Smoking Humor - Satire Videos
These are from Phil Williams of Norfolk, England who goes all out in a satirical portrayal of your typical lying Smoke-Nazi. They are classics, so don't even think about missing them. Rate them a high five and spread the word around to all your friends!
Anti Smoking League, Questions!
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Awpla8B72TI&NR=1
Anti Smoking League, Charity!
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=w8FR1pEDI1o
Anti Smoking League, Politics!
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Vs5KTHeIzg8
Anti Smoking League, Economy!
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=jzj8EPfU7W4
And a great parody video from Canada:
An Interview with Big Brother
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9vyby63Ias0
______________________________
Garnet Dawn - Illinois Smokers Rights - http://www.illinoissmokersrights.com
The Smoker's Club, Inc. - Midwest Regional Director
The United Pro Choice Smokers Rights Newsletter - http://www.smokersclubinc.com
mailto:garnetdawn@comcast.net - Respect Freedom of Choice!
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
Who benefits from smoking bans?
Smoking bans these days are often called a "good" thing.
May I ask for whom?
Is it good for the hospitality restaurant/bowling alley/bar owner? How about the smokers? Then, who is it really good for? Anti-smokers are on a crusade to make things better for themselves at the expense of bar and restaurant owners' Constitutional rights.´ Of course, some Antis are already complaining about their favorite places closing, since smokers no longer often patronize the establishments where smoking bans have been implemented.
Smoking bans are also "good" for the intellectually dishonest and the emotionally immature non smoker. We can't help but read their endless "hate" posts, insulting smokers and wishing those who smoke, long painful deaths.
Powerless, frustrated, emotionally inhibited by political correctness of all kinds, the non smoker responds to a primordial need to dominate someone or have control over something. It is not a coincidence, in fact, that totalitarian regimes of all colours in any age have always offered scapegoats to the population, so that the power-deprived citizen can have power over someone instead of rebelling against the system.
Mr. Emotionally Retarded Non Smoker has just paid a tax for a service he does not use, a traffic ticket against which there is absolutely nothing he can do, and which he identifies with theft. The boss has given him a hard time unfairly and he could not even tell Mr. Boss to 'go to hell', as he deserves. His wife tells him what to do, even where he believes he should have some control -- at home.
He has no courage to quit his job and give the boss his due, tell the wife to go to hell or drive his car against the post that holds the photo-radar. Rotten "public health" is the saviour that offers him the sacrificial lamb: The Smoker - and the lamb comes complete with the moral justification of "self defense". Mr. Non Smoker finally has power over someone!
Who cares if it is proven that the dangers of passive smoking are a scientific fraud? Who gives a damn if the law violates property rights? "See if I care about how Mr. Smoker feels, and whether it is cold outside! It's him, not me! I love the smoking ban for, finally, I can say 'I hate', without breaching political correctness and without being called an ass.
All this and a well-armed, criminal system that sides with me to boot: A law! Where is a smoker who breaks the "law" so I can exercise my power?
Like the dumb dog who bites the broom that hits him instead of jumping at the throat of he who handles it, Mr. Non Smoker will grip with locked jaw that little fragment of power that makes him feel like he's not a total loser. He will not let go - unless Mr. Smoker induces a loss to him that is greater than his gain.
______________________________
Garnet Dawn - Illinois Smokers Rights - http://www.illinoissmokersrights.com
The Smoker's Club, Inc. - Midwest Regional Director
The United Pro Choice Smokers Rights Newsletter - http://www.smokersclubinc.com
mailto:garnetdawn@comcast.net - Respect Freedom of Choice!
Special thanks to Lady9196
Smoking bans these days are often called a "good" thing.
May I ask for whom?
Is it good for the hospitality restaurant/bowling alley/bar owner? How about the smokers? Then, who is it really good for? Anti-smokers are on a crusade to make things better for themselves at the expense of bar and restaurant owners' Constitutional rights.´ Of course, some Antis are already complaining about their favorite places closing, since smokers no longer often patronize the establishments where smoking bans have been implemented.
Smoking bans are also "good" for the intellectually dishonest and the emotionally immature non smoker. We can't help but read their endless "hate" posts, insulting smokers and wishing those who smoke, long painful deaths.
Powerless, frustrated, emotionally inhibited by political correctness of all kinds, the non smoker responds to a primordial need to dominate someone or have control over something. It is not a coincidence, in fact, that totalitarian regimes of all colours in any age have always offered scapegoats to the population, so that the power-deprived citizen can have power over someone instead of rebelling against the system.
Mr. Emotionally Retarded Non Smoker has just paid a tax for a service he does not use, a traffic ticket against which there is absolutely nothing he can do, and which he identifies with theft. The boss has given him a hard time unfairly and he could not even tell Mr. Boss to 'go to hell', as he deserves. His wife tells him what to do, even where he believes he should have some control -- at home.
He has no courage to quit his job and give the boss his due, tell the wife to go to hell or drive his car against the post that holds the photo-radar. Rotten "public health" is the saviour that offers him the sacrificial lamb: The Smoker - and the lamb comes complete with the moral justification of "self defense". Mr. Non Smoker finally has power over someone!
Who cares if it is proven that the dangers of passive smoking are a scientific fraud? Who gives a damn if the law violates property rights? "See if I care about how Mr. Smoker feels, and whether it is cold outside! It's him, not me! I love the smoking ban for, finally, I can say 'I hate', without breaching political correctness and without being called an ass.
All this and a well-armed, criminal system that sides with me to boot: A law! Where is a smoker who breaks the "law" so I can exercise my power?
Like the dumb dog who bites the broom that hits him instead of jumping at the throat of he who handles it, Mr. Non Smoker will grip with locked jaw that little fragment of power that makes him feel like he's not a total loser. He will not let go - unless Mr. Smoker induces a loss to him that is greater than his gain.
______________________________
Garnet Dawn - Illinois Smokers Rights - http://www.illinoissmokersrights.com
The Smoker's Club, Inc. - Midwest Regional Director
The United Pro Choice Smokers Rights Newsletter - http://www.smokersclubinc.com
mailto:garnetdawn@comcast.net - Respect Freedom of Choice!
Special thanks to Lady9196
Will proposed Illinois Riverboat Gambling Bill HB 0025 be replaced by HB 2035?
Surprise! Within HB 0025's referral actions for Lost "Gaming" (06-01-07), on the "Gaming" Committee page is a linked Notice of Hearing for HB 2035. I did some exploring to find it, because someone told me that they had read every bit of verbiage in the amendments proposed for HB 0025 and could find no references to allow riverboat casinos a smoking exemption from Smoke Free Illinois.
http://12.43.67.2/legislation/BillStatus.asp?DocNum=0025&GAID=9&DocTypeID=HB&LegID=26618&SessionID=51&SpecSess=&Session=&GA=95
It appears to me that our IL legislators are playing games again. When I checked into HB 0025 and each of the activity references from 6-01-07 with Gaming links, I found the "Notice of Hearing" on October 17th for HB 2035. That's the bill (HB 2035) with references to extending smoking in casinos and verbiage to amend Smoke Free Illinois. Our elected officials will be attempting to incorporate gambling profits with transportation funding. (See below)
I admit, I hadn't looked up the amendment language on HB 0025 before.....since, I think, it's the third bill this year that has been proposed to exempt the casinos, including a Chinese puzzle of multiple proposed amendments.
This is still only an upcoming committee hearing for HB 2035, but seems our politicians haven't chosen to share its existence with the public yet. I could be wrong, but why haven't our Illinois House representatives extended the "action deadline" on HB 0025 out past the hearing date, if they weren't trying to camouflage it?
This entire fast shuffle in our IL Assembly is nauseating!
