoker in the state to quit smoking completely for 1 full month. Wonder what that would do to our economy?? I think a lot of us would quit for good & then everyone can wonder why our state revenues are dropping like a rock. "

 marc wrote on February 22, 2008 3:08 pm:
" great news! thanks to the legislature! "

 Hey, wrote on February 22, 2008 3:15 pm:
" If you don't like not being allowed to smoke in bars or restaurants, no one is forcing you to go there. Just stay home and be a hermit.



"

 Dano wrote on February 22, 2008 3:17 pm:
" Yeah. My wife and i thank you. My chidren thank you. Their children will thank you, and so on, and so forth. good work this time. "

 NoMoreTax wrote on February 22, 2008 3:17 pm:
" Now that yet another form of government control has reached into the personal lives of the citizens, I would like to assume that the numerous taxes attached to tobacco product sales will be dropped. Yeah right! I hate socialism! "

 nice wrote on February 22, 2008 3:23 pm:
" I am a Lincolnite that experienced the city smoking ban. I am not a smoker and was completely against the ban due to a lot of the arguments that are posted on here with the government having too much control over us. To be completely honest...I love the ban! I don't have to deal with all of the unpleasant effects of being in a smoky bar or restaurant. It truly is a nice thing! Way to go! I am excited that when I go out in Omaha I won't smell awful. "

 Thor wrote on February 22, 2008 3:37 pm:
" God help us. I've said before that this is a slippery slope here. It is a legal product. DON'T GO IN PLACES THAT ALLOW SMOKING, IT'S SIMPLE. Yes, Big Brother is here and we have no clue how to act, to the government is telling setting us straight. What happens when we all are safe in our bubbles from the evils of the world and we age to 183 years old? Then what? If second hand smoke is so evil (I haven't seen a study that proves it), then how can I have grown up around smoking parents and a brother, worked around co-workers in the 70s that smoked and have not developed ill effects? And I have NEVER smoked in my life, despite growing up with a smoking family. This is scary and I pray our Governor has the brains not to sign this. You are really opening up a can of worms. "

 NE in SC wrote on February 22, 2008 3:38 pm:
" We lived in Utah in the 70's and they had a smoking ban in place then. It was GREAT! It only took NE 30 years to catch up with this great idea. Now if the people of SC would just get off their tobacco laden behinds and do the same (along with the rest of the US) a cloud of smoke would lift from our country. "

 huskerman1978 wrote on February 22, 2008 3:42 pm:
" This just stupid really I mean common bars are for drinking and getting away from the daily grind smoking in a bar is essental i quit smoking when im not drinking but when i drink I cant go without and sure dont want to go outside when it ten below, If people have a problem with people smoking in bars well just go home and drink eat or whatever you want to do quit your complaining about people smoking in bars,ever watch the movies do those bars look like there non smoking NO. Ive said enough. "

 Nineteen Eighty-Four wrote on February 22, 2008 3:43 pm:
" Congratulations to the self righteous and the interest group controlled politicians. Heart disease kills more women than all the cancers combined. Let's ban Red Meat!
Ban Fast Food; it's not healthy! For those of you who are going to the bars to celebrate, enjoy it, the interest groups are after alcohol too. Not healthy.
Banning a legal substance from being used in a private business is the power of groupthink over individual rights. For all the talk about it's harm I've yet to see a scientific study that's proved second hand smoke has caused cancer. Rejoice in your loss of choice. Celebrate your lost freedom. What's next Senator Johnson? "

 Idea wrote on February 22, 2008 3:53 pm:
" let us just stop all the beating around the bush and just outlaw Tobacco completely.
That way we would have no arguement over the right of people to smoke in bars or be forced to go outside. "

 Mandy wrote on February 22, 2008 3:54 pm:
" Its about time! "

 Kitsch wrote on February 22, 2008 3:55 pm:
" It's about time!! If California can do it, so can Nebraska. My entire family is affected by cigarette smoke due to asthma and we love Lincoln's ban. Now, when we visit family and friends in the rest of the state, we won't have to worry about all the smoke in every restaurant and bar. Yaaaaaaaay!!!!! "

 OmahaDave wrote on February 22, 2008 4:00 pm:
" The governments job is to protect me from you. This is long overdue. "

 chad wrote on February 22, 2008 4:04 pm:
" It's shameful that it took this long. Our children's children will laugh at the old days when addicts were actually allowed to kill non-addicts. The people have finally been heard! "

 Bubba wrote on February 22, 2008 4:10 pm:
" Even better news for our neighbors to the east. Iowa passed a smoking ban earlier in the week in the House and sent it to the Senate, however, the ban exempts casinos. Even more reason for more Nebraskans to travel across the river and put money into the Iowa economy. "

