The habits of Arizona’s smokers versus the rights of those who don’t smoke hinge on two competing initiatives, Propositions 201 and 206.
Proposition 201 is sponsored by Smoke-Free Arizona, a conglomerate of representatives from the American Cancer Society, American Heart Association, American Lung Association and the Arizona Hospital and Healthcare Association.
The Smoke-Free Arizona Act proposed by this group says protecting the right of Arizonans to breathe clean indoor air by prohibiting smoking in enclosed public places such as: restaurants, offices, health care facilities, retail stores, nursing homes, licensed childcare facilities, sports arenas, hotels and motels, restaurants, bars, bowling alleys and places of employment.
Smoke-Free Arizona is competing with the Arizona Non-Smoker Protection Committee over the proposed smoking ban. The R.J. Reynolds tobacco company and the Arizona Licensed Beverage Association are the largest contributors to the campaign, while many small business owners have also contributed.
Under the Smoke-Free initiative, “No smoking” signs would be posted in all areas where smoking is prohibited. The only exceptions provided by this proposition would be private residences, retail tobacco stores and outdoor patios, private veteran and fraternal clubs, Native American religious ceremonies, and one-half of hotel and motel rooms.
Troy Corder, communications director for Smoke-Free Arizona, is confident Arizona voters will vote to keep smoking out of indoor establishments.
“We are very confident that voters will vote yes on Proposition
201 and no on Proposition 206,” Mr. Corder said. “We are the only ones who are getting the real message about smoking dangers out to the public.
“Look at who is funding whose initiative. Smoke Free Arizona is endorsed by world-renowned health organizations, while the Arizona Non-Smoker Protection Committee gets its major funding from the tobacco industry,” Mr. Corder said.
Smoke-Free Arizona backers comment that the elimination of secondhand smoke allows Arizonans to enjoy Arizona’s bars and restaurants without coming home smelling like smoke.
Smoke-Free Arizona says that breathing second hand smoke also harms children, seniors and people with existing health problems.
The initiative also aims at protecting the health of Arizona’s employees who work in the food and beverage industry from the effects of second hand smoke.
On its Web site, Smoke-Free Arizona states that second hand smoke is associated with several serious health effects including retarded fetal growth, asthma, lower respiratory infections, lung and nasal cancer, and heart disease.
The Web site also states that secondhand smoke has been classified by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a Group A carcinogen. This classification is reserved for chemicals or compounds which have been shown to cause cancer in humans.
This initiative proposes to increase the state tax on cigarettes to $1.20 per pack from $1.18, and the revenues would be depositied in a Smoke-Free Arizona Fund.
Mr. Corder said that increasing the state tax on cigarettes would help to educate the public regarding the harmful effects on smoking.
“The two-cent per pack increase would provide the mechanism to educate Arizona and enforce its rules,” Mr. Corder said. Enforcement by the Arizona Department of Health Services will be made possible by the increase.
Smoke-Free Arizona would also prescribe a hotline for people to report violations, he said, as part of the movement toward a smoke-free community.
Smoke-Free Arizona says that currently 10 states, five countries and numerous Arizona communities enjoy the benefits of smoke-free laws.
Approximately $852,000 has been raised for the Smoke-Free Arizona campaign, and more than 100 businesses, health and community companies endorse the committee, Mr. Corder said.
“We know we have people who support us and our proposition because of our donations from the public and all of the community volunteers,” said Mr. Corder. “We have a strong community pull.”
Prop. 206
The Arizona Non-Smoker Protection Committee, the group sponsoring Proposition 206, is made up of more than 900 individuals and more than 100 small businesses, including bars, from across the state. Approximately $2.8 million has been raised for the campaign.
The Arizona Non-Smoker Protection act proposed by this group aims at banning smoking in enclosed public places and places of employment.
The exceptions would include bars, tobacco shops and separately ventilated bars within restaurants and other establishments, private residences, some hotel and motel rooms, veteran and fraternal clubs when they are not open to the public, religious ceremonies and theatrical, film and television performances.
Camilla Strongin, spokeswoman for the Arizona Non-Smoker Protection Committee, is confident that the large majority of voters will support Proposition 206.
“We believe that Proposition 206 is a reasonable smoking law that keeps nonsmokers and children away from secondhand smoke, while still preserving adult choice and the rights of small business owners,” Ms. Strongin said. “It’s a reasonable compromise that gives people the ability to stay away from smoke, and gives bar owners the ability to run their business as they see fit.”
The initiative would not permit minors in any part of a bar or tobacco shop that permits smoking, and signs must notify patrons and employees where smoking is prohibited, in order to prevent someone from unknowingly entering an establishment that allows smoking.
This act will not raise taxes or create new government programs in order to get their message across.
The group says that if a bar or a tobacco shop is part of a larger business, it be separated by floor to ceiling partitions and separate ventilation systems.
According to Ms. Strongin, most people think that bar owners should be able to choose if they want smoking in their bar.
People want to be able to make the choice for themselves about the type of business they want to frequent, she said.
Bill Weigele, president of the Arizona Licensed Beverage Association, said that Proposition 206 is a better law for Arizona.
“We have many members, including bar owners, who will be negatively impacted by a statewide smoking ban,” Mr. Weigele said. “Proposition 206 is a better law, it makes sense and levels the field.”
Mr. Weigele says that the Arizona Licensed Beverage Association opposes the ban because it detracts from efforts to promote tourism and infringes on the rights of property owners.
The Arizona Non-Smoker Protection Committee claims that a statewide smoking ban will adversely affect their industry and economy through a loss of local, tourist and convention dollars.
“Proposition 201 will put people out of business and create an unfair advantage to casinos who are not regulated by smoking laws,” Ms. Strongin said. “It will also create a $4.7 million a year ‘smoke police’ for enforcement. Proposition 201 will leave a bureaucratic mess and will perpetuate the checkerboard of smoking laws that exists now that puts some businesses at a disadvantage to others.”
Under Proposition 206, smoking is allowed where adults make the adult decision to go, Ms. Strongin said.
Both propositions will appear on the ballot for the upcoming November election. If both pass, the proposition receiving the most votes will prevail.
ballot language
Prop. 201: Smoking ban
The current restriction on smoking in certain areas would be expanded to all public places including workplaces with exceptions for outdoor patios, hotel rooms designated as smoking rooms, fraternal clubs when not open to the public and retail tobacco stores. Persons smoking where prohibited would be subject to a fine of between $100 and $500 per offense. Imposes an additional two cents per pack tax on cigarettes (from $1.18 to $1.20). Revenue from fines and the new tax would go to Dept of Health Services to fund enforcement and education programs. This proposition would not prohibit local ordinances regarding smoking that are more restrictive. Proposed by initiative petition circulated by Smoke Free Arizona.
,b>Prop. 206: Smoking in bars & restaurants
The current restriction on smoking in certain areas would be expanded to most public places and workplaces. The list of exceptions is the same as for Prop. 201, except Prop. 206 permits bars and other establishments that sell alcoholic beverages for on-site consumption to permit smoking at owner’s option and with posted signs. A violation by a bar owner is a class 3 (lowest) misdemeanor. A person smoking where prohibited is guilty of a petty offense and subject to a fine of $100 – $500. This proposition applies statewide and does not permit local governments to enact or enforce ordinances related to smoking that are different from state law. Proposed by initiative petitions circulated by Arizona Non-Smoker Protection Committee.