______________________________
Garnet Dawn - Illinois Smokers Rights - http://www.illinoissmokersrights.com
The Smoker's Club, Inc. - Midwest Regional Director The United Pro Choice Smokers Rights Newsletter - http://www.smokersclubinc.com
mailto:garnetdawn@comcast.net - Respect Freedom of Choice!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://12.43.67.2/house/committees/hearing.asp?CommitteeID=402&GA=95
95th General Assembly HB 2035Gaming
Members
Notice of Hearing
Bills
Hearing Scheduled for Oct 17, 2007
Chairperson: Lou Lang
Vice-Chairperson: George Scully
Republican Spokesperson: Brent Hassert
Scheduled Date: Oct 17, 2007 10:00AM
Location: Room 16-503 James R. Thompson Center Chicago, IL
Posting Date: Oct 01, 2007 10:00AM
SUBJECT MATTER: Hearing for the purposes of considering HB 2035
Clerk of the House: Mark Mahoney
Bill Status of HB2035 95th General Assembly
Full Text Votes View All Actions Printer-Friendly Version
Short Description: IDOT-FUNDING GRANT PROGRAMS
House Sponsors
Rep. Chapin Rose - William B. BlackSenate Sponsors(Sen. Rickey R. Hendon - Mattie Hunter - Iris Y. Martinez - Donne E. Trotter and Kimberly A. Lightford)
Last Action Date: Chamber Action 9/19/2007
House Placed on Calendar Order of Concurrence Senate Amendment(s) 8,9,10
Senate Floor Amendment No. 8
(Note: This Amendment file is so gigantic and amazing that it requires it's own .pdf file. PDF
Seems Chicago could be entering the Gambling industry! - Garnet)
Deletes reference to:
20 ILCS 2705/2705-312 new
Adds reference to:
New Act
20 ILCS 301/5-20
20 ILCS 605/605-530 new
0 ILCS 2505/2505-305
was 20 ILCS 2505/39b15.1
30 ILCS 105/8a
from Ch. 127, par. 144a
30 ILCS 105/8h
30 ILCS 500/50-70
30 ILCS 740/2-7.1 new
35 ILCS 143/99-99
70 ILCS 1825/5.1
from Ch. 19, par. 255.1
70 ILCS 3615/4.03.2 new
205 ILCS 670/12.5
230 ILCS 5/1.2
230 ILCS 5/3.12
from Ch. 8, par. 37-3.12
230 ILCS 5/3.20
230 ILCS 5/3.22
230 ILCS 5/3.23
230 ILCS 5/3.28 new
230 ILCS 5/3.29 new
230 ILCS 5/9
from Ch. 8, par. 37-9
230 ILCS 5/14
from Ch. 8, par. 37-14
230 ILCS 5/15
from Ch. 8, par. 37-15
230 ILCS 5/26
from Ch. 8, par. 37-26
230 ILCS 5/27
from Ch. 8, par. 37-27
230 ILCS 5/28
from Ch. 8, par. 37-28
230 ILCS 5/28.1
230 ILCS 5/30
from Ch. 8, par. 37-30
230 ILCS 5/31
from Ch. 8, par. 37-31
230 ILCS 5/31.2 new
230 ILCS 5/36
from Ch. 8, par. 37-36
230 ILCS 5/54.5
230 ILCS 10/1
from Ch. 120, par. 2401
230 ILCS 10/2
from Ch. 120, par. 2402
230 ILCS 10/3
from Ch. 120, par. 2403
230 ILCS 10/4
from Ch. 120, par. 2404
230 ILCS 10/5
from Ch. 120, par. 2405
230 ILCS 10/5.2 new
230 ILCS 10/6
from Ch. 120, par. 2406
230 ILCS 10/7
from Ch. 120, par. 2407
230 ILCS 10/7.1
230 ILCS 10/7.3
230 ILCS 10/7.4
230 ILCS 10/7.15 new
230 ILCS 10/8
from Ch. 120, par. 2408
230 ILCS 10/9
from Ch. 120, par. 2409
230 ILCS 10/10
from Ch. 120, par. 2410
230 ILCS 10/11
from Ch. 120, par. 2411
230 ILCS 10/11.1
from Ch. 120, par. 2411.1
230 ILCS 10/12
from Ch. 120, par. 2412
230 ILCS 10/13
from Ch. 120, par. 2413
230 ILCS 10/13.2 new
230 ILCS 10/14
from Ch. 120, par. 2414
230 ILCS 10/18
from Ch. 120, par. 2418
230 ILCS 10/20
from Ch. 120, par. 2420
230 ILCS 10/23
from Ch. 120, par. 2423
235 ILCS 5/5-1
from Ch. 43, par. 115
235 ILCS 5/6-30
from Ch. 43, par. 144f
410 ILCS 82/35
720 ILCS 5/28-1
from Ch. 38, par. 28-1
720 ILCS 5/28-1.1
from Ch. 38, par. 28-1.1
720 ILCS 5/28-3
from Ch. 38, par. 28-3
720 ILCS 5/28-5
from Ch. 38, par. 28-5
720 ILCS 5/28-7
from Ch. 38, par. 28-7
735 ILCS 30/15-5-45 new
815 ILCS 420/2
from Ch. 121 1/2, par. 1852
30 ILCS 105/5.676 new
30 ILCS 105/5.677 new
30 ILCS 105/5.678 new
30 ILCS 105/6z-69 new
30 ILCS 105/5.490 rep.
230 ILCS 5/31.1 rep.
230 ILCS 5/54 rep.
Replaces everything after the enacting clause. Creates the Chicago Casino Development Authority Act. Creates the Chicago Casino Development Authority and vests its powers in the Chicago Casino Development Board. Provides that the Board shall select casino operators to develop and operate a land-based casino in Chicago. Reenacts the provisions of Public Act 94-804, and changes the provisions amending the Riverboat Gambling Act requiring certain owners licensees pay 3% of their adjusted gross receipts into the Horse Racing Equity Trust Fund by removing the 2-year limitation on the payments and requiring all owners licensees to pay a scaled percentage of gross gaming receipts. Amends the Horse Racing Act of 1975. Allows advance deposit wagering. Deletes provisions concerning the Horse Racing Equity Fund. Adds provisions concerning drug testing for horses. Creates the Backstretch Programs Advisory Board. Makes other changes. Amends the Riverboat Gambling Act. Authorizes the issuance of 2 licenses to conduct riverboat gambling and a license to conduct land-based casino gambling in Chicago. Allows the Authority to receive an owners license to conduct land-based casino gambling within that municipality. Changes the short title to the Riverboat and Casino Gambling Act and makes corresponding changes in other Acts. Allows an owners licensee to lease gaming positions in addition to the gaming positions authorized under current law. Makes changes concerning the admission tax rate and the distribution of wagering tax moneys. Makes other changes. Amends the Riverboat (and Casino) Gambling Act, the Regional Transportation Authority Act, and the Downstate Public Transportation Act to provide for money to be transferred from the State Gaming Fund to the General Revenue Fund for the purpose of providing funding to public transportation systems and for the repayment of the money to the State Gaming Fund. Amends the Smoke Free Illinois Act. Provides that any riverboat owners licensee conducting gambling operations pursuant to the Riverboat and Casino Gambling Act within 5 miles of the border of a state allowing (1) similar facilities for conducting gambling games and (2) smoking in such facilities may permit smoking on such riverboat subject to specified conditions. Amends the State Finance Act to create the Racing Industry Workers' Fund, the Depressed Communities Economic Development Fund, and the Capital Program Acceleration Fund. Contains an inseverability clause in relation to the amendatory provisions. Effective immediately.
Senate Floor Amendment No. 9
Deletes reference to:
410 ILCS 82/35
Removes provisions amending the Smoke Free Illinois Act.
