![]() | WRCB: Smoking Ban Effects: Scientists found nonsmokers sitting in outdoor patios or sidewalk seating areas connected to t... link about 5 hours ago |
![]() | CityBeatBlog: Anybody know a waiter or waitress who is anticipating the start of the smoking ban? about 1 day ago |
| bsaeed: @Jazz_C rather than arguing a smoking ban all together, you could argue why it should be banned on campuses and/or in bars n restaurants. about 1 day ago |
| bsaeed: @Jazz_C smoking ban, affirmative action, or should we still have troops in Afghanistan. Those are my 3 ideas for you! Hope they help lol about 1 day ago |
![]() | locktart: I love lurking on Gaia and reading about the 'smoking ban' that's happened. Or rather, what the gf says about what's going on. about 4 days ago |
![]() |
Wisconsin could be deemed a smoke-free state as early as next week. |
| By Julie Lawrence OnMilwaukee.com Staff Writer E-mail author | Author bio More articles by Julie Lawrence |
| Published May 5, 2009 at 5:13 p.m. |
|
It's possible that a bill for a state-wide smoking ban could be heading to Gov. Doyle's desk as soon as next Wednesday, May 13, according to State Rep. Jon Richards (D-Milwaukee).
Richards, who penned the bill, says the proposed ban is on the fast track for voting in both houses of the Wisconsin Legislature May 13.
He says it's a comprehensive ban that covers bars, restaurants, nightclubs, private clubs -- any public place. If passed, the phase-in process would begin in three months.
"We drafted it that way so it would go into effect rather quickly, because the health impacts of this are enormous. There's also a real savings for the state since we spend so much money on Medicaid and BadgerCare for people," said Richards.
"Just for heart attacks alone, we'd save over $1 million in the first year. If you add up all the health impacts from smoking, the Medicaid agency in the federal government estimates Wisconsin taxpayers could save almost $400 million."
There's a 10 a.m. public hearing tomorrow, Wednesday, May 6, in the assembly committee of public health at the State Capitol. Richards says people are welcome to submit written testimony to him personally at rep.richards@legis.state.wi.us.
There are currently more than 30 smoke-free communities in Wisconsin.
|
59 comments about this article. Post a comment / write a review. |
Posted by ladera12 on June 19, 2009 at 3:28 p.m. (report)
I found an Electronic Cigarette that allows me to smoke in banned areas and I really like it. The reason is because when you exhale there is no smoke only vapor and they allow you to choose the level of nicotine that you want. Friday on CNN they did a piece on the Electronic Cigarettes and said the same thing plus a number of other positive points. If you want to check it out go to this link http://myinlife.com/smokeelc
| Rate this: |
Posted by Broner on May 13, 2009 at 12:14 p.m. (report)
Dang, I forgot to check back on this after being out of town this weekend. Well DVM, if you happen to check this again, I'm not for 'smokers' rights' as much as I'm for business owners' rights. Personally, I don't think smokers have a lot of rights outside their own residences. I'm just against more and more government restrictions on business. For example, I just saw that Massachusetts is close to requiring all quick service restaurants to print the calorie amounts of their food products. That's intrusive and again, the government trying to save us from ourselves. Will someone who has their heart set on a 500 calorie monster burger change his mind to having a salad when he sees the calorie amount? No. It's about do-gooder politicians justifying their existences. And if you think the food issue only affects the people eating, just follow the dude who ate that monster burger into the bathroom and see how the toxic fumes affect you.
| Rate this: |
Posted by Broner on May 8, 2009 at 10:38 a.m. (report)
dvm, Wikipedia to the rescue, eh? Everything was sounding good until your last paragraph: "You can argue all you want that drinking to excess has negative effects, but those negative health effects generally only directly affect the person imbibing. [My comment: Drinking can lead to physical and mental abuse, drunk driving accidents, a burden on the health care system, etc. That's hardly only directly affecting the "imbiber."] Smoking, however, kills any and all people proximal to the carcinogen." [My comment: How can you even write that? Continuous, prolonged exposure to smoking, directly or indirectly, may eventually kill but the occasional exposure to it does not mean you will die from it. As I've said before, if you spend enough time at the bar to get sick from secondhand smoke, you're at the bar too much anyway.] But anyway, you won, I didn't. Enjoy being a frontrunner on popular progressive ideas whether they make sense (or can be rationalized) or not.
| Rate this: |
Posted by rnzh102 on May 8, 2009 at 7:56 a.m. (report)
I'm with dvm on this one, excellent points and sound reasoning to back up your stance. Smoking is an issue all to itself. It cannot be compared to drinking, eating fast food...blah, blah, blah; it is the only "vice" that directly affects others immediately.
| Rate this: |
Posted by Broner on May 7, 2009 at 8:06 p.m. (report)
Dude, I don't even smoke. Since I'm obviously not sane in your mind, I really wish you would explain the difference to me between the banning of different vices at different times. You're the Wikipedia master - do your work.
| Rate this: |
|
Saturday While scouring the pages of the December '09 issue of "This Old House" I came across a ... |
|
Nov. 17, 2009 It's no secret that people tend to get extra jolly this time of year and embrace the nature ... |
|
Nov. 11, 2009 About a month ago, OnMilwaukee.com tried something new in the art scene. |
|
Nov. 04, 2009 This past August I got married, and as married folks tend to do, my husband and I set ... |
|
Oct. 29, 2009 Much like the city its named for, the annual gathering of music makers, fashion flaunters ... |
| Top Clicks | Top Searches | Most Talkbacks |