 I agree wrote on February 22, 2008 4:18 pm:
" Now, we've taken care of the smoke, let's get after the booze. I think the state should take over all offsale liquor like a lot of other states. Have a limit on what one can buy . How about 1 six pack of beer or one 1/2 pt of liquor? That would be the limit for a week. Then go into the bars and allow one mixed drink , three beers or 2 glasses of wine. Then shut the person off for the night. My lungs are ruined from smoking, but, if a person wants to smoke that their decision. Same for drinking, if someone wants to kill their body its' up to them. Drinking is much more dangerous to others peoples health than smoking. Highway deaths should be named second hand drinkers deaths. Don't worry though about drinking, the government will never affect it as many of the federal and state senators are some of the heaviest drinkers and won't stand for it. "

 Left Lane wrote on February 22, 2008 4:19 pm:
" OUTSTANDING! Now don't stop there, lets get the smoking ban in the hammer lane and take it accross the state. Good deal! "

 Finally! wrote on February 22, 2008 4:23 pm:
" Please sign the bill! It is awesome to be able to go to a restaurant or bar and come out not smelling like an ashtray and coughing the next day. Business owners...maybe you would have more customers if people didn't have to go and sit in a smoke filled room! Smokers-you still have a CHOICE you can go outside and smoke. Poison yourself out there. "

 MAD wrote on February 22, 2008 4:38 pm:
" I just love how the government has to tell us "You're bad little children, and you don't know what's best for you, we do". I'm sorry but I'm an adult and I can make my own choices. This is a LEGAL substance. If the government really gave a crap about our health, they would ban it. But wait a minute, if they ban it, they won't get their money from it.....So, the government flip-flops as usual. Just Let us Smoke. "

 Linda wrote on February 22, 2008 4:38 pm:
" Amen Chad! I, a former smoker could not tolerate going into smoking establishments AS a Smoker. Thankfully, after many tries, I succeeded in arresting my ADDICTION. My addiction does not have rights nor precedence over anothers right to clean air. Period.

Now, my family will enjoy and spend money in businesses that I would never go to before, including clothing stores where employees smoke and stink up the products. We will spend more on entertainment as well.

Interesting, the smokers who are anti smoking bans think they are the ONLY ones who spend or don't spend money? Think again, and wake up!

Oh, and for those who think we can't have your tax money off of your cigs if you can't smoke in public businesses....so you are saying you are going to quit smoking and won't be buying the cigs any longer??? Congragulations on a healthy decision for you and your loved ones!

Way to go Nebraska! "

 Abl2brthdeep wrote on February 22, 2008 4:40 pm:
" The day the government stops having to use tax money to treat smokers' diseases is the day the government stops dictating what people do. Willingly smoking show a complete lack of intelligence and a lack of self-preservation. If this law is signed, non-smokers will no longer have to suffer/pay the consequences of those who smoke. "

 GramMar wrote on February 22, 2008 4:54 pm:
" Liz, where have you been?? Omaha passed a smoking ban many months ago and it is great. I am so glad to see the ban now cover all of Nebraska. Complainers, just take a deep breath (ahhh! clean air) and live with it. "

 LincolnMom wrote on February 22, 2008 4:58 pm:
" Smokers - get a clue. This isn't about you - it never has been. It is about those who don't smoke and the fact that second hand smoke has been proven to be more dangerous to those around the smoke. Nobody is telling you that you can't smoke - just that you have no right to endanger the health of others if you do. Same concept for drinking and driving. Drinking is legal but when you get in a car while or after drinking, you endanger the lives of others. Result - not legal to drink and drive. It's a no-brainer. Great job Nebraska. "

 ryan wrote on February 22, 2008 5:01 pm:
" Great news. I enjoyed breathing clean air thanks to the smoking ban when I was living in Lincoln. Now I live in Omaha that doesn't have the ban and have to avoid a lot of public places full of cancer sticks. Smokers can negatively affect their own health and have their clothes wreak like smoke, but non-smokers shouldn't have to breathe their air. "

 WHOO HOO!!! wrote on February 22, 2008 5:02 pm:
" This is great! Too bad it isn't going to be enacted on June 1, 08, instead of 09, but it's still great news! My health only has to suffer one more year if I go out in NE. For now though, I'll just stay in Colorado where there already is a ban in place. "

 ph wrote on February 22, 2008 5:34 pm:
" Those to lazy to fight for their rights, or to complacent with their situation, will have their decisions made for them. How do you boil a lobster to death and keep it from making noise? You put in a pot of warm water and SLOWLY turn up the heat. Soon it will be too late, Resistance is feudal. "