Surprise! Within HB 0025's referral actions for Lost "Gaming" (06-01-07), on the "Gaming" Committee page is a linked Notice of Hearing for HB 2035. I did some exploring to find it, because someone told me that they had read every bit of verbiage in the amendments proposed for HB 0025 and could find no references to allow riverboat casinos a smoking exemption from Smoke Free Illinois.
http://12.43.67.2/legislation/BillStatus.asp?DocNum=0025&GAID=9&DocTypeID=HB&LegID=26618&SessionID=51&SpecSess=&Session=&GA=95
It appears to me that our IL legislators are playing games again. When I checked into HB 0025 and each of the activity references from 6-01-07 with Gaming links, I found the "Notice of Hearing" on October 17th for HB 2035. That's the bill (HB 2035) with references to extending smoking in casinos and verbiage to amend Smoke Free Illinois. Our elected officials will be attempting to incorporate gambling profits with transportation funding. (See below)
I admit, I hadn't looked up the amendment language on HB 0025 before.....since, I think, it's the third bill this year that has been proposed to exempt the casinos, including a Chinese puzzle of multiple proposed amendments.
This is still only an upcoming committee hearing for HB 2035, but seems our politicians haven't chosen to share its existence with the public yet. I could be wrong, but why haven't our Illinois House representatives extended the "action deadline" on HB 0025 out past the hearing date, if they weren't trying to camouflage it?
This entire fast shuffle in our IL Assembly is nauseating!
______________________________
Garnet Dawn - Illinois Smokers Rights - http://www.illinoissmokersrights.com
The Smoker's Club, Inc. - Midwest Regional Director The United Pro Choice Smokers Rights Newsletter - http://www.smokersclubinc.com
mailto:garnetdawn@comcast.net - Respect Freedom of Choice!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://12.43.67.2/house/committees/hearing.asp?CommitteeID=402&GA=95
95th General Assembly HB 2035Gaming
Members
Notice of Hearing
Bills
Hearing Scheduled for Oct 17, 2007
Chairperson: Lou Lang
Vice-Chairperson: George Scully
Republican Spokesperson: Brent Hassert
Scheduled Date: Oct 17, 2007 10:00AM
Location: Room 16-503 James R. Thompson Center Chicago, IL
Posting Date: Oct 01, 2007 10:00AM
SUBJECT MATTER: Hearing for the purposes of considering HB 2035
Clerk of the House: Mark Mahoney
Bill Status of HB2035 95th General Assembly
Full Text Votes View All Actions Printer-Friendly Version
Short Description: IDOT-FUNDING GRANT PROGRAMS
House Sponsors
Rep. Chapin Rose - William B. BlackSenate Sponsors(Sen. Rickey R. Hendon - Mattie Hunter - Iris Y. Martinez - Donne E. Trotter and Kimberly A. Lightford)
Last Action Date: Chamber Action 9/19/2007
House Placed on Calendar Order of Concurrence Senate Amendment(s) 8,9,10
Statutes Amended In Order of Appearance
20 ILCS 2705/2705-312 new
20 ILCS 2705/2705-312 new
Synopsis As Introduced
Amends the Department of Transportation Law of the Civil Administrative Code of Illinois. Requires that, if the federal government offers to provide any grant or other financial assistance to the State or to units of local government in the State on a matching-funds basis for transportation projects, then, if the State does not appropriate the matching funds necessary to receive the financial assistance, the Department of Transportation must establish and maintain a program to enable units of local government or other interested public or private parties to pay the cost of the matching funds necessary to receive the financial assistance with respect to any specific transportation project. Effective July 1, 2007.
Senate Floor Amendment No. 8
(Note: This Amendment file is so gigantic and amazing that it requires it's own .pdf file. PDF
Seems Chicago could be entering the Gambling industry! - Garnet)
Deletes reference to:
20 ILCS 2705/2705-312 new
Adds reference to:
