Session 2005 Mike Mulcahy's Capitol Letter Minnesota Legislature Web site Legislative district finder Bonding Budget Education Health Care Social issues Transportation Audio Smoking ban heads for Senate floor vote (story audio) Photos The debate has pitted clean indoor air advocates against bar and restaurant owners. It's also raised numerous concerns about government's role in restricting personal behavior. More from MPR Scaled-down smoking ban clears first legislative committee (01/27/2005) Backers of Minnesota-wide smoking ban say this is their year (01/14/2005) Tools E-mail this page Print this page Sponsor

Smoking ban heads for Senate floor vote
by Tim Pugmire, Minnesota Public Radio
February 21, 2005

The debate has pitted clean indoor air advocates against bar and restaurant owners. It's also raised numerous concerns about government's role in restricting personal behavior. (Photo by Chris Furlong/Getty Images)

A proposed indoor smoking ban for Minnesota bars and restaurants has cleared another legislative hurdle. The Senate Commerce Committee approved the measure Monday on a 9-7 vote. The issue is now headed for a vote by the full Senate.

St. Paul, Minn. — The legislation would prevent smoking inside public places throughout the state. The debate has pitted clean indoor air advocates against bar and restaurant owners. It's also raised numerous concerns about government's role in restricting personal behavior.

Sen. Scott Dibble, DFL-Minneapolis, says he's out to protect waiters and waitresses who have to work in smokey environments.

"Secondhand smoke is classified as a Type A toxin, which is the worst by the EPA. And most recently, we've learned that the health consequences are even more immediate, quite rapid with compromised health situations," according to Dibble.

To stress that point, Dibble brought along physicians, researchers and hospitality workers to testify in support of the smoking ban.

Zachary Barnes, 11, from Virginia, also wants an end to smoking in bars and restaurants. Barnes, who suffers from cystic fibrosis, says secondhand smoke makes it hard to breathe.

"I look forward to the day that I can walk into any restaurant, hotel, bowling alley, grocery store and any other establishment and not have to worry about secondhand smoke and how it will affect my health. I'll be able to work in four years, and I'd like to choose my job based on what I'm good at, not whether a place is smoke free," he said.

But the owners of the kind of businesses affected by the proposed ban see the issue as an attack on their rights. Tom Day of the group Hospitality Minnesota says many bars and restaurants have already gone smokefree on their own. He says a government mandate will only hurt small business owners.

"We can all agree that as a result of this legislation, some restaurants will close, some employees will lose their jobs. So, while concern is shown in the area of employees not having a choice of where they work, I'd be more concerned that they even have a place to work after their employer closes the doors," Day said.

A smoking ban bill is also moving through the Minnesota House, but it exempts bars that sell more drinks than meals. Restaurants could construct separate smoking rooms.

Sen. Daniel Sparks, DFL-Austin, tried unsuccessfully to amend Dibble's bill to more closely match the House version.

"I do agree with Sen. Dibble, and I commend his hard work when it comes to smoking ban in restaurants. But I also agree with small business owners and constituents in my district that want bars and places not serving food to have a choice on this issue. If they want to have their establishment smoke-free, they should be able to do so, and I respect their right to decide," Sparks said.

The committee approved one amendment which would exempt tobacco shops that allow product sampling on the premises. This was the second Senate panel to approve the bill. The measure now moves to the full Senate, where numerous amendments are expected to surface during the floor debate.