Kansas Health Institute | Information For Policy Makers. Health for Kansans.

TOPEKA — Most Kansans want a statewide ban on public smoking. But are legislators listening?

First Lady Stacy Parkinson raised the question at a press conference held Wednesday by the American Cancer Society in support of House Bill 2221, which would ban smoking in most workplaces.

“Seventy-one percent of Kansans want a public smoking ban,” Parkinson said. “Do our legislators hear them? I am proud to be one of those voices. I am demanding clean indoor air for all Kansans.”

The question was raised again during a House Health and Human Services Committee hearing on HB 2642, which also would ban smoking but would allow exemptions for businesses willing to pay a fee.

The bill has been called a “compromise” and an “alternative” to HB 2221 by Rep. Brenda Landwehr, a Wichita Republican who chairs the House health committee.

Landwehr has said she is personally opposed to a statewide smoking ban, but if there is to be one she prefers it resemble an ordinance Wichita approved in 2008.

Her preferred alternative would prohibit smoking in public places, but allow exemptions for businesses that pay a fee set at $1 per square foot, construct a separately ventilated smoking area, and ban minors.

Critics of HB 2642 said it also would “pre-empt” public smoking restrictions in at least 36 cities and three counties that have already passed their own local laws.

Cindy Claycomb, a Wichita researcher, said a recent randomized, scientific survey found that 70 percent of Wichita voters would favor a state law that bans smoking in most public places. Eighteen percent of those surveyed said they would visit restaurants and bars more often if the establishments were completely smoke-free.

“I am saddened by the lack of respect shown to voters on this issue,” Claycomb said.

Landwehr said she was offended by the statement.

“I don’t believe all of us are being disingenuous with voters,” she said.

“If 70 percent of voters are saying that, I sometimes wonder if you’re listening hard enough,” Claycomb responded.

Public health officials and anti-smoking advocates oppose the new bill because of the exemptions it would allow. Those who testified Wednesday asked the committee to reconsider HB 2221, saying it would do more to protect health.

Dr. Jason Eberhart-Phillips, director of health for the Kansas Department of Health and Environment, said Landwehr’s alternative bill would be a step backward but HB 2221 would provide “true protection” against the harmful health effects of secondhand smoke.

“KDHE firmly opposes House Bill 2642 because it provides no real protection against secondhand smoke, and it obliterates protections that are already in place,” he said. “This would prohibit future actions counties or cities may want to take to further policies in manners that are consistent with local values. There are 36 cities and three counties that have passed these laws, and nearly every one of those laws provides stronger public health protection than HB 2642.”

Those who testified in favor of the bill were mostly small business owners who have opposed broader restrictions in the past.

Todd Gamble, owner of Jaywalkers Bar and Grill in Kansas City, Kan., said his patrons appreciated his decision to purchase a smoking license for his establishment.

“I also own a bar in Kansas City, Mo., and when that smoking ban went into effect, the bar’s business declined by 23 percent while Jaywalkers’ business went up by 18 percent in the first month and 8 percent in the second month,” he said. “I applaud and support a bill that allows me to make the choice.”

A Kansas Health Institute study from 2009 of Lawrence bar and restaurant sales before and after the city’s smoking ban found no evidence of an economic impact on the community as a whole.

Two former opponents of a statewide smoking ban – the Kansas Restaurant and Hospitality Association and the R.J Reynolds tobacco company – have now become neutral on the matter.

Ron Hein, who represents both groups, said the tobacco company was no longer taking a stand on smoking bans. The restaurant group liked some aspects of the newest House bill but not others, he said.

A sticking point for all was a provision in the older bill allowing smoking on the gaming floors of state-owned casinos.

Landwehr said it wouldn’t be fair for private businesses to have to follow different rules than the state.

Many supporters of the tougher smoking restrictions, including Eberhart-Phillips, said they would also like to see the casino exemption removed.

Landwehr said the committee will probably hold or two or three more days of hearings on the bill.

Even if the new measure is approved, other legislators have vowed to quash the measure if it makes it to the House floor.

Rep. Tom Burroughs, D-Kansas City, and Rep. Charlie Roth, R-Salina, said at the Wednesday morning cancer society press conference that they would only support a measure such as HB 2221.

“My preference is the bill passed by the Senate,” Roth said. “In the next few weeks, maybe sooner rather than later, this will either be over or we’ll adopt the tougher bill. I won’t settle for less than what the Senate bill has to offer.”