New Act
20 ILCS 301/5-20
20 ILCS 605/605-530 new
0 ILCS 2505/2505-305
was 20 ILCS 2505/39b15.1
30 ILCS 105/8a
from Ch. 127, par. 144a
30 ILCS 105/8h
30 ILCS 500/50-70
30 ILCS 740/2-7.1 new
35 ILCS 143/99-99
70 ILCS 1825/5.1
from Ch. 19, par. 255.1
70 ILCS 3615/4.03.2 new
205 ILCS 670/12.5
230 ILCS 5/1.2
230 ILCS 5/3.12
from Ch. 8, par. 37-3.12
230 ILCS 5/3.20
230 ILCS 5/3.22
230 ILCS 5/3.23
230 ILCS 5/3.28 new
230 ILCS 5/3.29 new
230 ILCS 5/9
from Ch. 8, par. 37-9
230 ILCS 5/14
from Ch. 8, par. 37-14
230 ILCS 5/15
from Ch. 8, par. 37-15
230 ILCS 5/26
from Ch. 8, par. 37-26
230 ILCS 5/27
from Ch. 8, par. 37-27
230 ILCS 5/28
from Ch. 8, par. 37-28
230 ILCS 5/28.1
230 ILCS 5/30
from Ch. 8, par. 37-30
230 ILCS 5/31
from Ch. 8, par. 37-31
230 ILCS 5/31.2 new
230 ILCS 5/36
from Ch. 8, par. 37-36
230 ILCS 5/54.5
230 ILCS 10/1
from Ch. 120, par. 2401
230 ILCS 10/2
from Ch. 120, par. 2402
230 ILCS 10/3
from Ch. 120, par. 2403
230 ILCS 10/4
from Ch. 120, par. 2404
230 ILCS 10/5
from Ch. 120, par. 2405
230 ILCS 10/5.2 new
230 ILCS 10/6
from Ch. 120, par. 2406
230 ILCS 10/7
from Ch. 120, par. 2407
230 ILCS 10/7.1
230 ILCS 10/7.3
230 ILCS 10/7.4
230 ILCS 10/7.15 new
230 ILCS 10/8
from Ch. 120, par. 2408
230 ILCS 10/9
from Ch. 120, par. 2409
230 ILCS 10/10
from Ch. 120, par. 2410
230 ILCS 10/11
from Ch. 120, par. 2411
230 ILCS 10/11.1
from Ch. 120, par. 2411.1
230 ILCS 10/12
from Ch. 120, par. 2412
230 ILCS 10/13
from Ch. 120, par. 2413
230 ILCS 10/13.2 new
230 ILCS 10/14
from Ch. 120, par. 2414
230 ILCS 10/18
from Ch. 120, par. 2418
230 ILCS 10/20
from Ch. 120, par. 2420
230 ILCS 10/23
from Ch. 120, par. 2423
235 ILCS 5/5-1
from Ch. 43, par. 115
235 ILCS 5/6-30
from Ch. 43, par. 144f
410 ILCS 82/35
720 ILCS 5/28-1
from Ch. 38, par. 28-1
720 ILCS 5/28-1.1
from Ch. 38, par. 28-1.1
720 ILCS 5/28-3
from Ch. 38, par. 28-3
720 ILCS 5/28-5
from Ch. 38, par. 28-5
720 ILCS 5/28-7
from Ch. 38, par. 28-7
735 ILCS 30/15-5-45 new
815 ILCS 420/2
from Ch. 121 1/2, par. 1852
30 ILCS 105/5.676 new
30 ILCS 105/5.677 new
30 ILCS 105/5.678 new
30 ILCS 105/6z-69 new
30 ILCS 105/5.490 rep.
230 ILCS 5/31.1 rep.
230 ILCS 5/54 rep.
Replaces everything after the enacting clause. Creates the Chicago Casino Development Authority Act. Creates the Chicago Casino Development Authority and vests its powers in the Chicago Casino Development Board. Provides that the Board shall select casino operators to develop and operate a land-based casino in Chicago. Reenacts the provisions of Public Act 94-804, and changes the provisions amending the Riverboat Gambling Act requiring certain owners licensees pay 3% of their adjusted gross receipts into the Horse Racing Equity Trust Fund by removing the 2-year limitation on the payments and requiring all owners licensees to pay a scaled percentage of gross gaming receipts. Amends the Horse Racing Act of 1975. Allows advance deposit wagering. Deletes provisions concerning the Horse Racing Equity Fund. Adds provisions concerning drug testing for horses. Creates the Backstretch Programs Advisory Board. Makes other changes. Amends the Riverboat Gambling Act. Authorizes the issuance of 2 licenses to conduct riverboat gambling and a license to conduct land-based casino gambling in Chicago. Allows the Authority to receive an owners license to conduct land-based casino gambling within that municipality. Changes the short title to the Riverboat and Casino Gambling Act and makes corresponding changes in other Acts. Allows an owners licensee to lease gaming positions in addition to the gaming positions authorized under current law. Makes changes concerning the admission tax rate and the distribution of wagering tax moneys. Makes other changes. Amends the Riverboat (and Casino) Gambling Act, the Regional Transportation Authority Act, and the Downstate Public Transportation Act to provide for money to be transferred from the State Gaming Fund to the General Revenue Fund for the purpose of providing funding to public transportation systems and for the repayment of the money to the State Gaming Fund. Amends the Smoke Free Illinois Act. Provides that any riverboat owners licensee conducting gambling operations pursuant to the Riverboat and Casino Gambling Act within 5 miles of the border of a state allowing (1) similar facilities for conducting gambling games and (2) smoking in such facilities may permit smoking on such riverboat subject to specified conditions. Amends the State Finance Act to create the Racing Industry Workers' Fund, the Depressed Communities Economic Development Fund, and the Capital Program Acceleration Fund. Contains an inseverability clause in relation to the amendatory provisions. Effective immediately.
Senate Floor Amendment No. 9
Deletes reference to:
410 ILCS 82/35
Removes provisions amending the Smoke Free Illinois Act.
HB 0556: Future of Cigarette Tax Uncertain - DuPage County, IL - Home Rule?
It is still unconstitutional, according to the Illinois State Constitution, for any Illinois county to assume home rule authority without a vote by residents to delegate that authority to them. Cook County is the only county in Illinois with Home Rule Authority....and we've all observed how well they have used it. Perhaps, that is why no other county in Illinois has been able to cajole voters into giving them that same authority over the past half century.
DuPage is back, only this time their board is attempting to tack their budget problems on the currently pending Illinois HB 0556 that proposes a state wide tax increase for cigarettes. This time though, DuPage is trying to draw in a few other greedy counties (Lake County, where I live, included) to give the counties more taxation clout.
This seemed a good time to resurrect NTUI's press release, dated last January, regarding opposition to county cigarette taxes. (copy below)
Only the date and bill number (HB 0556) have been changed by our Illinois Assembly to protect the legislators in our state who can't seem to balance Illinois' budget without gouging smokers yet again.
______________________________
Garnet Dawn - Illinois Smokers Rights - http://www.illinoissmokersrights.com/
The Smoker's Club, Inc. - Midwest Regional Director
The United Pro Choice Smokers Rights Newsletter - http://www.smokersclubinc.com/
mailto:garnetdawn@comcast.net - Respect Freedom of Choice!
-------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.chicagosuburbannews.com/lemont/homepage/x510089134
Future of cigarette tax uncertain
By Dan Petrella, dpetrella@libertysuburban.com
GateHouse News Service
Tue Oct 09, 2007, 06:29 AM CDT
DuPage County, IL - The deadline for DuPage County Board Chairman Robert Schillerstrom to propose his 2008 budget is coming next week, and the fate of the cigarette tax the county hopes will close its anticipated budget gap is still unclear.
Officials have predicted there will be an estimated $20 million shortfall in next year’s budget unless the county finds a new source of revenue. Over the past several months, the county has pinned its hopes on a new $1-per-pack cigarette tax being debated in Springfield.
The bill has already passed both houses of the Illinois General Assembly, but differences between the House and Senate versions of the bill must be rectified. The deadline for final action on the bill was originally scheduled for August, but it has been extended five times and is now Friday. There is a chance it could be extended again.
Several weeks ago, the County Board gave Schillerstrom an extra month to come up with a budget, in part because board members wanted to wait for the outcome of the cigarette tax. He must present his proposal to the board next Tuesday. Schillerstrom and other county officials have made numerous trips to the state capital to lobby for the tax bill.
“If we don’t find a new revenue source, there will be significant cuts made (to the budget) that will have a serious impact on people’s lives,” Schillerstrom said last month. “It’s not like we have a budget with a lot of fat in it that you can go pare out a certain percentage and it won’t have any impact on people’s lives.”
Schillerstrom has predicted the tax could generate as much as $25 million in new revenue each year. Without an increase in revenue, cuts will have to be made and that could include jobs, though Schillerstrom has not said how many positions are at risk.
Laurence Msall, president of the Civic Federation, a Chicago-based nonpartisan budget watchdog, said a cigarette tax can be an effective way of closing a budget gap, but should be used to offset the health care costs created by smoking. He would not comment specifically on DuPage County’s situation because the budget has not yet been proposed.
“A great deal of spending in DuPage and in other counties is health care and health-related services,” Msall said. “In general terms, cigarette taxes have proven to be very politically popular among the general public both as a means for raising revenue and discouraging people from smoking.”
Msall said he does not consider a cigarette tax regressive because smokers chose whether or not to buy cigarettes. But that choice also can make revenue generated by the tax fall short of predictions. If smokers go to neighboring counties with lower taxes to buy their cigarettes or kick the habit altogether, the tax may not create as much revenue as expected, he said.
But the future of the cigarette tax still remains uncertain. Some of DuPage’s own state representatives have not committed to supporting the bill.
“I’m for DuPage County getting the revenue they need, but there are other things in there besides DuPage County,” said state Rep. Bob Biggins, R-41st District, of Elmhurst.
On top of the $1 tax DuPage and other Chicago-area counties would be allowed to add to a pack of cigarettes, the bill would also implement an additional state tax.
Biggins said without seeing the final version of the bill he would be voting on, he could not say if he would vote in favor of it.
----------------------------------------------------------------
NTUI NEWS RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - January 5, 2007
Contact: Jeff Trigg (312) 427-5128 or Jim Tobin (773) 354-2076 (cell)
NTUI RELEASES OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT JONES AND THE ILLINOIS SENATE CALLING FOR OPPOSITION TO COUNTY CIGARETTE TAXES
Honorable Senate President Emil Jones, Jr. and all Illinois Senators;
We urge you to oppose Senate Bill 716 and to let the bill expire this session without action.
Senate Bill 716 is a bad bill for taxpayers, small businesses, and state government revenues and should be opposed now and in any future versions.
Every county already has the opportunity to impose cigarette taxes and the current laws do not need to be changed regarding home rule authority. The power to grant home rule authority to counties currently rests with the voters and that power should not be taken by the General Assembly. Du Page and other counties’ voters have spoken at the ballot box numerous times against giving their county the power to tax cigarettes. Those votes must be honored.
Fiscally, this is a bad bill for state government revenues. State cigarette tax revenues are steadily declining. Through the first six months of FY 2007 state cigarette tax revenues are down $4.3 million from the same time period in FY 2006. FY 2006 state cigarette tax revenues were $120 million lower than FY 2004. Passing Senate Bill 716 will reduce state cigarette tax revenues even more.
Alongside cigarette tax revenues, cigarette sales across the state are declining. In 2006, 57.5 million fewer packs of cigarettes were sold in Cook County than the previous year. Those reduced sales harm small businesses and our economy even more than the state budget. Senate Bill 716 only places higher hurdles in front of small businesses when we should be knocking down hurdles in front of the American Dream.
Finally, tobacco consumers have been picked on more than enough in Illinois. Chicago has the highest cigarette tax in the nation, and Illinois should be looking to cap if not reduce cigarette taxes in the state. These taxes are regressive and hit families and the poor the hardest.
The General Assembly has nothing to gain by passing Senate Bill 716. Doing the counties’ dirty work for them will only present you with harder budget decisions going forward. If the counties want the home rule authority to tax cigarettes, let them go to the voters and ask for it, as they should. Please oppose Senate Bill 716.
###
Jim Tobin is President of National Taxpayers United of Illinois.
Jeff Trigg is the Executive Director.
NATIONAL TAXPAYERS UNITED OF ILLINOIS
407 S. Dearborn, Suite 1170 * CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60605
(312) 427-5128 * Fax (312) 427-5139 * Web Site* E-mail
It is still unconstitutional, according to the Illinois State Constitution, for any Illinois county to assume home rule authority without a vote by residents to delegate that authority to them. Cook County is the only county in Illinois with Home Rule Authority....and we've all observed how well they have used it. Perhaps, that is why no other county in Illinois has been able to cajole voters into giving them that same authority over the past half century.
DuPage is back, only this time their board is attempting to tack their budget problems on the currently pending Illinois HB 0556 that proposes a state wide tax increase for cigarettes. This time though, DuPage is trying to draw in a few other greedy counties (Lake County, where I live, included) to give the counties more taxation clout.
This seemed a good time to resurrect NTUI's press release, dated last January, regarding opposition to county cigarette taxes. (copy below)
Only the date and bill number (HB 0556) have been changed by our Illinois Assembly to protect the legislators in our state who can't seem to balance Illinois' budget without gouging smokers yet again.
______________________________
Garnet Dawn - Illinois Smokers Rights - http://www.illinoissmokersrights.com/
The Smoker's Club, Inc. - Midwest Regional Director
The United Pro Choice Smokers Rights Newsletter - http://www.smokersclubinc.com/
mailto:garnetdawn@comcast.net - Respect Freedom of Choice!
-------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.chicagosuburbannews.com/lemont/homepage/x510089134
Future of cigarette tax uncertain
By Dan Petrella, dpetrella@libertysuburban.com
GateHouse News Service
Tue Oct 09, 2007, 06:29 AM CDT
DuPage County, IL - The deadline for DuPage County Board Chairman Robert Schillerstrom to propose his 2008 budget is coming next week, and the fate of the cigarette tax the county hopes will close its anticipated budget gap is still unclear.
Officials have predicted there will be an estimated $20 million shortfall in next year’s budget unless the county finds a new source of revenue. Over the past several months, the county has pinned its hopes on a new $1-per-pack cigarette tax being debated in Springfield.
The bill has already passed both houses of the Illinois General Assembly, but differences between the House and Senate versions of the bill must be rectified. The deadline for final action on the bill was originally scheduled for August, but it has been extended five times and is now Friday. There is a chance it could be extended again.
Several weeks ago, the County Board gave Schillerstrom an extra month to come up with a budget, in part because board members wanted to wait for the outcome of the cigarette tax. He must present his proposal to the board next Tuesday. Schillerstrom and other county officials have made numerous trips to the state capital to lobby for the tax bill.
“If we don’t find a new revenue source, there will be significant cuts made (to the budget) that will have a serious impact on people’s lives,” Schillerstrom said last month. “It’s not like we have a budget with a lot of fat in it that you can go pare out a certain percentage and it won’t have any impact on people’s lives.”
Schillerstrom has predicted the tax could generate as much as $25 million in new revenue each year. Without an increase in revenue, cuts will have to be made and that could include jobs, though Schillerstrom has not said how many positions are at risk.
Laurence Msall, president of the Civic Federation, a Chicago-based nonpartisan budget watchdog, said a cigarette tax can be an effective way of closing a budget gap, but should be used to offset the health care costs created by smoking. He would not comment specifically on DuPage County’s situation because the budget has not yet been proposed.
“A great deal of spending in DuPage and in other counties is health care and health-related services,” Msall said. “In general terms, cigarette taxes have proven to be very politically popular among the general public both as a means for raising revenue and discouraging people from smoking.”
Msall said he does not consider a cigarette tax regressive because smokers chose whether or not to buy cigarettes. But that choice also can make revenue generated by the tax fall short of predictions. If smokers go to neighboring counties with lower taxes to buy their cigarettes or kick the habit altogether, the tax may not create as much revenue as expected, he said.
But the future of the cigarette tax still remains uncertain. Some of DuPage’s own state representatives have not committed to supporting the bill.
“I’m for DuPage County getting the revenue they need, but there are other things in there besides DuPage County,” said state Rep. Bob Biggins, R-41st District, of Elmhurst.
On top of the $1 tax DuPage and other Chicago-area counties would be allowed to add to a pack of cigarettes, the bill would also implement an additional state tax.
Biggins said without seeing the final version of the bill he would be voting on, he could not say if he would vote in favor of it.
----------------------------------------------------------------
NTUI NEWS RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - January 5, 2007
Contact: Jeff Trigg (312) 427-5128 or Jim Tobin (773) 354-2076 (cell)
NTUI RELEASES OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT JONES AND THE ILLINOIS SENATE CALLING FOR OPPOSITION TO COUNTY CIGARETTE TAXES
Honorable Senate President Emil Jones, Jr. and all Illinois Senators;
We urge you to oppose Senate Bill 716 and to let the bill expire this session without action.
Senate Bill 716 is a bad bill for taxpayers, small businesses, and state government revenues and should be opposed now and in any future versions.
Every county already has the opportunity to impose cigarette taxes and the current laws do not need to be changed regarding home rule authority. The power to grant home rule authority to counties currently rests with the voters and that power should not be taken by the General Assembly. Du Page and other counties’ voters have spoken at the ballot box numerous times against giving their county the power to tax cigarettes. Those votes must be honored.
Fiscally, this is a bad bill for state government revenues. State cigarette tax revenues are steadily declining. Through the first six months of FY 2007 state cigarette tax revenues are down $4.3 million from the same time period in FY 2006. FY 2006 state cigarette tax revenues were $120 million lower than FY 2004. Passing Senate Bill 716 will reduce state cigarette tax revenues even more.
Alongside cigarette tax revenues, cigarette sales across the state are declining. In 2006, 57.5 million fewer packs of cigarettes were sold in Cook County than the previous year. Those reduced sales harm small businesses and our economy even more than the state budget. Senate Bill 716 only places higher hurdles in front of small businesses when we should be knocking down hurdles in front of the American Dream.
Finally, tobacco consumers have been picked on more than enough in Illinois. Chicago has the highest cigarette tax in the nation, and Illinois should be looking to cap if not reduce cigarette taxes in the state. These taxes are regressive and hit families and the poor the hardest.
The General Assembly has nothing to gain by passing Senate Bill 716. Doing the counties’ dirty work for them will only present you with harder budget decisions going forward. If the counties want the home rule authority to tax cigarettes, let them go to the voters and ask for it, as they should. Please oppose Senate Bill 716.
###
Jim Tobin is President of National Taxpayers United of Illinois.
Jeff Trigg is the Executive Director.
