Today in the Legislature

LB395 as introduced by Sen. Johnson would adopt a new Nebraska Clean Indoor Air Act and ban smoking in all restaurants and businesses. The bill as written is in horrible shape. It would allow an opt out provision for the communities in the state who don't want a smoking ban and if the city council or village board passes an ordinance the members of their community could force the community back into a ban if 5% of the people signed a petition to invalidate the ordinance. Seriously, no vote just a poorly written opt out provision. So there is an amendment to take the opt out provision out of the bill and to make Lincoln's smoking ban the statewide ban.

Here is where I come down on the bill.

We can agree about the idea, but I cannot agree that the state needs to step in and pass LB 395. 2/3 of all communities who have sought to ban smoking similar to LB 395 have prevailed. 70% of restaurants in Kearney are smoke free. Where is the problem? I have seen no effort to address this locally in any community in our district nor have I seen patrons work to get their own businesses in their community to be smoke free.

The role of government should be limited. That means that you shouldn't do more than is necessary and most importantly those who are closest to the issue should be willing to act if there is a problem. If they cannot then there is a higher body to act. This current debate is not that situation.

I have never smoked or drank. I go to restaurants that are smoke free and recognize that is a convenience not a right. The money that is donated to my campaign by tobacco companies ends up in charities that help individuals who are facing cancer get assistance. My grandmother died of cancer. She smoked for many years. I think it is, to be candid, stupid.

However at the same time the state generates millions of dollars in cigarette taxes (which little if any money goes to health related programs) as well as funding numerous public health and other health related activities from cigarette revenue via the tobacco settlement. We as a state are hypocrites at best in this area. We donŐt want people to smoke, but we want you to keep smoking so we can spend the revenue and possibly increase the tax on smoking to fund programs unrelated to smoking problems while we hope people will continue to smoke to fund them.

So I can agree that it is a good idea, I disagree on how to accomplish it.

I have put a lot of thought into this topic and maybe more than I should. I have heard bills like this for 8 years and regardless of the topic I generally, if not unequivocally, come down on the side of limiting government.

Today in the Health & Human Services Committee

Appointments
Sykes, Leon - Board of Emergency Medical Services
Schroeder, Dave - Foster Care Review Board

LB972 (Gay) Change optometry licensure provisions
LB1029 (Fulton) Provide for contract rates for foster care services
LB1031 (Ashford) Change confidentiality provisions relating to researchers and auditors accessing adult and child protective services records
LB1070 (Dubas) Provide for a child placement resources form for a child placed with the Department of Health and Human Services

Unfortunately there is not time to write more about the hearing today, but no action was taken on the bills.

Members of the Health and Human Services Committee: