Friday, February 08, 2008

Smoking ban defeated ... business owners' rights upheld

A bill to ban smoking in restaurants and other private places has been unanimously defeated in committee. Restaurants and other businesses may continue to make their own rules for their own establishments. The overbearing hand of government has been held back for a while longer.

For the second year in a row Governor Tim Kaine had sought to have a smoking ban put in place after previously saying he did not think the government had the right to interfere with private business.

On October 27, 2007, it was reported in the Washington Post that "Kaine said again Thursday that he does not support legislation that would ban smoking in private businesses, saying that would be a troubling expansion of government regulation. 'I don't think the police power of the state should go that far,' he told reporters."

Kaine's smoking ban was defeated for his very own reasoning. The police power of the state shouldn't go that far.

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

As any close reader would discern, Kaine was talking not about restaurants, which are public places even though privately owned, but about truly private businesses. Think about the difference and stop twisting Kaine's words for your own ideology.

Lynn R. Mitchell said...

He was talking about restaurants but you are correct in that he was also talking about private places as I noted in the link to a previous post. I re-read and saw that I had typed "public" instead of "private." That has now been corrected.

Anonymous said...

I'm afraid you still don't have it quite right. Kaine opposed - and still opposes - a comprehensive ban on smoking in private businesses (covering offices, bars and restaurants), but has long supported a more limited ban on smoking in bars and restaurants.

Lynn R. Mitchell said...

This is from my post of January 8, 2008 (http://swacgirl.blogspot.com/2008/01/ban-on-smoking-kaine-was-against-it.html):

Gov. Tim Kaine has proposed a statewide ban on smoking in restaurants. His media release, dated January 7, said:

Governor Timothy M. Kaine today proposed legislation for a statewide ban on smoking in restaurants, including dining establishments in public and private clubs. The legislation also clarifies the definition of a restaurant for purposes of the smoking ban.
...
The proposed legislation changes the definition of a restaurant to any food establishment – including dining establishments of public and private clubs – where food is available for sale and consumption by the public and includes the areas of a restaurant where food is prepared, served or consumed. The proposal excludes exterior dining areas of food establishments from the ban, unless the exterior area can be enclosed.


Oh, really?

Just over a year ago, on October 27, 2006, Michael Shear with the Washington Post reported:

Kaine said again Thursday that he does not support legislation that would ban smoking in private businesses, saying that would be a troubling expansion of government regulation.

"I don't think the police power of the state should go that far," he told reporters.

Anonymous said...

That's what I said. Kaine opposed then and opposes now a comprehensive ban on smoking in all private businesses because he thinks it goes to far. He supported then and supports now a more limited ban, one that applies to restaurants and bars, which is a subset of private business that is akin to a public place. Quoting yourself and your earlier incorrect assertion doesn't prove anything, and the quotation from the Washington Post is consistent with what I'm saying. Once again, you are willfully misinterpreting Kaine by relying on incomplete information.

Anonymous said...

Take a look at this earlier article from the Washington Post that includes a more complete statement of the governor's position, including this comment:

Kaine said he opposed banning smoking in all public places. "I remain opposed to a widespread, general ban on smoking in public. This bill, with my amendment, is narrowly targeted to prevent smoking in restaurants, which is an important step to protect the health of both patrons and employees."

You may still disagree with his position, which is fine, but my point is that he has been consistent in expressing this view.

Consequentialism & America said...

Just to clarify, a restaurant or bar is a private business. Private and public do not mean who is allowed to enter they mean owned by government or private citizen.

Here is a good article called "Rights of Private Business Owners Going Up In Smoke":
http://mikeromig.blogspot.com/2007/12/rights-of-private-business-owners-going.html

Mike