NATIONAL TAXPAYERS UNITED OF ILLINOIS
407 S. Dearborn, Suite 1170 * CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60605
(312) 427-5128 * Fax (312) 427-5139 * Web Site
Monday, October 08, 2007
PRESS RELEASE -
Over 2.8 Million Residents Reject Smoke Free Illinois Act - SB 500
Since I've re-activated Land of Lincoln Smokers Diary again, I'm sharing the Illinois Smokers Rights press release, following our Illinois Assembly's passage of SB500 - Smoke Free Illinois Act, and prior to Governor Blagojevich signing it into law.
Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------
PRESS RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: May 17, 2007
Over 2.8 Million Residents Reject Smoke Free Illinois Act - SB 500
http://www.smokersclubmedia.com/pr/pr051707.html
LAKE BLUFF, IL (MAY 17, 2007) -- Illinois Smokers Rights, on behalf of over two million, eight hundred thousand smoking residents in Illinois, and The Smoker's Club, Inc., does not accept the validity of The Smoke Free Illinois Act (SB 500) recently passed by the Illinois House of Representatives and the Illinois Senate. This pending law states that it is justified based upon 'proven' health findings which are, in fact, unsupported and unresolved scientific claims taken from inconclusive studies.
We challenge the validity and authority of this new pending law because it was written and based upon highly questionable material supplied by the American Cancer Society.
Specifically, we wish to challenge two widely publicized health claims. We would like to see documentation from those experts who claim eight Illinois resident deaths are caused daily by second hand smoke and that breathing environmental tobacco smoke in the workplace is like inhaling the smoke from sixteen cigarettes (or even expanded to include the equivalent of smoking a pack of twenty cigarettes) in a single eight hour shift. We would like a detailed explanation to validate, in detail, how these calculations and statistics were created.
In actuality, provable ETS exposure for the most heavily exposed bartenders would be about one-fifth of a cigarette or one cigarette per week. We would also like to receive conclusive documentation to support the other ETS health claims made in The Smoke Free Illinois Act.
Smoking, itself, is not a right any more than non-smoking or smoke free air is a right. Our rights issues are based upon are our 'right to choice'. The error being made by our legislators is in their attempt to turn a legal personal life style choice into a crime on private property. The Illinois Clean Indoor Air Act of 1989 eliminated smoking in public places, and smoking residents cooperated.
The Smoke Free Illinois Act, based upon unconfirmed health statement sound bites, proceeds to violate our US Constitution and Bill of Rights. When our Illinois General Assembly representatives took office, they each took an oath and swore to uphold our Constitution. The constitutional purpose of our government is to promote commerce, build roads, protect us from foreign invasion and protect individual rights. This includes property rights. Any act to the contrary is an outright violation of our Constitution. A smoking ban is a violation of property rights.
The Constitution was written in such a manner to specifically limit the power and scope of government to preserve our individual rights. We are a constitutional republic, not a mob rule democracy and minorities still deserve consideration under our laws.
We have over eleven hundred municipalities in Illinois and more than one thousand of them have not chosen to impose local smoking bans. Among the communities that have passed new bans, based upon the Illinois Clean Air Act - Home Rule Amendment enacted a little over one year ago in January of 2006, several have enacted exemptions, including bars.
Also, of the one hundred and two counties located in Illinois, only Cook and Sangamon counties have enacted severe smoking bans, and McLean county has instituted one in unincorporated areas (while still exempting bars).
Perhaps the foremost question in the minds of those Illinois legislators, health agencies and tobacco control experts who support banning the use of a legal product on private property, should be to wonder how the Smoke Free Illinois Act will affect the health quality and living standards of those who are forced to close their businesses and those who will loose their jobs under a state-wide smoking ban.
###
CONTACT INFORMATION:
Garnet Dawn
Midwest Regional Director
The Smoker's Club, Inc.
http://www.smokersclubinc.com/
Media Interview Requests
Illinois Smokers Rights - http://www.illinoissmokersrights.com/
mailto:garnetdawn@comcast.net
Over 2.8 Million Residents Reject Smoke Free Illinois Act - SB 500
Since I've re-activated Land of Lincoln Smokers Diary again, I'm sharing the Illinois Smokers Rights press release, following our Illinois Assembly's passage of SB500 - Smoke Free Illinois Act, and prior to Governor Blagojevich signing it into law.
Garnet Dawn
--------------------------------------------------
PRESS RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: May 17, 2007
Over 2.8 Million Residents Reject Smoke Free Illinois Act - SB 500
http://www.smokersclubmedia.com/pr/pr051707.html
LAKE BLUFF, IL (MAY 17, 2007) -- Illinois Smokers Rights, on behalf of over two million, eight hundred thousand smoking residents in Illinois, and The Smoker's Club, Inc., does not accept the validity of The Smoke Free Illinois Act (SB 500) recently passed by the Illinois House of Representatives and the Illinois Senate. This pending law states that it is justified based upon 'proven' health findings which are, in fact, unsupported and unresolved scientific claims taken from inconclusive studies.
We challenge the validity and authority of this new pending law because it was written and based upon highly questionable material supplied by the American Cancer Society.
Specifically, we wish to challenge two widely publicized health claims. We would like to see documentation from those experts who claim eight Illinois resident deaths are caused daily by second hand smoke and that breathing environmental tobacco smoke in the workplace is like inhaling the smoke from sixteen cigarettes (or even expanded to include the equivalent of smoking a pack of twenty cigarettes) in a single eight hour shift. We would like a detailed explanation to validate, in detail, how these calculations and statistics were created.
In actuality, provable ETS exposure for the most heavily exposed bartenders would be about one-fifth of a cigarette or one cigarette per week. We would also like to receive conclusive documentation to support the other ETS health claims made in The Smoke Free Illinois Act.
Smoking, itself, is not a right any more than non-smoking or smoke free air is a right. Our rights issues are based upon are our 'right to choice'. The error being made by our legislators is in their attempt to turn a legal personal life style choice into a crime on private property. The Illinois Clean Indoor Air Act of 1989 eliminated smoking in public places, and smoking residents cooperated.
The Smoke Free Illinois Act, based upon unconfirmed health statement sound bites, proceeds to violate our US Constitution and Bill of Rights. When our Illinois General Assembly representatives took office, they each took an oath and swore to uphold our Constitution. The constitutional purpose of our government is to promote commerce, build roads, protect us from foreign invasion and protect individual rights. This includes property rights. Any act to the contrary is an outright violation of our Constitution. A smoking ban is a violation of property rights.
The Constitution was written in such a manner to specifically limit the power and scope of government to preserve our individual rights. We are a constitutional republic, not a mob rule democracy and minorities still deserve consideration under our laws.
We have over eleven hundred municipalities in Illinois and more than one thousand of them have not chosen to impose local smoking bans. Among the communities that have passed new bans, based upon the Illinois Clean Air Act - Home Rule Amendment enacted a little over one year ago in January of 2006, several have enacted exemptions, including bars.
Also, of the one hundred and two counties located in Illinois, only Cook and Sangamon counties have enacted severe smoking bans, and McLean county has instituted one in unincorporated areas (while still exempting bars).
Perhaps the foremost question in the minds of those Illinois legislators, health agencies and tobacco control experts who support banning the use of a legal product on private property, should be to wonder how the Smoke Free Illinois Act will affect the health quality and living standards of those who are forced to close their businesses and those who will loose their jobs under a state-wide smoking ban.
###
CONTACT INFORMATION:
Garnet Dawn
Midwest Regional Director
The Smoker's Club, Inc.
http://www.smokersclubinc.com/
Media Interview Requests
Illinois Smokers Rights - http://www.illinoissmokersrights.com/
mailto:garnetdawn@comcast.net
Sunday, October 07, 2007
Your Favorite Supper Club/Restaurant - 2017
I wrote the following a few months ago and have it linked on my Illinois Smokers Rights website. I thought blog readers might enjoy sharing a cynical look at our possible futures too:
January 1, 2017
EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY
Whereas, it has been determined as law in this state that it is a crime to knowingly emit any airborne carcinogens in any private business establishment that invites the public to enter, we have established these mandatory procedures to comply with required health standards, and no exceptions will be made.
