Illinois lawmakers look at allowing smoking back in bars, to raise more money via taxes

[The Straight Story]

Illinois lawmakers are pitching creative ways to solve the state’s budget deficit. Among them, a proposal to end the indoor smoking bans for some locations.

The thinking is that lifting the prohibition, which went into effect more than three years ago in order to protect people from second-hand smoke, would entice people back to places where smoking once was allowed. The money they would spend would increase taxes paid to the state.

There are several proposals out there, many of which only affect Illinois gaming locations. One bill, HB1310 sponsored by state Rep. Anthony DeLuca (D-Crete), would allow local liquor boards to approve smoking licenses for establishments that derive 10 percent or less of their income from food sales.

Marji Swanson, 36, of Plainfield, said the bill is not needed as the smoking ban hasn’t stopped smokers from going out.


http://plainfield.patch.com/articles/should-smoking-ban-be-lifted-in-some-places-to-increase-state-tax-revenue#photo-5289538

[Luciferous]

1. I live in IL and none of the smokers I know have stopped going

to bars because of the smoking bans. I really don't think it will make a significant difference in the number of people going out and spending their money in these establishments. I also heard today that IL is trying to raise taxes on cigarettes by a dollar a pack, so there might be more people quitting smoking anyway!

[Buzz Clik]

2. Banning smoking in private establishments is the worst form of govt interference.

I hate helmet laws, seatbelt laws, and other such impositions designed to protect us from ourselves. Smoking restrictions in bars are far, far worse than helmet and seatbelt laws because a) smokers are going to smoke and banning smoking from bars just sucks and b) walking into a bar that allows smoking is 100% voluntary.

I hope that Illinois sees the light and others follow.

(btw -- I don't smoke and I find smoking repellent and incredibly stupid and none of my damned business)

[Bandit]

3. Smoking bans are not designed to protect you from yourself, they protect me from you.

Smokers emit a poisonous cloud that hurts others. Seat belts and helmets I agree with you on. They ONLY affect you..It has been proved beyond any doubt smoking is hazardous for the person smoking and everyone in the near vicinity as well.

[pintobean]

4. Then don't go into an establishment that allows smoking.

[superduperfarleft]

5. What about the people that work there? n/t

[pintobean]

6. That's their choice

[joeybee12]

8. In this economy, yeah right...they don't have that choice, and they

should not be victims of someone else's addiction.

[superduperfarleft]

9. So are you for the abolition of OSHA or other workplace safety rules?

Seeing as it's your "choice" to work there?

[LynneSin]

17. wow, you're a democrat right?

I spent 3 years working in a restaurant (pre-smoking bans) because it was the only place where I could make a decent living while putting myself back to school. In 3 years my cough riveled that of any smoker.

I guess I should have worked for minimum wage and lived off the government instead?

:grr:

[pintobean]

25. Couldn't you have made your argument without that insult?

I wouldn't dream of doing that to you just because I disagree.

[LynneSin]

27. Well since you think so little of working class people who struggle to make ends meet

If you don't want to deal with smoke go work at wal-mart mentality is offensive.

I thought we were here to fight for the working class people and for many of them working in bars & restaurants pay way better than working minimum wage.

I respect the fact that people, despite all the education out there about the health risk, still choose to smoke. But others should not have to share in that choice.

Anyhow in this day and age if someone really wants to smoke in public get an e-cigarette. Nicotine without offending others around you.

[LiberalAndProud]

7. Then why ban smoking in tobacco shops? Do you frequent those as well?

[Fuzz]

18. That one is very bizarre.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

24. I think smoking is noxious, but that one to me makes no sense

[kctim]

10. Holy crap

Nice to see lawmakers at least thinking about pro-choice legislation and individual freedoms, instead of trying to take them away.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

12. If only that were the reason...

If they did not need the $$$ this would not be on the table

[kctim]

14. Agreed

but still nice to see ideas of giving freedom instead of taking it, which has become the norm.

[HappyMe]

11. I am not surprised at this.

I wondered what was going to happen when the smokers turned into ex-smokers and the tax dollars dried up.

[msongs]

13. drug addicts and junkies will say and do anything to perpetuate their addictions nt

[HappyMe]

20. What?

I get that nicotine is addictive and smoking kills people off, but 'drug addicts and junkies'? Really?

Kinda harsh, imo.

I think they should leave the ban in place. Obviously lots of people have quit smoking because of it, and the high cost of cigarettes. Let 'em find somebody else to tax.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

22. Tobacco products are drugs, albeit legal ones

[HappyMe]

26. I get that, technically tobacco is a drug.

What I have a hard time with is equating somebody smoking a Marlboro to somebody smoking crack or shooting heroin.

[mopinko]

15. the smoking ban has enticed many people to come out.

i never used to go to see live music because of the smoke. now i get to do that again. i am sure i am not alone.

[pintobean]

16. Live music should be banned due to noise pollution.

[Ron Green]

19. The "Nanny State" can teach us

about harmful behavior. It's taken decades, after the science made it clear, for smoking to diminish across the board. Most people automatically put on their seatbelts now, and take airbag protection for granted (remember how hard the manufacturers fought against that one in the '70s?) I cringe when I see a motorcyclist without a helmet now; 30 years ago it was unremarkable.

I wonder if the same people who scream "Nanny State!" would whine when business owners in the South in the early '60s were told by the Federal Government that they couldn't run their own business the way they want to.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

23. It is not like the consequences of smoking or working in a smoking environment are unknown to anyone

[Ron Green]

28. They're known on some level, but it takes many years for knowledge of consequences

to percolate through behaviors molded by decades of tradition and addiction, supported by propaganda.

[Thunderstruck]

21. Wait a minute...

You ban smoking because second-hand smoke is a health risk for non-smokers. BUT, since you need money now, that concern is tossed out the window?

What a FUCKED UP country we have ourselves here.

[ieoeja]

29. Smokers I know are spending MORE at the bars in Illinois since the ban.

They have opined that the extra activity, going outside to smoke after every other beer, seems to keep them more energetic. So they tend to stay for another beer or two.

Some even like the ban in good weather. Though not in bad weather.

Anthony DeLuca just wants to smoke in the bar, and is making up a complete bullshit excuse to accomplish it.