Session 2005 Mike Mulcahy's Capitol Letter Minnesota Legislature Web site Legislative district finder Bonding Budget Education Health Care Social issues Transportation Audio Scaled-down smoking ban clears first legislative committee (story audio) Photos "Today is a victory" Opposes the ban Accepts the compromise More from MPR Backers of Minnesota-wide smoking ban say this is their year (01/14/2005) Resources Minnesota Licensed Beverage Association Tools E-mail this page Print this page Sponsor

Scaled-down smoking ban clears first legislative committee
by Tom Scheck, Minnesota Public Radio
January 27, 2005

The sponsor of the statewide smoking ban, Rep. Doug Meslow, R-White Bear Lake, says today's vote is a victory because it's the first time a smoking ban proposal has been voted out of a legislative committee. (MPR Photo/Tom Scheck)

A modified bill that would ban smoking in Minnesota restaurants has passed a committee in the Minnesota House. Opponents succeeded in narrowing the scope of the bill from its original form, which would have banned smoking in all indoor public facilities.

St. Paul, Minn. — Supporters of smoking ban legislation have reason to breathe a little easier with approval from a legislative committee. It's the first test of support for a ban at the Capitol since last session. And in that period, there has been a growing movement among local governments to sharply limit smoking in public places.

However, opponents of the provision are also breathing a sigh of relief because the bill isn't as strong as originally written. The House Health Policy and Finance Committee amended the original bill, which would have banned smoking in almost every indoor facility. Instead, smoking would only be banned in bars and restaurants that sell more food than alcohol.

Rep. Jim Abeler, R-Anoka, modeled his amendment after a smoking ban in Olmsted County. He says it's a good compromise for public health advocates concerned about secondhand smoke, and bar owners worried about their bottom lines.

"If you see what's left, you have a positive approach to a consensus part of this problem. Should this bill become law as it is, people will be better served in restaurants, and the employees who work in a restaurant will be safer," says Abeler.

Several lawmakers expressed concern that the amendment would be confusing for bar and restaurant owners. The bill says sales tax receipts will determine which establishments have to ban smoking.

The House sponsor, Rep. Doug Meslow, R-White Bear Lake, says he would have preferred the stricter language in the original bill, but he is happy the bill moved out of committee.

"Today is a victory, because this is the first time a bill like this has cleared a House committee," says Meslow.

Meslow says he understands that this is a controversial issue for many lawmakers. He says he's willing to work with them to reach some sort of consensus.

"My first choice is to have the original bill, and if I can get that, that is what I prefer. I think that bill, as it has come out of committee here, is something that I can live with if I need to. I'm willing to accept that since I'm one of only 134 people in the House," Meslow says.

Sen. Scott Dibble, DFL-Minneapolis, the bill's Senate sponsor, said he was disappointed with the changes.

"It weakens the bill significantly," Dibble said. "It doesn't recognize that all employees are deserving of healthy environments in which to work. ... I would hope that we could pass the bill intact in the Senate."

The hearing was remarkably civil, considering council members in several Minnesota cities have engaged in often long and contentious arguments over the issue in the past few months.

Ramsey County passed a similar measure that bans smoking in restaurants, but excludes bars. Hennepin County, Minneapolis and Bloomington have passed measures that ban smoking in all restaurants and bars. The House proposal would allow those and any other stricter local laws to stand.

Rep. Tom Emmer, R-Delano, says he thinks the decision should be left up to individual bar and restaurant owners.

"The statement was made here, 'Why should I be subjected to somebody else smoking when I'm there?' Well, you don't," says Emmer. "You can get up and you can leave. That's what makes this such a great country."

Jim Farrell with the Minnesota Licensed Beverage Association says he's happy with the compromise. He says a full ban could hurt the smaller mom-and-pop bars that don't see the customer turnover that restaurants do. He says his members would prefer to see no action taken, but sense that state lawmakers are more willing to address the issue this year.

"It should be left up to the business owner, the customer and employee. But if people disagree with that and the majority has a different opinion, then we have been looking for a compromise that distinguishes the difference between places where people sit for an extended period of time and a restaurant," says Farrell.

Others say they're pleased with the first step, but will continue to work to get the tougher measure passed. Corrine Ertz with the American Cancer Society says lawmakers are likely to tinker with the legislation over the next few months. She also says it's likely that the DFL-controlled Senate will pass a tougher measure than the House.

"Things are going to change as they move through committees and through the floor. In the end, as long as we get closer to smokefree workplaces for everyone, we'll be happy," says Ertz.

The bill moves without recommendation to the House Commerce Committee. The bill has to be heard in several committees before it reaches the House floor. The statewide smoking ban failed last year, but has better odds this session with the backing of lawmakers from both major parties and Gov. Tim Pawlenty.

(The Associated Press contributed to this report)