No Smoking will be allowed within 500 feet of this establishment!
Upon entering, guests will be required to completely disrobe and check all clothing articles, shoes and personal effects which will be retained in our "clean room" holding area during their dining experience. Items will be returned to our guests upon departure. (All clothing emits carcinogens from new textile chemicals, dry cleaning and fabric softeners.)
Guests will also be required to pass though our disinfectant showers to remove any carcinogenic traces of perfume, after shave lotion, skin cream, hairspray or other chemicals.
Guests will find that we have now removed all carpeting and upholstery in our dining and bar areas to eliminate dust mite threats. You will now be dining in plastic protected splendor. Note: We will no longer be decorating your table with candles.
Whereas, it has been determined by law that coffee, butter, salad dressing and desserts are unhealthy and unnecessary for a balanced diet; these items will no longer be available on our menu. (Guests will also be required to sign a waiver before they will be served any water, to protect this establishment from any future prosecution, as it has also been determined that water contains a vast number of carcinogens. We cannot be responsible for the health of those guests still desiring to consume water.)
Any and all alcoholic beverages will be pre-mixed in our special clean room before serving and hermetically sealed to eliminate any evaporation of ethyl alcohol into our sterile environment. Imbibing alcoholic beverages will only be allowed by using the special self sealing straws we provide with our sealed containers.
Whereas, the serving of undercooked meat is now illegal and current laws have abolished any open cooking or flame-required preparation (including grilling, frying or broiling), our entrees will now all be prepared by boiling or slow cooking and will be only served well done.
Whereas, the only form of credit or payment currently allowed by law is your National Identification Card, our guests will have their dinner checks charged to their twenty-four (24) digit National Debit Card. upon leaving. Please note: A disinfectant service charge of forty percent (40%) and a service tip of twenty percent (20%) will be added to your check before the final total is determined.
We hope you will enjoy your new dining experience and return soon. - The Management
Any and all alcoholic beverages will be pre-mixed in our special clean room before serving and hermetically sealed to eliminate any evaporation of ethyl alcohol into our sterile environment. Imbibing alcoholic beverages will only be allowed by using the special self sealing straws we provide with our sealed containers.
Whereas, the serving of undercooked meat is now illegal and current laws have abolished any open cooking or flame-required preparation (including grilling, frying or broiling), our entrees will now all be prepared by boiling or slow cooking and will be only served well done.
Whereas, the only form of credit or payment currently allowed by law is your National Identification Card, our guests will have their dinner checks charged to their twenty-four (24) digit National Debit Card. upon leaving. Please note: A disinfectant service charge of forty percent (40%) and a service tip of twenty percent (20%) will be added to your check before the final total is determined.
We hope you will enjoy your new dining experience and return soon. - The Management
http://www.illinoissmokersrights.com/Restaurant-2007.html
______________________________
Garnet Dawn - Illinois Smokers Rights - http://www.illinoissmokersrights.com
The Smoker's Club, Inc. - Midwest Regional Director
The United Pro Choice Smokers Rights Newsletter - http://www.smokersclubinc.com
mailto:garnetdawn@comcast.net - Respect Freedom of Choice!
______________________________
Garnet Dawn - Illinois Smokers Rights - http://www.illinoissmokersrights.com
The Smoker's Club, Inc. - Midwest Regional Director
The United Pro Choice Smokers Rights Newsletter - http://www.smokersclubinc.com
mailto:garnetdawn@comcast.net - Respect Freedom of Choice!
Friday, October 05, 2007
Nicotine addicts...
After a period of inactivity for my blog, I wanted to share this letter to the Suburban Herald, as I seriously doubt it will be printed.
----- Original Message -----
From: Garnet Dawn
To: ccain@scn1.com; HeraldNews@scn1.com
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2007 1:53 AM
Subject: Letter to the Editor: Ban raises compliance issues - Addicts
Herald News
300 Caterpillar Drive,
Joliet, IL 60436
RE: Ban raises compliance issues http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/heraldnews/business/581052,4_3_JO30_SMOKING_S1.article
Dear Editor:
cc: Ms. Wojdyla Cain
How can the Suburban Herald News (member of the Sun-Times News Group) allow this type of journalism to be published?
Can anyone justify the opening statement "Nicotine addicts aren't the only ones bracing for the looming statewide smoking ban"? This purposely insulting and inaccurate slur would be grounds for libel, if it were any other minority group being maligned. Ms. Wojdyla Cain and those responsible for printing her story are promoting hatred for smokers. Were such terms as "Jungle Bunny", "Camel Jockey", "Hebe", "Spic", or "Retard" substituted for "nicotine addicts", we would hear national screams of indignation and indictments against bigotry.
Nicotine addiction is not the reason people smoke. Our entire population is addicted in some way to activities that are pleasurable to them. Physical dependency is no longer accepted as the definition of addiction.
Per Dictionary.com: "Addiction: The condition of being habitually or compulsively occupied with or involved in something. An instance of this: had an addiction for fast cars."
If people smoked because they were addicted to nicotine, pharmaceutical cessation substitutes would be successful. Till the time insulting caffeine drinkers, chocolate lovers, those who drink alcohol, love gambling, motorcycles or racing cars becomes acceptable and they are also labeled as addicts, kindly refer to smokers with a little respect.
After all, smokers are your neighbors, friends, co-workers and family members.
______________________________
Garnet Dawn - Illinois Smokers Rights - http://www.illinoissmokersrights.com
The Smoker's Club, Inc. - Midwest Regional Director
The United Pro Choice Smokers Rights Newsletter - http://www.smokersclubinc.com
mailto:garnetdawn@comcast.net - Respect Freedom of Choice!
-------------------------------------------------
Ban raises compliance issues
September 30, 2007
By CINDY WOJDYLA CAIN Staff Writer
JOLIET -- Nicotine addicts aren't the only ones bracing for the looming statewide smoking ban.
Business people are burning up the Will County Health Department's phone lines with questions about compliance.
There has been a "huge increase' in the number of calls, said Cindy Jackson, program manager for the Will County Health Department's Tobacco, Control and Prevention department.
Staring Jan. 1, smoking will not be allowed in private businesses and workplaces. Restaurants, clubs, bars, casinos, offices -- you name it, they have to comply. Even church bingo and Alcoholics Anonymous meetings will be smoke free, Jackson said.
The No. 1 question concerns smoking shelters, Jackson said. For instance, both of Joliet's casinos plan to build outdoor smoking shelters.
"No one really knows what the process is yet," she said.
Joliet architect Bret Mitchell is trying to design a shelter for Harrah's, but it's practically impossible until the rules are set in place.
"We've come up with several designs," said Mitchell, who works for Buchar, Mitchell and Bajt Architects. "We are not being given any real guidance at this point."
Harrah's wants to heat and cool the area, but it has to have permeable walls to let smoke escape. The state hasn't defined what permeable means yet, Mitchell said.
The Illinois Department of Public Health drafted rules that were posted for public comment this week by the legislature's Joint Committee on Administrative Rules. The rules probably won't be finalized for 60 to 90 days, leaving little time before the ban takes effect.
"It does put businesses at a disadvantage," said state Rep. Brent Hassert, R-Romeoville, who co-chairs the committee. "Springfield never moves at lightning speed. I understand the frustration."
Harrah's wants its shelter in place by the time the ban takes effect on Jan. 1, Mitchell said. The company may build a preliminary shelter and finish construction once the rules are set.
