© 2024 St. Louis Public Radio
Play Live Radio
Next Up:
0:00
0:00
0:00 0:00
Available On Air Stations

Smoking-ban supporters try again for statewide action

This article first appeared in the St. Louis Beacon, Feb. 13, 2011- Year after year, public-health advocates have lamented political inaction on tobacco-related policies. But they might have found an effective spark plug for statewide action on public smoking: Start local.

With help from these advocates, jurisdictions large and small, liberal and conservative have approved more than a dozen public smoking bans across the state in the past two years, many of them comprehensive. And on Jan. 31, a strict smoking ban went into effect in Missouri's capital, Jefferson City.

"Having the state capital go smoke-free is huge," said Kendre Israel, coalition coordinator for Tobacco-Free Missouri, an umbrella organization that includes health groups like the American Cancer Society and local smoking-ban groups.

With Jefferson City's ban now in effect, smoke-free policies have effectively landed on lawmakers' doorsteps -- although not necessarily in their offices. (Members of the state House may permit smoking in their offices.)

For advocates the overall trend suggests the public is making a bold statement in support of statewide action, and they said more and more elected officials are taking notice. They hope that lawmakers, swayed by local bans, will enact a statewide ban on smoking in public in the next few years. (In contrast, Illinois has had a statewide smoking ban in effect since 2008.)

Enter Missouri state Rep. Jill Schupp, D-Creve Coeur, who has championed smoke-free policies since she arrived in Jefferson City in 2009 and whose home city has since gone smoke-free. Schupp is the lead sponsor of a bill introduced last week to outlaw smoking in nearly all public places statewide, and she said the public has spoken in favor of protecting customers and workers from tobacco smoke.

"The people of the state of Missouri, in community after community, have said it is time," Schupp told the Beacon. "I hope our legislators are paying attention to our constituents in all areas of the state -- rural, urban and suburban -- who are saying it is time."

But Israel, whose coalition backs Schupp's bill, said a smoking ban's prospects this session seemed dim. The weak economy could make some lawmakers wary of supporting a ban. The economic condition has already strengthened opposition from people throughout the state who oppose smoking bans for economic and personal-choice reasons.

"I'm not for smoking, but I am for fair business and I'm for people being able to keep their jobs," said Bill Nigro, a Kansas City, Mo., businessman who strongly opposes both his city's new smoking ban and a statewide smoking ban. "I'm not in favor of the government coming in and doing anything that will cost people their jobs. It should be the role of government to keep people employed, not to put them out of work."

Supporters see a silver lining. Kendre said that in recent years, it's usually taken three or four legislative sessions for bans to get enough traction to pass in other states. And Schupp noted two of her bill's more than two dozen co-sponsors are Republicans.

Ban supporters got a start last session, when a proposal from termed-out state Sen. Joan Bray, D-University City, got a hearing in the Senate. The bill died, as did one sponsored by termed-out state Rep. Walt Bivins, R-Oakville.

Recent media attention regarding Missouri's cigarette tax, the lowest in the country, and an American Lung Association report card that failed Missouri in all areas of addressing tobacco use have further fueled lawmakers' interest, Israel said.

Smoking-ban opponents, such as Bill Hannegan, leader of Keep St. Louis Free, warned that supporters' perceived momentum was tempered somewhat when the Missouri House recently voted, 113-45, against including a smoking ban in Capitol offices as part of a House rules bill. "That vote ... sent a clear signal," Hannegan said. "Can you imagine if they put in a statewide smoking ban after taking that vote?"

The vote was a letdown for Schupp, who said it was ironic that lawmakers' offices are now the only public places where smoking is allowed in Jefferson City. "These are people's offices that belong to the public," she said. "To those who stood up and said these are private offices, I disagree with that characterization."

For now supporters hope to continue their local strategy and put more bans on a map that already includes roughly three dozen at-least-partial bans. Proposed smoking bans are going to voters in the Missouri cities of O'Fallon, Cape Girardeau, Webb City and Springfield, in early April.

"To have big wins like that in April would push us further into moving the momentum toward statewide," Israel said.

A report from the Health Care Foundation of Greater Kansas City has further strengthened smoking-ban supporters' enthusiasm. The report, which immediately sparked controversy after its release, found no change in business revenue in Kansas City, Mo., after a 2008 ban went into effect. Smoke-free groups hailed the study as evidence that smoking bans don't harm business.

Ban opponents strongly criticized the Kansas City study. Nigro called it "a total lie," saying a lot of Kansas City bar and tavern owners lost customers. "We're surrounded by communities that allow smoking in private clubs," he said. "It's devastated Kansas City. It's put a lot of people out of work."

Michael Marlow, professor at California Polytechnic State University's Orfalea College of Business, said the study was misleading because it didn't break down the business effects by type of establishment.

"What we would expect is that some businesses are going to gain, some are going to lose and some aren't going to have any effects at all from a smoking ban," added Marlow, who has studied smoking bans extensively. The ones that lose sales, he said, are usually "mom-and-pop-type bars."

Schupp said several other reports and studies show smoking bans don't harm business, such as a 2006 report from the U.S. surgeon general.

And, she added, "Doing this on a statewide level in Missouri, we ensure that all of Missouri is on a level playing field."

Nigro said a strict smoking ban would not produce a level playing field. He said it would hurt border cities such as Kansas City, because patrons would go to private clubs in nearby states with looser smoking policies. He'd favor letting establishments have special smoking rooms with make-up air-ventilation units, he added.

Ban supporters, however, have touted a recent Washington University study that found that ventilation systems were ineffective at removing nicotine from air at bars and restaurants.

Hannegan and other ban opponents quickly responded to that study with skepticism, calling for further testing and saying the researchers tested just one type of technology among many that might actually work.

Hannegan, Nigro and other smoking-ban opponents said they might be able to live with a policy like Tennessee's, whose smoking ban exempts places with a 21-and-over age restriction.

"It won't make anyone perfectly happy, but it does seem that's a rational basis to where to draw the line," Hannegan said.

Schupp and public-health advocates said they would still prefer a strict policy in part because bans with exemptions, including St. Louis County's, are tough to strengthen in the future.

And a ban with a 21-and-over exemption would be the wrong type of compromise, Israel said: "The only compromise that's being made is for the health of our citizens, so we'll advocate for a strong smoke-free law that includes all workplaces."

Smoking Bans Approved Since 2009

* Brentwood: effective January 2011
* Clayton: effective July 2010
* Creve Coeur: effective January 2011
Fulton: effective December 2010
Gladstone: effective May 2010
Jefferson City: effective January 2011
* Kirkwood: effective January 2010
Lake St. Louis: effective October 2010
Liberty: effective January 2010
Maryville: effective October 2010
Parkville: approved April 2009, effective April 2011
St. Louis: approved November 2009, effective January 2011
St. Louis County: approved November 2009, effective January 2011
Warrensburg: approved November 2009, effective November 2010
*Supersede St. Louis County's smoking ban
Sources: Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, media reports, government websites
Puneet Kollipara, a senior at Washington University, is a free-lance writer and former Beacon intern. To reach him, contact Beacon issues and politics editor Susan Hegger.

Puneet Kollipara special to the Beacon