 Boomer wrote on February 22, 2008 5:39 pm:
" This is just stupid. Non-smokers have been griping about this forever about how they can't go some places because of the smell..well Lincoln had at least 2 non-smoking bars before the ban went into effect. And as for all you that write now you can go outside of Lincoln because your health won't be affected anymore..what about supporting Lincoln business??? You people annoy the crap out of me! "

 mom wrote on February 22, 2008 5:40 pm:
" To those who complain about your right to smoke toxins being taken away by this ban, what about my right to air that's not going to kill me? I believe you'll still be able to smoke in your own home, so what's the big deal? After Lincoln enacted this ban, I have enjoyed being able to go into restaurants and other establishments without coming out smelling like an ash tray! Heineman has not had a problem supporting the restrictions on other "rights" - i.e. seat belts, helmets, etc. If he vetoes this bill it will be only because of politics... rich Republican friends who somehow see this as something that will cut into their profits...rather than his supposed concern for our freedom. "

 upinsmoke wrote on February 22, 2008 6:02 pm:
" As I have stated before, I will no longer give a state tobacco tax money that think's it has to dictate to it's resident's what it think's is best for them because the state doesnt think it's resident's have enough inteligence to decide for themselves. Everyone has the ability to decide for themselves to enter an establishment that allow's smoking or not, the same applies for those who work at a place that allows smoking. As I am in council bluff's nearly once a week, I'll just simply buy my tobacco there & heck, I might as well fill the tank also, Way to go Nebraska! Bigger government, YES!!! "

 Former Smoker wrote on February 22, 2008 6:05 pm:
" I for one like the smoking ban. I didn't think I would but I do feel it makes a difference. My only complaint is that with smoking being banned indoors it means anytime I try to enter a building I have to literally walk through a cloud of smoke. I have also noticed that the streets of lincoln (especially downtown) are terribly littered with butts etc. In the end I do like the ban but can something be done to keep people from smoking right outside the doors? Keep in mind I am a former smoker and do still feel this way! "

 Beef Itswhatsfordinner wrote on February 22, 2008 6:15 pm:
" Yes!! Finally! A firm ban in place on the filthy smoking habit! Kudo's to our state's lawmakers, and the fine folks at GASP for making this dream a reality! Now, we can finally turn our attention to banning beef in resturants. In fact, I'd like to see feedlots, and the raising of beef cattle banned, as I'm sure many of you would as well. It is a well documented fact that consumption of red meat leads to coronary disease, heart attack and a multitude of other health problems. It is only because of the lobbying of big dollar Beef Producers that this evil product is made avaliable in stores and resturants across this state, and actually made avaliable for people to consume. Dangerous. Health hazard. When YOU"RE buying that Double Cheeseburger, you're asking ME to pay for your hospital bill buster, and I'm not doing it. I'm sure that Gov. Dave will get right on this bandwagon and join with me and other members of BONE (Beef Outta Nebraska Everybody!) to work to bring good health to Nebraska.
You fish eating people look out. You're next. Mercury in fish. Why should I pay for you eating thermometers and the resulting health risk?
Am I serious? Gee, it sure sounds crazy, doesn't it? Or maybe a different take on the smoking issue...after all one man's meat is another man's Marlboro..... "

 retiredtaxpayer wrote on February 22, 2008 6:23 pm:
" Ok Nebraska ......next you can ban alcohol! So we don't have to worry about driving on the roads in Nebraska. Then we want you to ban all guns, so we can go freely without the worry of being shot at! And last but not least we want you to ban all illegal drugs so the kids don't end up addicts! Better yet why don't we just add a curfew to keep people off the streets? And then shut down the 24 hr. businesses. What will it be next? This just doesn't seem right that you can dictate to people what they can and can not do. Don't you think that our State Leaders could have picked a more worth while subject to attack that would have actually done some good instead of this? As this was a waste of time and money by the state when it could have been put to better use! So while you are at it why don't you just remove all tobacco products from the state, that would better solve your problem, then how could you control all those out of staters from smoking in your state? Your jails would really be full then. "

 Sarah wrote on February 22, 2008 6:46 pm:
" A freedom taken away from smokers and a freedom finally given back to those who don't..... Either way, someone is going to be upset, but honestly, in the long run, your business will grow because more people are not smoking these days and enjoy going out and then going home and relaxing, not showering, doing laundry and airing out their car from being in a smoking facility... I lived in another state that had a no smoking policy, and trust me, people kept going out.... and spending money on food and drinking... "

 Still Confused wrote on February 22, 2008 7:56 pm:
" Again, on what planet is someone's "freedom" to smoke more important than someone's right not to be subjected to the toxic chemicals of cigarette smoke in an enclosed area? Go. Out. Side. It's not a matter of the big bad government trying to infringe on your rights. It's common sense. Glad to see this measure passed "