"This is uncharted territory, no one has been here before on this kind of thing," Mitchell said.
Jackson said businesses must be cautious to make sure the smoking shelters are for smoking only and employees aren't required to work in them.
"The shelters can't be like beer gardens because employees would have to work there," she explained.
Jackson is telling businesses to hold off on shelters until the state's rules are final. Once the rules are finalized, the health department will create a packet of information that will guide businesses toward ban compliance. The health department also will use advertising to get the word out.
Though the rules are in flux, Jackson said there are some aspects of the law that appear to be concrete.
She's telling business owners they have to:
• Remove all ashtrays and smoking paraphernalia from their businesses.
• Post signs on every entrance and exit that will inform costumers about the ban and where they can file a complaint if it's being violated. The signs have to be 5-by-7 inches in size.
• Enforce the ban and make sure any outdoor smoking is at least 15 feet away from a building.
• Communicate to all employees and job applicants that smoking is not allowed in the establishment.
Jackson said she gets a lot of calls from private club members that believe they are exempt from the ban.
"Private clubs have to follow the law, too," she said. "That's something a lot of people don't know."
Only a few entities are exempt, including private residences; retail tobacco shops, open prior to Jan. 1, 2008; and private rooms and semi-private rooms in nursing homes.
The Illinois Casino Gaming Commission is working to have casinos exempted from the law for five years or until neighboring state's casinos become smoke free. But so far, the effort hasn't paid off.
The Illinois Department of Public Health, local health departments and local law enforcement agencies will be enforcing the ban once it's in effect, Jackson said.
Fines for individuals who violate the ban will be not less than $100 for a first offense and $250 for subsequent violations. For business owners it will be not less than $250 for first violations, $500 for second violations and $2,500 for subsequent violations in the same calendar year.
Reporter Cindy Wojdyla Cain may be reached at (815) 729-6044 or at ccain@scn1.com
After a period of inactivity for my blog, I wanted to share this letter to the Suburban Herald, as I seriously doubt it will be printed.
----- Original Message -----
From: Garnet Dawn
To: ccain@scn1.com; HeraldNews@scn1.com
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2007 1:53 AM
Subject: Letter to the Editor: Ban raises compliance issues - Addicts
Herald News
300 Caterpillar Drive,
Joliet, IL 60436
RE: Ban raises compliance issues http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/heraldnews/business/581052,4_3_JO30_SMOKING_S1.article
Dear Editor:
cc: Ms. Wojdyla Cain
How can the Suburban Herald News (member of the Sun-Times News Group) allow this type of journalism to be published?
Can anyone justify the opening statement "Nicotine addicts aren't the only ones bracing for the looming statewide smoking ban"? This purposely insulting and inaccurate slur would be grounds for libel, if it were any other minority group being maligned. Ms. Wojdyla Cain and those responsible for printing her story are promoting hatred for smokers. Were such terms as "Jungle Bunny", "Camel Jockey", "Hebe", "Spic", or "Retard" substituted for "nicotine addicts", we would hear national screams of indignation and indictments against bigotry.
Nicotine addiction is not the reason people smoke. Our entire population is addicted in some way to activities that are pleasurable to them. Physical dependency is no longer accepted as the definition of addiction.
Per Dictionary.com: "Addiction: The condition of being habitually or compulsively occupied with or involved in something. An instance of this: had an addiction for fast cars."
If people smoked because they were addicted to nicotine, pharmaceutical cessation substitutes would be successful. Till the time insulting caffeine drinkers, chocolate lovers, those who drink alcohol, love gambling, motorcycles or racing cars becomes acceptable and they are also labeled as addicts, kindly refer to smokers with a little respect.
After all, smokers are your neighbors, friends, co-workers and family members.
______________________________
Garnet Dawn - Illinois Smokers Rights - http://www.illinoissmokersrights.com
The Smoker's Club, Inc. - Midwest Regional Director
The United Pro Choice Smokers Rights Newsletter - http://www.smokersclubinc.com
mailto:garnetdawn@comcast.net - Respect Freedom of Choice!
-------------------------------------------------
Ban raises compliance issues
September 30, 2007
By CINDY WOJDYLA CAIN Staff Writer
JOLIET -- Nicotine addicts aren't the only ones bracing for the looming statewide smoking ban.
Business people are burning up the Will County Health Department's phone lines with questions about compliance.
There has been a "huge increase' in the number of calls, said Cindy Jackson, program manager for the Will County Health Department's Tobacco, Control and Prevention department.
Staring Jan. 1, smoking will not be allowed in private businesses and workplaces. Restaurants, clubs, bars, casinos, offices -- you name it, they have to comply. Even church bingo and Alcoholics Anonymous meetings will be smoke free, Jackson said.
The No. 1 question concerns smoking shelters, Jackson said. For instance, both of Joliet's casinos plan to build outdoor smoking shelters.
"No one really knows what the process is yet," she said.
Joliet architect Bret Mitchell is trying to design a shelter for Harrah's, but it's practically impossible until the rules are set in place.
"We've come up with several designs," said Mitchell, who works for Buchar, Mitchell and Bajt Architects. "We are not being given any real guidance at this point."
Harrah's wants to heat and cool the area, but it has to have permeable walls to let smoke escape. The state hasn't defined what permeable means yet, Mitchell said.
The Illinois Department of Public Health drafted rules that were posted for public comment this week by the legislature's Joint Committee on Administrative Rules. The rules probably won't be finalized for 60 to 90 days, leaving little time before the ban takes effect.
"It does put businesses at a disadvantage," said state Rep. Brent Hassert, R-Romeoville, who co-chairs the committee. "Springfield never moves at lightning speed. I understand the frustration."
Harrah's wants its shelter in place by the time the ban takes effect on Jan. 1, Mitchell said. The company may build a preliminary shelter and finish construction once the rules are set.
"This is uncharted territory, no one has been here before on this kind of thing," Mitchell said.
Jackson said businesses must be cautious to make sure the smoking shelters are for smoking only and employees aren't required to work in them.
"The shelters can't be like beer gardens because employees would have to work there," she explained.
Jackson is telling businesses to hold off on shelters until the state's rules are final. Once the rules are finalized, the health department will create a packet of information that will guide businesses toward ban compliance. The health department also will use advertising to get the word out.
Though the rules are in flux, Jackson said there are some aspects of the law that appear to be concrete.
She's telling business owners they have to:
• Remove all ashtrays and smoking paraphernalia from their businesses.
• Post signs on every entrance and exit that will inform costumers about the ban and where they can file a complaint if it's being violated. The signs have to be 5-by-7 inches in size.
• Enforce the ban and make sure any outdoor smoking is at least 15 feet away from a building.
• Communicate to all employees and job applicants that smoking is not allowed in the establishment.
Jackson said she gets a lot of calls from private club members that believe they are exempt from the ban.
"Private clubs have to follow the law, too," she said. "That's something a lot of people don't know."
Only a few entities are exempt, including private residences; retail tobacco shops, open prior to Jan. 1, 2008; and private rooms and semi-private rooms in nursing homes.
The Illinois Casino Gaming Commission is working to have casinos exempted from the law for five years or until neighboring state's casinos become smoke free. But so far, the effort hasn't paid off.
The Illinois Department of Public Health, local health departments and local law enforcement agencies will be enforcing the ban once it's in effect, Jackson said.
Fines for individuals who violate the ban will be not less than $100 for a first offense and $250 for subsequent violations. For business owners it will be not less than $250 for first violations, $500 for second violations and $2,500 for subsequent violations in the same calendar year.
Reporter Cindy Wojdyla Cain may be reached at (815) 729-6044 or at ccain@scn1.com
